The use of animals in scientific research has long been the subject of heated debate on the one hand it is considered morally wrong to use animals in this way solely for human benefit. Animal testing – taken here to mean the use of animals in research for the purpose of furthering human concerns such as drug efficacy and the safety of products such as cosmetics – is an endeavor fraught with controversy and difficult ethical arguments. Utilitarianism says an action is morally right if it benefits the greatest number of beings with the greatest good people may use utilitarianism to justify or condemn actions for animals rights. Argument to stop cosmetic animal testing by kmwhite08 animal testing is commonly thought of as a means of protecting humans from the possible dangers of medicine, cleaning products, and cosmetics. 2 it has great important to research if testing cosmetics on animals is prohibited, it would be difficult for researchers to make an educated guess about the safety of these products.
Violation of animal rights is a prominent argument against animal testing supporters of this view state that if testing and experimenting on human subjects is unethical or illegal, then treating animals' rights to life any differently is wrong. In 2013, a ban on animal testing for cosmetics and the marketing of cosmetics tested on animals went into effect in the european union, paving the way for efforts to find alternatives for all of the common cosmetics tests that use animals. Unfortunately, animal testing on cosmetics does not always lead to the release of new cosmetics in fact, there are tests done, without products actually put into use animals are just suffering and dying in vain by being subjects in dangerous tests that do not even have direct human benefits.
Drug and cosmetic act annals of internal medicine, 122(6):456-461 there are strong, moral arguments against animal-testing however, strict legislation is implemented in many countries a constant tension between the benefits of animal testing in science and the possible ethical and moral implications of animal use medical research. Usually, this middle view accepts experimentation on some, but not all, animals and aims to avoid unnecessary use of animals in scientific research by pursuing alternatives to animal testing the following sections briefly outline a few of the arguments for and against animal experimentation. The use of animals in research and education dates back to the period when humans started to look for ways to prevent and cure ailments most of present day's drug discoveries were possible because of the use of animals in research. In fact, the use of animal ‘models’ has never been validated, and the claim that animals are necessary for biomedical research, is unsupported by scientific literature there is, rather, growing awareness of the scientific limitations of animal research and its inability to make reliable predictions about human health. One for against: humans are actually animals, so we both have feelings, and we both can feel the pain and ache that some of heartless people cause.
The argument for support of animal experimentation is that it aids in development of the several medications and procedures that are currently in use today and also use of animals in research helps in development of future treatments. Consumers and manufacturers sometimes ask about the use of animals for testing cosmetics the following information addresses the legal requirement for cosmetic safety and fda policy on developing. Whenever possible,researchers do use non-animal models for researchcomputer models, tissue and cell cultures,and a number of other non-animal related research methods are used today in biomedical research. An ethical argument against animal experiments as animal advocates, we oppose animal experiments, on ethical grounds, believing that it is morally wrong to harm one species for the supposed benefit of another. Opinions about the use of animals for research are complicated and often divided when it comes to different purposes or types of research for instance, a clear majority of people are against the use of animals for testing cosmetics and personal care products.
The controversies surrounding the use of animals for human research 484 words 1 page an argument against animal testing an the need for a change on the matter 395 words 1 page the ugly truth behind cosmetics and animal testing 1,311 words 3 pages an essay on animal testing 880 words. An oxford-based neurosurgeon who last week became one of the first scientists to publicly champion the use of animals in medical research goes further today by condoning their use to test cosmetics. In against animal testing, a pamphlet published by the body shop, a well-known cosmetics and bath-product company based in london, the development of products that use natural ingredients, like bananas and basil nut oil, as well as others with a long history of safe human usage is advocated instead of testing on animals (3.
The epa’s addiction to animal testing is so strong that even when evidence from human epidemiological studies implicates a chemical in the spread of a disease, the results are ignored by the epa for the sake of conducting more and more animal studies. The humane society of the united states promotes research methods that can potentially replace, reduce, or refine animal use so that animals experience less suffering an opinion poll was taken by the hsus on september 23, 2001 on pain and distress in research.
Cosmetic testing on animals is a type of animal testing used to test the safety and hypoallergenic properties of products for use by humans due to the harm done to the animal subjects, this testing is opposed by animal rights activists and others cosmetic animal testing is banned in the european union, india, israel, and norway. Arguments against testing the critics of animal testing base their argument on the grounds of morality, the necessity or the validity of this procedure, whether proper authority to perform such tests is granted, whether such tests are actually needed and whether such tests practically provide us with any useful information. The research defence society (rds london, uk), an organization representing doctors and scientists in the debate on the use of animals in research and testing, welcomes the greater openness that the foi act brings to discussions about animal research. Non-animal models, such as cell and tissue culture, are used in addition to animal models, but they cannot replace all animal research tweet this all personnel involved with the care and use of laboratory animals must be trained to ensure the animals’ well-being.