Charger Features

The pros and cons of animal testing: is it a friend or foe?

Laura Denton, Charger Staff

Vivisection, from Greek origin meaning to cut while alive, is also known as animal testing.  Some say it’s useless, others claim it’s unavoidable, a so-called necessary evil.  It has saved human lives, and it has been the cause of many human deaths.  Many great advances in the scientific and medical fields are credited to animal testing.  However, do the disasters and drawbacks outnumber the benefits?  You decide.

Some of the many successes of animal experimentation include the development of the treatment for rabies, small pox, and rickets.  A study on dogs brought about the discovery of insulin, which is extremely helpful in the treatment of diabetes.  Development of modern anesthesia, prevention of tetanus, treatment of rheumatism, and prevention of diphtheria are also credited to animal experimentation.

Dr. Barbara Jackson, a local professor at Tennessee Tech, feels that animal testing is necessary, but that it should be kept at a minimum. “Most scientists do not want to hurt animals,” she said.

Dr. Jackson also added that, “It is the intention that matters, and the intention is good; to save human lives.”

The amount of relevant and useful experiments is greatly outnumbered by those which produce no useful conclusion.  Less than 2% of human illnesses are ever seen in animals.  Also, 95% of drugs passed by the use of animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.  Proctor & Gamble, a well-known manufacturing company and one that regularly practices animal testing, admits that the tests are “of little relevance to humans.”

To begin with, the anatomy of commonly tested animals, a mouse for example, isn’t at all comparable to a human.  We can’t be certain that just because a certain treatment is safe on a mouse that it is safe on a human. 

The vaccine for Polio was delayed because of incongruity between test animals and humans.  Many people continued to be exposed to asbestos and die because scientists could not reproduce the cancer in laboratory animals. 

An antidepressant, Zelmid was tested on dogs and rats without consequence.  In humans, it caused severe neurological problems.  Eraldin, a drug intended to treat heart disease, caused many deaths in humans, though it passed animal tests with flying colors.  The list of animal testing disasters goes on and on.

Vivisection is widely used in the testing of cosmetics and household products.  While many manufacturers insist that animal testing is for the safety of the customer, it is, in actuality, a way to reduce liability and protect against lawsuits.  Animal testing is not required by law, though it is a common misconception that it is. 

The LD-50 test is an excellent example of some of the useless and unnecessary experiments manufacturers perform on animals.  A group of animals is forced to ingest, inhale, or otherwise consume varying amounts of a substance and suffer excruciating pain in the process.  The test is complete when 50% of the animals die.  The surviving 50% are killed, autopsied and analyzed to determine which organs and systems were affected and why they didn’t die during the test.

Yet another example of an extremely cruel and horrifying process is the Draize test.  In this test, conscious rabbits are restrained and vivisectionists proceed to pour the solution in question directly into their eyes.  This test lasts for seven days, in which the rabbits experience intense and agonizing pain.  Often, the animals are blinded.  At the end of the seven days, they are killed and their bodies examined.

There are several alternatives to animal experimentation which are often more successful.  Some of these better methods are the use of logic and observation.  Doctors can observe patients in a clinic and gather helpful medical information. 

Albert Einstein offered this view on animal testing: “There will come a day when such men as myself will view the slaughter of innocent creatures as horrible a crime as the murder of his fellow man - Our task must to be free ourselves - by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures...”

There are many advances being made to the eradication of animal testing.  As more people are becoming educated to the reality of vivisection, and more and more people oppose it.