Synthesis Essay On Animal Testing

Ronan Redar

Ms. Yeates

2W AP English Language

Friday, January 6, 2023

Over the years, numerous ethical and safety concerns have been raised concerning the use of animals for medical research and testing. Although there are problems with animal testing, there are no alternatives that yield results as accurate as animal testing. Animal testing is crucial to insure the safety of human patients, it allows researchers to observe the effects of a certain treatment, and strict regulations are placed on any testing done on animals. For these reasons, animal testing should remain legal.

Animal testing should be legal because it allows for medical testing and development to be conducted without putting humans at risk. Source A supports this, stating

In the past, testing has been conducted on human patients, often without their consent. This is far more ethically problematic than testing on rats, mice, and even dogs or other primates. While testing on humans may be more accurate, when a new treatment seems propitious “it is then tested in animals to see whether it seems to be safe and effective” (Source H). Additionally, there are strict regulations on animal testing, and there is a strict vetting procedure before animal testing is started. Further, Source D shows that as well as a sizable decrease in the number of animals tested in the US since 1973, only a small percentage of tests are run on dogs, cats and primates, and according to Source A, 95% of tests are done on rodents. Additionally, according to Source E the AWA “sets strict standards of care” for animals, and the USDA enforces these standards among organizations. Even more strict regulations are set upon organizations receiving federal funding. These regulations ensure that animals are treated humanely, and it prevents placing humans in unnecessary danger or deceiving

One of the most prevalent arguments against animal research is that it can be inaccurate due to physiological differences between animals and humans. Source B states that “psychopathology, cancer, drug addiction, Alzheimer’s, and AIDS, are species-specific”. However, this is a broad overgeneralization. Cancer can of course be observed in a plethora of species. Drug addiction and psychopathology (mental disorders or illnesses) can be observed in animals. Even Alzheimer's can be induced in rodents and yield meaningful information. Source B also raises the point that different substances can have different effects on different species. While this is of course true, rodents are so physiologically similar to humans that this is rarely the case, and it isn’t much of a problem because scientists can figure out what animals can be used to test for, and what they are too different to yield valid results. Source F further argues that only 92% of drugs that pass the animal testing phase are put into use. However, 8% of those drugs going on to be approved means that there is still a good chance that a drug used in animal testing will go on to help humans with medical