Pro and con of Animal testing?

Answer 1

Pros: Animals are less intellectually advanced. Animals are very loveable but we could use them so that we could eventually find cures to cancer and HIV. It can also help medical tools in hospitals. If you had cancer right now, would you want a cure? Or to die in a hospital bed.

Cons: animal deaths through research are considered unnecessary and are not morally different from murder. animals have the right to live there own lives, we shouldn't meddle with them just cause we can. the reaction of an animal to a drug may be very different from a humans so testing on them may be pointless.

Answer 2

The cons of animal experimentation is the fact that animalsshould be treated as beings of value. Millions of animals die each year from this. The con is that animals have rights and that we should respect that. the Pro is that animals can be used to help us find cures for diseases that affect humans

Answer 3

Sometimes a product that is being tested will never be validated or used in the world. The animal died in vain.

There is also a high cost related to the testing. the animal must be fed and cared for, purchased in the first place, and tested in a controlled environment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pros: Found vaccinations for:-rabiespoliomeaslesmumpsrubellascarlet feverTB (tuberculosis)macular diseaseParkinson's diseaseMeningitisAsthmaValidated proceduresOpen-heart surgeryorgan and kidney transplantsblood transfusions

Answer 4

Pro: living organism model

Con: violates the animal's rights

inefficient and ineffective, their anatomy and biological reactions are not the same

(look up the thalidomide tragedy)

Answer 5

The advantages of testing with animals, is that they don't use poor people to test their products, although animals are not less important than human. Before a lot of poor people, in research of money, accept to test products in their bodies. Another advantage is that they can improve the product, more, and take it to the market without failure because it is test before. I think there is no so many advantages, but if they don't test with animals, with what should they test?! The disadvantages obviously that are many more, we reduce biodiversity by killing animals of one specie, we also are destroying nature, maybe that is not so efficient because animals are not the same as humans, although its similar.

Answer 6

Some people believe that experimenting on animals is acceptable if suffering is minimized in all experiments, and human benefits are gained which could not be obtained by using other methods.

Other people believe that experimenting on animals is always unacceptable because:

1. Animals can feel pain and fear like humans do, so it is wrong to experiment on them while we refrain from experimenting on humans.
   
2. Animal testing is cruel and inhumane. According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and "killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means."
   
3. Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. For example, in vitro testing, such as culturing human cells in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing.
   
4. The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between humans and non-human animals make non-human animals poor models for humans.
   
5. Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe. The 1950s sleeping pill thalidomide, which was tested on animals prior to its commercial release, caused 10,000 babies to be born with severe deformities. Tests on the Arthritis drug Vioxx showed that it had a protective effect on the hearts of mice, yet the drug went on to cause more than 27,000 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths.
   
6. Animal tests may mislead researchers into discarding potential cures and treatments. Some chemicals that are harmful to animals prove valuable when used by humans. Aspirin, for example, is dangerous for some animal species. Tacrolimus, an anti-rejection agent for organ transplant recipients, was almost shelved before proceeding to clinical trials due to severe toxicity in animals.
   
7. The Animal Welfare Act has not succeeded in preventing animal abuse in research laboratories. In March 2009, for example the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) found 338 possible violations of the Animal Welfare Act at the federally funded New Iberia Research Center (NIRC) in Louisiana.
   
8. The Animal Welfare Act does not protect rats, mice, fish, and birds, which comprise around 95% of the animals used in research.
   
9. Animal tests do not reliably predict results in humans: 94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials.
   
10. Animal tests are a waste of tax dollars. Humane Society International found that animal tests cost many times more than the cost of in-vitro alternatives.
    
11. Most experiments involving animals are flawed, wasting the lives and suffering of the animal subjects. A 2009 peer-reviewed study found serious flaws in the majority of publicly funded animal studies using rodents and primates in the United States and the United Kingdom.
    
12. There is no evidence that animal experiments were essential in making major medical advances, and if enough money and resources were devoted to animal-free alternatives, other solutions would be found.
    

Answer 7

the pros of animal testing is that it saves people's lives and we all know if we didnt have it

we will all be DEAD by now

Answer 8

there are a few.... like leprosy and type 1 Diabetes are cures because of it.