Pro Animal Testing

Words: 1174
Pages: 5

Animals have been used in biomedical and cosmetic research since the creation of civilized societies. In fact, Aristotle, a Greek physician and scientist, conducted experiments on living animals as early as 384 BC. Today, research relies so heavily on animal testing that almost everyone on the planet has benefited from it. From the polio vaccine, to the makeup we wear, none of it would have been possible without experimentation on animals. Animal testing has become a staple in medical and cosmetic advancement. Despite this, modern day society has begun questioning its relevance and practices.
Animal research has brought many relevant scientific and cosmetic advances, but at what cost? According to PETA, over one million animals in the United
…show more content…
For the past few decades, animal testing has been vital to finding cures and vaccinations for a multitude of diseases and ailments. For example, in the 1990s animal testing led to the development of a drug called Tamoxifen, which is used to treat breast cancer patients, and women with high risk of developing breast cancer. The development and implementation of this life-saving drug led to a 30% decrease in breast cancer related deaths. When citizens hear about cases like this, it asserts misconceptions that without animal testing, scientific advancements like the one above would have never happened. While animal testing has helped lead to scientific discoveries in the past, it also has unique weaknesses that make it an unreliable research …show more content…
New cruelty free medical and cosmetic research methods include cell cultures, in vitro testing, the use of real human tissue, and computer models. All of these methods have been scientifically proven to be more effective than animal research, and they are also a fraction of the price. For example, in vitro testing allows scientists to observe real human cells and has even create miniature human organs to study. This allows researchers to observe how diseases and ailments affect real human systems, making results done in the studies much more accurate than studies based off of non human test subjects. To put this in perspective, according to NEAVS, a organization dedicated to ending the use of animals in research, in vitro study results have around a 90% accuracy rate, while 92% of results reached through animal testing are inaccurate. Along with its higher accuracy rate, in vitro and other non animal study methods are extremely inexpensive compared to traditional animal research. For example, rats and other rodents are often used to to test the embryotoxicity of certain drugs and substances. The research helps to predict how the drugs could affect a human embryo if taken by a pregnant mother. The average cost for this type of study while using animal testing is $55,000 dollars for a single drug, while