Cons of Animal Research Using animals in research is a costly methodology. Ending animal testing in cosmetics is a no-brainer, whichever way you look at it. The substance being tested may well prove to be lethal for the animals, or the conditions during their captivity may lead to their deaths. The skin is then graded for erythema and edema. Without these experimentations, these people say that thousands, if not millions, of hepatitis B and diabetic patients would have died each year. Discriminating against animals because they do not have the cognitive ability, language, or moral judgment that humans do is no more justifiable than discriminating against human beings with severe mental impairments. American women use an average of 12 personal care products per day, so product safety is of great importance.
By banning cosmetic testing on animals, it would be difficult for scientists and researchers to make an educated guess about the safety of cosmetics. This is a government website, and thus, the information is reliable. When we speak about animal testing cons, there are plenty of emotional and ethical issues staring in our faces. The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings. The animals like rats, mice may even bite the handler. People are now suggesting use of tissue culture, statistics and even computer models for carrying out the test.
In Covance, Germany in 2004, monkeys were kept isolated with minimal to no lighting for extended periods of time without being warranted by the testing purposes or protocol. I think it was scientist Konrad Lorenz who proposed a test for scientific researchers: that they should imagine killing and cutting up a lettuce, a fly, a guinea pig and a dog. Treatments developed using these tests also include remedies for hip dysplasia and glaucoma, and even pacemakers. This horrible cosmetic incident led to the main cosmetic animal test used today, the Draize tests. Animals do not have the cognitive ability or moral judgment that humans do and because of this they have been treated differently than humans by nearly every culture throughout recorded history. Be honest and stop using them.
Medicines as well as cosmetics ingredients that are patented require animal testing because they have not existed before their creation. Learn all about the pros and cons. As you can see, some animals are killed immediately after each test and sometimes suffer from injuries and chemical poisoning, forcing them to live the rest of their lives in captivity. Hence those drugs which are found to be effective in humans are again tested on animals for confirmation of activity. Epidemiology has already successfully proven the relation between smoking and cancer.
List of Cons of Animal Testing on Cosmetics 1. The situation is much worse when an animal is harmed or even killed to test out a product that never contributed anything positive to mankind, and unfortunately this does happen. Animals however, are never asked for their opinion and have never had their rights safeguarded. Some experiments also include the administration of lethal doses of certain chemicals to determine how much would kill animals. Additionally, the animals used in the experiments are in captivity, and may be harmed or killed. Thus animals are allowed to sacrifice instead of humans. Animal testing is used in many different industries, mainly medical and cosmetic.
So animals are stabbed, shot, poisoned, irradiated, etc. Proponents of animal testing say that it has enabled the development of many life-saving treatments for both humans and animals, that there is no alternative method for researching a complete living organism, and that strict regulations prevent the mistreatment of animals in laboratories. Some lose their limbs, eyesight, hearing ability, etc. But until alternative tests are better developed, banning animal testing for either cosmetics or medicine seems unethical. Pros of Animal Testing To decide whether animal testing is beneficial or not, it is best that you start learning its positive sides first like the following: Treatments Developed Have Saved Lives Animals are the most common subject of medical testing.
Companies are making human skin in labs to curb animal testing of products. Even there are companies involved in growing these for sake of experiments. That blog written by your roommate about how to reduce stress and anxiety during exam week might provide some useful advice. Firms that are participating in cosmetic tests on animals have a competitive edge over those that do not do it. Because at the end most of them are dead. The drug was definitely tested on animals before it was released commercially.
Reduction: Reduction suggests opting for methods where a considerable amount of information is garnered by subjecting minimum number of animals to tests. One way or the other testing on products must be done, especially when using ingredients that we do not have an extensive amount of knowledge on. If the human benefit seems to outweigh the costs of the animal lives, then the only allowable animal experiments must provide the greatest of human benefit. Arguments on each side certainly have their compelling strengths. The software performs toxicity and pharmacology prediction.