Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Animal testing, according to this article, is cruel

     Animal testing is used to find cures for diseases which humans are currently infected with. But in order to test cures on animals they have to be infected with diseases first, for example, in order to test cures for brain cancer, first they must be infused with brain cancer, otherwise there would be nothing to test on. That is surely the cruelest part of animal testing, they have to go through the immense pain that the disease brings to them, and most of the time they end up dieing from the disease, or even worse, living with the disease.

The costs of animal testing is unefficient and expensive, it would  be much cheaper to use alternative sources, such as cadevers, instead of using minks, which people in the university of collegedale use, they could much rather use cadavers which are cheaper and more efficient. Some say it is a necessary evil to test on animals for the sake of saving humans. It isn't fair to the animals, many people would speak for these mute animals which are forced to be tested on, if they could speak up I am sure that they would rather not volunteer to be testing dolls, if they could speak up I'm sure they would not want to be infused with diseases like cancer or other types of diseases, I know I wouldn't, and animals have a mind of their own and they shouldn't be treated so differently as to how humans are treated.

I know that it would be much more efficient to use other alternatives, such as cadavers, and other than those, you can use corrositex, to measure the amount of corrosiveness, and another source is computers, you can program it to show how a disease progresses and how it festers, it would be much better than hurting animals.

Overall I think that testing on an animal is unfair, costly, and unefficient.

(This blog post was hard because I would much rather argue for how it is efficient and necessary)

No comments:

Post a Comment