Therese cell cultures, human tissues, computer models, etc.

Therese ArancelThibeault English 38 December 2017HeterotrophsHumans, in order to benefit themselves, depend on animals. Although accurate, the experiments conducted on these species are brutal and delay nature from progression. Their lives are evidently invaluable in the science world. From routinely being used for tests in laboratories to suffering and undergoing pain when they should be unbothered. Animal experimentation is mediocre and it is hard to believe that we do not treat them humanely. This cruelty is causing millions of animals to die every year in the United States, which is unacceptable. Many are curious as to what animals endure as they become subjects for scientists. An ideal trial run is unachievable with any of the methods used by scientists. They go through different procedures and harsh “routine handling, venipuncture, and gavage elicit striking elevations in pulse, blood pressure, and steroid hormone release” that cause “isolation, confinement, and restrictions on physical movement by Barnard”, which affect the animals mentally. The outcome of these experiments show that they become more traumatized and restrained. People do not put into thought that they are vulnerable to harmful operations and breathe in chemicals daily. Most are concerned for the animal’s mental state and the negative intentions towards them. We should not use tools, which force them out of their comfort zone, for our own advantage. There are innovative ideas that replace the use of animals, such as cell cultures, human tissues, computer models, etc. Scientists have produced 3D structures to create a more practical way to test proposals. Microdosing is one of many procedures that act as an alternative that is “used in volunteers to measure how very small doses of potential new drugs behave in the human body. These microdoses are radiolabeled and measured using a very sensitive measuring device” that helps examine how the human body reacts even though it might not be as effective (Cruelty Free International). Testing products on humans would be more logical considering that we will know how it impacts us. If you were to test it on an animal, although it might be a close comparison, it still isn’t the same. Substituting animal testing doesn’t require us to put ourselves at risk, but it does help enhance our science. Luckily, alternative methods are thriving, “due to innovations in science, animal tests are being replaced in areas such as toxicity testing, neuroscience and drug development,” which helps encourage others to decrease the use of animals and help scientists find exact information (Cruelty Free International). If we do not start using alternatives to animal testing, we would be constantly killing millions. It is crucial to keep in mind that animals are not meant to be tested on. We should encourage this because relying on how animals react might not be as accurate for us. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act does not recommend testing on animals, while the United States Food and Drug Administration support the Animal Welfare Act. They do not initiate the safety of animals while being tested on products. The FDCA states that the company is held accountable for what they choose to do and “it remains the responsibility of the manufacturer to substantiate the safety of both ingredients and finished cosmetic products prior to marketing…by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services” and how the end product turns out to be. Even with the FDA respecting the Animal Welfare Act, they still support that “research and testing derive the maximum amount of useful scientific information from the minimum number of animals and employ the most humane methods available within the limits of scientific capability…by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services” and still agree to use animals even with other options given. This is an important matter because it proves that animals are not the only source to get the maximum amount of information and do not always give exact results. The way the animals react to the products will not always be the same as humans would. Animal testing should not be normalized or promoted. We need to justify that companies should not approve of animal experimentation and the FDCA and FDA Act should show more concern towards animals. The Animal Welfare Act was finally passed by Congress in 1966. Organizations and supporters have been advising to protect animals more. Animal rights groups have gradually become more known, such as large national and international organizations. Advocates have been urging less “use of animals for fur, leather, wool, and food by Britannica” by protesting against hunting and linking with environmentalists to urge others on knowing the importance of leaving these animals in their natural habitat. However, the act did not necessarily make an effort to stop testing and experimentation on animals. The act mainly supplied more care for animals, “to insure that animals intended for use in research facilities or for exhibition purposes or for use as pets are provided humane care and treatment by Britannica” and are given more attention. We are not as sympathetic as we should be towards this subject about treating animals as if they were an individual without human constraints being on them. The Animal Welfare act is the only act in the United States that manages nursing towards animals. More groups are starting to be active and expressive towards animal experimentation. It is important that animal organizations take action to rescue these animals and be their voice to help people understand the cruel things done to them. Many question what happens to animals after experimentation, and they wonder if the animals were adopted out or left to die. More projects are occurring to educate the public and working towards promoting adoption of animals that are tested on. Organizations are now rescuing dozens of animals, “The Beagle Freedom Project contacts more than 470 research labs a year and offers to take their dogs once studies are complete, by Meredith Cohn”, which gives dogs and other animals a chance to be adopted and taken care of. This project assures that the animal will be given attention and the protection it needs and make it a “mission is to see an end to animals used in experiments, said Jeremy Beckham,” and have people understand the responsibility before letting them adopt. If you go on their website, it allows you to adopt all kinds of animals. They have rescued rats, farm animals, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and even goldfish. This gives animals the opportunity to have a good life after sustaining all the pain they went through in labs. Animal rights groups are trying to demand a bill that necessitates public and private institutions to search for residences where animals can be adopted and stop animal testing altogether. It is a very serious matter on letting animals be adopted after testing because laboratories just leave these animals to die after being used.Humanity relies on animals for almost anything. The documentary motion picture, “Earthlings” narrated by Joaquin Phoenix, demonstrates in various divisions; entertainment, clothing, scientific research, food, and pets, how we depend on animals in our everyday lives. The definition of earthlings is an inhabitant of the Earth, “since we all inhabit the earth, we are all considered earthlings. There is no sexism, racism, or speciesism in the term ‘earthling’. It encompasses each and every one of us: warm- or cold-blooded, mammal, vertebrate or invertebrate (Earthlings, Dir. Shaun Monson, American, 2005. Film), which means we are no different from animals. Humans tend to think that we are superior and “oftentimes treating other living beings as mere objects…speciesism is a prejudice or attitude or bias in favor of the interests of the members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species” (Earthlings, Dir. Shaun Monson, American, 2005. Film), hence the fact why we think we have the authority over anyone below us. The movie itself is a stunning film that displays visuals of how we really misuse them. “Earthlings” is meant to keep us open-minded to changing our ways. We are all a part of this Earth, we all suffer, have feelings, and we are all living. We are at an all time low, acting passive as we are disrespecting these animals. The movie is a cry for help to convince us to end animal experimentation, and more movies should be made to show others around the world. In the early 1800’s, the Civil War prompt Texans to aid in the Confederate Army and vacate their ranches. Americans were educated by Mexicans and picked up the proposal of cattle ranching. Going into the 1870’s “animals were slaughtered before shipping by Prentice Hall America: Pathways to the present Modern American History” and cows and buffalo were becoming popular, risking their extinction. A number of factors took part in their extinction like buffalo-hide leather and hunting. As for cows, they “were a truly wild part of West while “cow towns” sprang up along the rail lines and took a large part in towns (Prentice Hall America: Pathways to the present Modern American History). Coming back from war, finding all these animals gave a sufficient amount of beef. Americans’ desire for pork as their favored meat took a big toll on animals and contributed to their path toward extinction. Even cooks have been publishing books discussing about pork being troublesome to digest which caused the country to overindulge on beef. Cattle Boom and the growth of demands for both buffalo and cows was a prime time for Americans and has greatly affected our love for beef and has lead up to more animal cruelty. Scientists are always focused on getting information from animals, but never realize that they have feelings. It is generally known by scientists that animals can encounter pain. Losing their rights to be in their natural habitat and being deprived of interaction with other creatures causes them to be isolated. They now take into account that “animal’s potential for experiencing harm is greater than has been appreciated and that current protections need to be reconsidered by Gregory NG” and have compared animal’s emotional states to humans. They are no different from us and “display many language-like abilities, complex problem-solving skills, tool related cognition and pleasure-seeking, with empathy and self-awareness by Boysen ST, Himes GT” which should be a good enough reason to treat them as if they were humans. Post-traumatic stress can affect animals greatly after being tested on for so long. Scientists put animals through so much, thinking the information found from animals will be reliable and that the same outcomewill come out of humans. This knowledge of animals dispute our thoughts of animals similarities and differences compared to us and question if we really need animals for experimentation. The book, The Jungle by Sinclair, discusses about a diligent immigrant from Lithuania who takes an offer at a meatpacking house. As you continue to read, you figure out what really happens within the meatpacking house. Not only does it talk about labor conditions, but as well as the poor animals that are “fed on ‘whiskey-malt’… It was stuff such as this that made the ’embalmed beef; that had killed several times as many United States soldiers as the bullets of the Spaniards” and expose how vile the cattle are (Chapter 18 “The Death Of A Cow.” The Jungle, Upton Sinclair, 1906, p. 333). The book helps reveal to the people how the contaminated meat has led to precautions of food safety. These animals go through starvation and are given shots to become unhealthily fatter for the benefit of people buying meat in stores.  It is vital that more books are uncovering the important topic of what we eat on a daily basis and what happens in farms and slaughterhouses, how unsanitary it is for us to eat. These animals go through starvation and are given shots to become for fatter for the benefit of people buying meat in stores. Animal cruelty is a major concept; we have tortured these animals through experimenting, slaughtering, and testing them with shots. Using them for the purpose of benefitting our research has caused us to overpower them as if their worth or value was any less than ours. As humans, we only get more mediocre for allowing ourselves to hurt animals with an indifferent attitude. Foremost, year after year we continue to permit all the ways they are beingmistreated. It is no wonder that they are dying at an alarming rate due to being tormented. By all counts, we should focus on forbidding the exploitation of these poor animals. Works Cited”Alternatives to animal testing.” Cruelty Free International, Web.”animal rights.” Compton’s by Britannica, v 6.0. 2009. eLibrary. Web. 26 Sep. 2017.Cayton, Andrew R. L., et al. Prentice Hall America: pathways to the present: Modern American history. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2007.Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. “Product Testing – Animal Testing & Cosmetics.” US Food and Drug Administration Home Page, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 5 Apr. 2006Cohn, Meredith. “Study aims to check if other methods can replace animal testing.” McClatchy – Tribune Business News. 13 Mar. 2017eLibrary. Web. 26 Sep. 2017.Ferdowsian, Hope R., and Nancy Beck. “Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research.” PLoS ONE, Public Library of Science, 2011Monson, Shaun, and Persia White. “Earthlings.” 24 Sept. 2005″PCRM Position Paper on Animal Research.” The Physicians Committee, 5 Mar. 2011, Accessed 27 Sept. 2017.Miller, Walter James. Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, 1998


I'm William!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out