Cufaude 1

Brittany Cufaude Mr. Francisco ELA 7th Periods 1 and 2 29 September 2013 The Unfortunate Truth about Animal Testing The time will come when men . . . will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men. Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) The role and treatment of animals in society is a highly debated issue around the world. One particular focus of this debate is on the issue of animal testing. According to dictionary.com, animal testing is the the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, esp. for purposes of determining the safety of substances such as food or drugs. Animal rights activistsor, in other words, people who fight for the rights of animalsbelieve that animal testing should be banned because it is cruel to animals and that there are better alternatives. Many scientists and medical researchers disagree and conversely argue that modern medicine and life all together would fall apart without animal testing. While it may be true that animal testing is cruel to animals, the evidence suggests that it is a necessary means for medical advancement until we can find better solutions because animals have shorter lives and make better research subjects, many people would die without medical advancements, and researchers follow strict guidelines to protect animals as best they can. One of the primary reasons animals make ideal research subjects is because they have shorter life spans. To test the long-term effects of a medication, scientists must evaluate the impact drugs have on patients over the course of a lifetime. According to the

Cufaude 2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2011 report, the average life expectancy in the U.S. is 78.7 years. Consequently, it would take researchers nearly eighty years to assess a drugs impact on the human body overtime. In some cases, researchers might die themselves before their subjects. Animals, on the other hand, have shorter life spans. According to Laura Blue of Time Magazine, The vast majority of animal testing [today] is in rodents, either rats or mice. Rodents, particularly mice, have very short life spans, so you can see how a compound would react in a young animal, then in the same geriatric animal, and then in the next-generation animal, all in a time frame that is reasonable (Blue). In other words, animal testing provides key insight into how a medication reacts in a body well into old age. When diseases, like Cancer, AIDs, and Diabetes are killing people everyday, time is crucial. It is not reasonable to assume that humans can wait another 80 years to develop and test new drugs that have the potential to save lives now. For this reason, animals make the best subjects in this context until better alternatives arise. Throughout the history of modern medicine, doctors have relied on animal testing to save human lives. One particular example is the development of the heart transplant procedure. The University of Wisconsin, Madison states, In the early 1900s, scientists learned to suture the arteries and veins of animals. In 1912, the Nobel Prize was awarded to one of the researchers who achieved this vital step in transplanting organs such as the heart, kidney or liver. During the next six decades, animal researchers developed their transplant techniques, with a focus on reducing organ damage by cooling the heart and speeding the operation, and keeping the patients alive in the meantime with heart-lung machines. In the

Cufaude 3 1960s, doctors were confident enough to attempt heart transplantation in humans (University). This article goes on to tell the story of a 54-year-old Chuck Reynolds, a father of four who, in 2001, was dying from heart failure. After the unfortunate death of another man, doctors were able to give Reynolds a heart transplant that saved his life. The University of Wisconsin credits the turn of the century doctors who performed experimental surgeries on animals for developing the techniques that save innumerable lives today. They assert none of these lives would have been saved without the use of animal testing. It is clear that a growing number of people frown upon animal testing despite its positive impact on medical advancements. In fact, according to a March, 2013 New York Times article, the European Union banned the import of any cosmetics that contains animal tested products (Kanter). The growing trend toward banning animal testing is particularly contemptuous toward animal testing for cosmetics. Cosmetics are considered to be non-essential to human life and therefore it is difficult to get people who also value animal life to agree that animals should be negatively affected so that people can have softer hair, for example. For researchers, however, who are pursuing cures to terrible diseases, they are also trying to avoid similar scrutiny. The FDA states, In some cases, after considering available alternatives, companies may determine that animal testing is necessary to assure the safety of a product or ingredient. FDA supports and adheres to the provisions of applicable laws, regulations, and policies governing animal testing, including the Animal Welfare Act and the Public Health Service Policy of Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Moreover, in all cases where animal testing is used, FDA advocates that research

Cufaude 4 and testing derive the maximum amount of useful scientific information from the minimum number of animals and employ the most humane methods available within the limits of scientific capability. In this sense, researchers and the government alike are recognizing that animal testing should be limited to essential research and that when animals are used that they be treated with dignity. Therefore, it appears that treating animals as humanely as possible is the necessary means to continued medical progress until better alternatives emerge. Animal testing is a difficult topic. While those who love and respect animals obviously cringe at the thought of animal suffering, it is also difficult to imagine a world without medicine, heart transplants, and the hope of saved lives. While some researchers work toward creating alternatives to animal testing, it is perhaps painfully clear that animal testing, when absolutely necessary, is a crucial piece of the puzzle of humanity. What is important to remember, however, is that to save one life, we are sacrificing another and with that in mind researchers should proceed with absolute caution and eyes focused clearly on better alternatives.

Cufaude 5 Works Cited "Animal Testing and Cosmetics." Cosmetics. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 5 Apr. 2006. Web. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductTesting/ucm 072268.htm>. Blue, Laura. "How Much Does Animal Testing Tell Us?" Health and Family. Time.com, 17 June 2008. Web. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815241,00.html>. "Heart Transplant: A Life Saved Courtesy of Animal Research." Animals in Research and Teaching at UWMadison. University of Wisconsin, Madison, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://animalresearch.wisc.edu/heart-transplant/>. Hoyert, Donna L., PhD, Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Division of Vital Statistics. "Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2011." National Center for Health Statistics. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 10 Oct. 2012. Web. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf>. Kanter, James. "E.U. Bans Cosmetics With Animal-Tested Ingredients." Global Business. The New York Times, 11 Mar. 2013. Web. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/business/global/eu-to-ban-cosmetics-withanimal-tested-ingredients.html?_r=2&>.