Alternative to Animal Testing



All across the Earth, scientists in research labs are studying and testing newly found cells and new products that could end up being very beneficial to humans in everyday life, as well as in hospitals or our homes. The beginning stages of how these new products and cells are being tested is with the use of animals. The vast majority of the time, the animals being tested on are small rodents, mainly rats and other gerbil type creatures. These animals do not have the same rights as other more typically housed animals that are kept as household pets like dogs and monkeys. Many people feel that it’s completely fine to test on these specific types of animals for many reasons. For example, one could make the argument that God created animals on this Earth for us to use, and they aren’t sentient, therefore it does not matter what we do to them. Other people also feel that without the use of animal testing, people would be placed into harms way because we do not know the effects of something until it is tested on a living being. Also, many argue that the greater affect of what the animals are being used for is better than a few animals dying. I disagree with all of this for the most part. While yes, I do think that life is special and it would suck to die testing a product or new cure or vaccine, I do not feel that the amount of animals we lose to testing is acceptable in the grand scheme of things. There are many cruelty free products that do not use animals on the market. That being said, with a large number of cruelty free products, this would indicate that there are a multitude of different ways we can test certain things that still show if something is safe for humans. Also, personally, I just do not feel that it is okay to do something potentially harmful, which could very likely cause death, to something living and conscious when the living and conscious thing in question has no idea what is going on, as well as no say in the matter whatsoever. I feel that human testing would be more ethically acceptable for these reasons. First of all, and most importantly, unlike an animal, a human can give actual consent to be a part of a test. This is already much better morally speaking. Also, The human anatomy is exactly the same as other human anatomy, so really, the tests would ultimately be more accurate. Testing on animals, while it is similar to a human, is not perfect. If something is not harmful to a rat, that does not always mean that it will not cause harm to a human. If you start with a human, however, the risk of an inaccurate test is significantly decreased. That, to me, is a win. Finally, humans will actually understand what needs to happen. If a human has willfully consented to participating in a test, they will more likely understand what specifically they need to do. This could actually cause better results for that test. While I specifically would not choose to be a test subject, I am fairly certain that there are plenty of people across the globe that would be more than willing to donate their bodies for science. While it is unlikely that human testing would ever replace animal testing, we should at least have some rules regarding animal testing. There shouldn’t be anything potentially harmful to them. If you know it could be a fatal result, go back and do other tests before practicing on an unwilling participant.