By Seungheon Han, G9
Throughout history, animal experimentation has played a crucial role in making new discoveries for our benefit. Even today, the world uses more than 115 million animals annually for experimentation and the biomedical industry (Aysha Akhtar). This has led to a mainly two-sided debate of great significance regarding the use of animals for testing. One primary side of the argument sheds light on the intense processes that take place, and inefficiency of the use of other organisms other than ourselves, while the other states past achievements, morals, and scientific evidence as reasons.
It can be said that the fundamental rights of animals are violated as animals have a basic moral right to be respected, and this value is not supported when animals are used as tools in an experiment. The notion that animals and humans should be treated equally with respect derives from the fact that all are both sentient beings. This means that animals used for testing would feel the same pain and frustration as a person would if external forces were to cause pain, cause permanent damage, or death. It is vital to understand that during such events, animals do not willingly sacrifice themselves for the development of human welfare, but are simply born or captured into the situation. Another reason is that, although animal testing may be seen as effective, the numbers say otherwise. Based on a 2007 study by the UK Medical Research Council, in which animal experimentation results were compared to clinical trial results focusing on the treatment of head injury, respiratory distress syndrome, osteoporosis, stroke, and haemorrhage, human and animal results matched only half of the time. This means “animal experiments were no more likely than a flip of the coin” to predict the treatment’s benefit to humans (Aysha Akhtar). Thus, this result shows how all the pain and suffering animals are subject to does not correlate with possible help for humans.
However, many people believe it is morally acceptable to use animals for experimentation, as we already raise and use animals on a daily basis for consumption, creating products, and our love for pets (Animal Use). Furthermore, research shows that animals are the most suitable for testing for medication or products, as it would be too dangerous to do on humans, and many animals used have immense genetic and physiological similarities with humans. For example, mice and people share the same genetic homology of 98%, making mice a good alternative to testing products for people (Biobide). Another point is that there is simply a lack of choice when it comes to finding ways to verify the safety of a medical or pharmaceutical product, due to the lack of technology or techniques trusted by the overall public. For example, one of the main alternatives, computer simulations, is said to have a lack of accuracy due to the many unknown components of the human body (Animal Use). For example, brain interactions and other complex systems cannot be fully replaced with machinery or technology because they are simply not understood at a deeper level, and it is impossible to simulate what we don’t know (Animal Use). Another example of simulations’ limits is the basic structure and function of a cell. The day-to-day functions of cells include numerous processes that humans do not understand, meaning that scientists do not have a chance of producing a perfectly accurate simulation of it (“Britannica”). Plus, to simulate multiple cells is even harder as they have additional complex sets of interactions. Thus, to do a basic drug test in a simulation, scientists would need to simulate all of the cellular components that would be affected by that drug, which is currently impossible (“Britannica”).
In conclusion, animal testing, being one of the most debated topics in the field of biomedical sciences, consists of strong arguments following scientific evidence and basic human morals. While some may argue that animal testing is inefficient and cruel, others view it as an opportunity for future development that will pave the way for biomedical research. However, it is important to keep in mind that there are many other opinions not mentioned, and that some may have a neutral stance on the topic.
Works Cited
AKHTAR, AYSHA. “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation.” NCBI, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4594046/#fn37.
“Animal Use – MU School of Medicine.” University of Missouri School of Medicine, https://medicine.missouri.edu/centers-institutes-labs/health-ethics/faq/animal.
Chen, Ingfei, and Kamala Thiagarajan. “Pain in Lab Animals: How Much Is Too Much?” Undark Magazine, 5 June 2018, https://undark.org/2018/06/05/dilemma-lab-animals-pain/.
“Cell | Definition, Types, Functions, Diagram, Division, Theory, & Facts.” Britannica, 23 August 2024, https://www.britannica.com/science/cell-biology. Accessed 6 September 2024.
“Why is animal testing good? Benefits of animal testing.” Biobide, https://biobide.com/benefits-of-animal-testing.