Animal Testing
Essay Preview: Animal Testing
Report this essay
Luis Robles
Mrs. Rockweiler
Honor Rhetoric and Research
17 November 2015
Animal testing
Attention Getter:
Each year, over 100 million animals including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamster, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds are killed in the U.S in Laboratories for biology lessons, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical drugs, food, and cosmetic testing.
Position and Resolution: I strongly negate the resolution that the use of animal for scientific testing is moral.
Definitions:
The Definitions of Scientific Testing is a way of problem-solving by making a hypothesis and then testing it, a way of thinking that values observation and data instead of fanciful ideas about the order of things.
Value:
So for that I value Life- The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproductions functional activity, and continual charge preceding death. By testing on animals it is taking a life away for something that could has a high chance of not helping curing a disease or cancer.
Value Criterion: My value criterion is Equality. Equality is defined the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities.
First Contention:
My first Contention is Animals are a lot different from human beings physically.
Support:
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has noted that 92 percent of all drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests fail in human trials because they don’t work or are dangerous. (“Animal Experiments: Overview”). And of the small percentage that are approved for human use, half are relabeled because of side effects that were not identified in animal tests. Dr. Richard Klausner, former director of the US National Cancer Institute said “The history of cancer research has been the history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades and it simply didn’t work in human beings.” (“Animal Experiments: Overview”). So why keep using mice to cure cancer when it doesnt work for curing humans? Scientist keep killing the a gift of life that has been given to animals just like how its been given to us. No one has the right of killing a human being because he/she has the gift of life something so precious in the world. Animals do not get many of the human diseases that people do, such as major types of heart disease, many types of cancer, HIV, Parkinson’s disease, or schizophrenia. Instead, signs of these diseases are artificially induced in animals in laboratories in an attempt to mimic the human disease. Yet, scientist can add the complexity of human conditions which are affected by wide-ranging variables such as genetics, deeply-rooted psychological issues and different personal experiences. Despite many decades of studying conditions such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, stroke and AIDS in animals, we do not yet have reliable and fully effective cures.
Second Contention:
Animals share characteristic just like what humans do.
Support:
Animals show a lot of characteristic traits just like in human beings for example, they know who their friends are or their rivals. They try to stay survive like us from finding shelter or raising theirs youngs ones and finding food. If you watch mammals or even birds, you will see how they respond to the world. They play. They act frightened when there’s danger. They relax when things are good. It seems illogical for us to think that animals might not be having a conscious mental experience of play, sleep, fear or love.(“Teach Respect for All Living Things.” ) For example, people can see monkeys or dogs show emotions and have feelings when they feel alone, pain, in dangers, and etc. so testing on animals when there is a high