Imagine growing up with a pet, one who became your closest confidant, someone you would call your brother or sister. Now imagine that family member being taken to a testing center and given a cancer cell to see if the latest cancer treatment would work. During your stay in the experimental facility, you are allowed to visit them. However, as you wait outside your assigned room, you hear loud screams and low growls coming from your dearest friend. Thinking that this experience can help thousands or even millions, you just hope that this experience is worth it and that they are okay. Unfortunately, it doesn't work and your pet dies. The historical tradition of animal experimentation began in the fourth and third centuries BCE by the ancient Greeks and has continued to the present day with the aim of improving human life. However, it is quite difficult to determine where the line lies in these experiments, which is why the topic of animal testing has become so controversial. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get the original essay In 1966, the Animal Welfare Act was implemented to regulate the “handling, shelter, needs in space, feeding, watering, sanitation, ventilation, veterinary care » care and transport » of laboratory animals. This means that the law guarantees the right of animals to have a safe and comfortable environment while they are being tested. But the law does not go far enough. Despite these regulations, a few species are left behind – not covered by the AWA – leaving mice, rats, birds and cold-blooded animals, which make up 99% of experimental animals vulnerable to potentially inhumane treatment. . And while many experiments are legal, they shouldn't be. In the article "All Animals Are Equal..." by moral rights philosopher Peter Singer, he states that although animals do not have the ability to speak, they still have the ability to feel emotions and pain. An analogy he uses is the comparison between men's and women's rights. Stating that “the differences that exist between men and women are also undeniable… Many feminists argue that women have the right to abortion on demand. This is not to say that because these same feminists campaign for equality between men and women, they should also encourage men to have abortions. Since the act of abortion would no longer have any meaning since men would not need it. This same concept can be applied to animals, because although humans and animals are markedly different, they nevertheless share some of the most fundamental similarities. For example, they are also living, breathing beings who can suffer when injured and feel comfortable when treated properly. This is not to say that animal rights activists are demanding the right to vote, but simply some of the most basic rights that can lead to a happy life: to be cared for properly or even just to get help for their most basic needs. basics like food and water. So really, if we continue animal testing, it would go against the philosophy of moral rights. Because their rights both negative and positive would be violated, because not only humans go against their fundamental rightsinalienable, but also of their right not to be interfered with. However, many argue that animals should not have rights because they cannot determine their actions between right and wrong by applying moral judgments. But even if they are not endowed with rights, is it not our moral obligation to ensure that animals are not mistreated? As the Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau once said, whatever an animal's understanding of natural rights, "they are endowed (...) [to] participate [in] natural rights" and Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher, “would be famous for “The question is not: can they reason?” And they can't speak either? But can they suffer? "So, by allowing this form of abuse for the sake of our own selfish needs, humans are violating the right of animals to live happy and fulfilling lives. It is therefore unethical to allow animal testing because it harms animals, is of little or no use to human research, and kills millions of people. Harming animals in the narrow interest of human well-being is immoral, to say the least. In animal testing laboratories, animals are known to be "time and resource intensive", meaning that they must be exploited to test as many substances (i.e. products) on their bodies chemicals) that they can handle throughout their lives. These tests would make it possible to find “medical treatments, to determine the toxicity of drugs, to verify the safety of products intended for human use and other biomedical uses... and health”. However, the discovery of the toxicity of chemicals by prescribing large lethal doses during processes such as inhalation and skin contact results in the possibility of experiencing intense stress which can sometimes lead to death. During these tests, animals are subjected to extreme conditions which can, therefore, exert significant stress on their bodies. The tests can "...cause some animals to develop neurotic types of behaviors, such as constantly spinning in circles, rocking back and forth, pulling out their own fur, and even biting themselves." After enduring a life of pain, loneliness and terror, almost all will be killed. » With these effects in mind, it must be understood that the enormous sacrifice of animals would be rendered unnecessary because many of these experiments provide little information on how these chemicals react on humans. In considering the welfare of these animals, humans must also understand that they, like us, are living, breathing creatures who have the capacity to love and understand pain. Therefore, humans should stop these sadistic acts and find new ways to fight diseases, because animal testing is a Pyrrhic victory that results in more losses than gains. Animal testing is a practice of the past that should remain in the past because it is largely ineffective in helping people. of human research/development. With the long history behind this controversial practice, people have become accustomed to contributing to tradition rather than developing better, more humane ways of testing vaccines, household cleaning products, and other chemicals to see results/ symptoms if brought into contact with humans. Despite this, these tests are not even accurate, because different species react differently to chemicals. So in reality the side effects vary with each test done on a different animal, which also means that the damage to the animal will not even reflect the symptoms..