Kathleen Maurice

Ms. Hughes
English 1102
19 April 2016
Annotated Bibliography
Pycroft, Laurie, and Helen Marston. "Is Animal Testing Necessary To Advance Medical
Research?." New Internationalist 444 (2011): 34-36. Academic Search Complete. Web.
17 Apr. 2016. The authors in this article discuss both sides of the debate as to whether or
not animals should be used as test subjects in medical research while collectively
weighing the legal, ethical, and moral concerns surrounding the issue. Laurie Pycroft,
represents the medical scientists stressing the necessity of using animals for research
since they serve as the best possible model as a living organism. But, Helen Marston,
representing the animal rights advocates, questions their methods viewing them as
nothing more than cruel since animals cannot accurately mimic the complex human form.
This source provides strong arguments and examples for both medical researchers and
animal rights advocates regarding the use of animal testing for scientific research. In
addition to providing support for the ethical aspect, which may ultimately be the deciding
factor when emotions are engaged.
"Animal Testing & Environmental Protection. (Cover Story)." Environmental
Action 21.6 (1990): 25. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 Apr. 2016.
This article presents multiple points of view with regards to the use of
animals for biomedical and environmental acute toxicity research. One
perspective, Dr. Richard Hill of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),

stresses how the EPA must rely heavily on the analytical data from animal testing to make
well-constructed decisions in order to safeguard human life from chemicals in the
environment, considering little human data is available. However, Henry Spira,
coordinator of Animal Rights International, advocates that non-animal experimentation
methods should be all but exhausted. Considering, these types of methods are not only
faster allowing for more testing, but cheaper to conduct. Other findings allude to more
important concerns over the accuracy of data collected using animals seeing that humans
differ biologically from animals. The viewpoints in this article provide good examples
and statistical data supporting the differing stances on the use of animals for biomedical
and environmental acute toxicity research.