Literature Review

Animal testing is classified as any sort of scientific experiment or test on a live animal to

see the effects or reactions of the experiment. Often animal testing causes great pain and

suffering to the animals being tested on, leading them to possible deformities, stress, and

constant pain. Often these animals will have an early death for a plethora of reasons, some being

that they are killed after the experiment, they die due to the test performed on them, or their

bodies simply cannot take the stress of living any longer. I have always wondered if animal

testing for medical purposes is really needed anymore, with all the new and improved technology

humans have. Is there even an effective way to stop animal testing while also figuring out what is

safe and effective for humans, and if so what would it be?

I found the starting history of animal testing goes all the way back to Greek writings in

500 B.C. according to ProCon.org’s webpage on animal testing. They give history and examples

and rightings that go back in time and note where animal testing all started. The webpage states

that noted scientific physicians such as Aristotle, Herophilus, and Erasistratus all performed

experiments on animals to understand how living organisms function. They were even known to

perform dissections on criminals. Also according to ancient writings, Aristotle believed that

animals didn’t feel pain, so he mindlessly performed on them without much thought. The

original thought process has seemingly been carried to today's world, the only difference is that

people now know these experiments cause the animals pain but they just don’t care. Take a big

time leap all the way to the 1800’s and 1900’s and we find animal testing had no laws, rules, or

regulations as to how they needed to be performed. These animal experiments would involve

anything from testing new ailments to trying to completely rewire the animals’ brains. It wasn’t

until the 1970’s when real laws started to be put into place against the more severe animal
testing, like injuring the nervouse system or brain. Currently there are quite a few laws in place

against animal cruelty when it comes to animal testing, but most wouldn’t even need to exsist if

we sought the alternatives to animal testing instead. ProCon.org gives many facts and

information along with credible sources that make it a reliable resource.

Cruelty Free International is an organization based in London against the cruelty and

testing of animals. According to Cruelty Free International’s student page, “Cell cultures have

been central to key developments in areas such as cancers, sepsis, kidney disease and AIDS, and

are routinely used in chemical safety testing, vaccine production and drug development.” Cell

cultures can accurately predict a human reaction to allergies and medicines 90% of the time

compared to the 60% on rodents and 72% on pigs. Cell cultures also have a 100% success rate of

identifying toxic chemicals and toxic drugs that can affect the growth of a human baby while in

the mothers womb. Human tissues are another successful way of testing the progression of

disease and regeneration of healthy tissue. These tissues are typically donated, usually from

surgeries, and post-mortem bodies. People who have donated their bodies to science have

provided vast amounts of information to medicine that cannot be replicated through any other

means. Cruelty Free International is a valid source that has good examples of why animal testing

doesn’t need to happen.

Stanfor Medical Center is an educational center with valid points for animal testing.

While I don’t agree with their potition, they make a valid argument and stand as a good counter

argument. Stanford states multiple facts such as “Animals are biologically very similar to

humans. In fact, mice share more than 98% DNA with us,” and “Animals are susceptible to

many of the same health problems as humans – cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc.” as well as “

With a shorter life cycle than humans, animal models can be studied throughout their whole life
span and across several generations, a critical element in understanding how a disease processes

and how it interacts with a whole, living biological system,” (Stanford Medical Center). Stanford

will be a good source for arguing against the counter argument in my essay, because while they

are a good medical school, not many facts are actually stated in the information. It is discussed in

the information that animal testing has been done for years and is accurate and reliable, yet they

don’t give any statistics, percentages, or examples of why is is.

PETA is an animal rights organization against any sort of abuse or killing of animals.

While PETA is known to be questionable in their actions, their starting story is true. This story is

true as proven by the countless numbers of police officers and non-PETA rescuers who bore

witness to the horrific sight. A man named Edward Taub, who actually had no medical or animal

training, ran the Institute for Behavioral Research (IBR), a research institute that was federally

funded in Silver Springs, Maryland. The IBR had 17 monkeys in their “care” in 1981. After

digging further into the facility, and a former PETA member actually getting a job at the facility,

the horrific conditions of the monkeys was discovered. They lived in small cages, encrusted with

years of their own feces and urine, having never been cleaned, and with many bloody injuries

that were never taken care of, as there was no vet in the facility. Sadly, that was just the

beginning, as the experiments was where the real torture began. Taub wanted to discover if a

limb that could not be felt could be used. To figure it out, Taub severed nerve spinal nerve

endings of the monkeys, leading to them being unable to feel one or two limbs. Then Taub

subjugated the moneys to electrocution, food deprivation, and in one experiment, placed them in

a converted refrigerator with an electroshock floor, to get the moneys to use their limbs. In other

experiments the monkeys were tied to a restraint chair by their necks, waist, ankles, and wrists

using packaging tape, with pliers attached tightly to their skin. Once it was discovered that these
monkeys were harmed much more than the law allowed, pictures and information was sent to the

police. Once the police received a warrant to search the property, they were appalled and

shocked. The monkeys were rescued, but sadly the only two that survived were later euthanized

for the extreme amount of suffering they endured. This is only one story of thousands of cruel

animal testing experiments. Laws have been put in place to stop this cruelty, but with the

combination of people refusing to listen and new drugs requiring testing, people may find it

difficult to end the animal testing.

The final source I’ve chosen is from the NBCI and states not only the harsh impacts on

humans and animals, but also so other alternatives to animal testing. They have multiple

paragraphs about each different alternative and each effect the testing has on animals. The NBCI

states one of the alternatives to animal testing is antibodies in which they state, “Animal-friendly

affinity (AFA) reagents are alternatives to antibodies, produced without immunization of animal.

These antibodies are typically selected in vitro by phage, ribosome, or yeast display, but they

also include non-antibody reagents such as DARPins, affibodies, monobodies, anticalins etc

(Taussig et al., 2007, Dübel et al., 2010). In a recent review by Gray et al., (2016); a comparative

analysis is done between animal derived antibodies and AFAs. AFAs are less time consuming,

superior in quality, more reliable, reproducible and cost effective except that initial investment

and expertise is required to move from animal antibodies to AFAs. The private entities like

YUMAB has come up to provide custom made recombinant antibodies,” (NCBI). The facts and

information that the site contains makes it a valuable and reliable resource.
 Works Cited

“Cruelty Free International Student Resource.” Cruelty Free International, August 2018,

https://www.crueltyfreeinternational.org/why-we-do-it/alternatives-animal-testing

“History of Animal Testing - ProCon.Org.” Animal Testing, 24 Feb. 2021,

animal-testing.procon.org/history-of-animal-testing.

“Why Animal Research?” Animal Research at Stanford, 2021,

med.stanford.edu/animalresearch/why-animal-research.html.

“The Silver Spring Monkeys: The Case That Launched.” PETA, 5 Dec. 2018,

www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/silver-spring-monkeys/?v

2=1.

“Why Animal Research?” Animal Research at Stanford, 2021,

med.stanford.edu/animalresearch/why-animal-research.html.