Animal

Testing
What is animal testing defined as?
The term “animal testing” refers to procedures performed on living animals for purposes of research
into basic biology and diseases, assessing the effectiveness of new medicinal products, and testing
the human health and/or environmental safety of consumer and industry products such as
cosmetics, household cleaners,

ATTACK:
Animal testing is cruel and inhumane.

According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to
force feeding, food and water deprivation, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the
healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and “killing by carbon dioxide
asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means.

Scientists are able to test vaccines on humans volunteers.

Unlike animals used for research, humans are able to give consent to be used in testing and are a
viable option when the need arises. [142] The COVID-19 (coronavirus) global pandemic
demonstrated that researchers can skip animal testing and go straight to observing how vaccines
work in humans.

Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals.

Other research methods such as in vitro testing (tests done on human cells or tissue in a petri
dish) offer opportunities to reduce or replace animal testing. [15] Technological
advancements in 3D printing allow the possibility for tissue bioprinting: a French company is
working to bioprint a liver that can test the toxicity of a drug. [16] Artificial human skin, such
as the commercially available products EpiDerm and ThinCert, can be made from sheets of
human skin cells grown in test tubes or plastic wells and may produce more useful results
than testing chemicals on animal skin
Animals are very different from human beings and therefore make poor test subjects.

The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor
models for human beings. [52] Paul Furlong, Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University
(UK), states that “it’s very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we’re
trying to achieve in the human.” [53] Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at
Johns Hopkins University, argues for alternatives to animal testing because “we are not 70 kg rats.”

Animal tests may mislead researchers into ignoring potential cures and treatments.

Some chemicals that are ineffective on (or harmful to) animals prove valuable when used by humans.
Aspirin, for example, is dangerous for some animal species. [105] Intravenous vitamin C has shown to
be effective in treating sepsis in humans, but makes no difference to mice.

Animal tests do not reliably predict results in human beings.

94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials. [57] According to neurologist
Aysha Akhtar, MD, MPH, over 100 stroke drugs that were effective when tested on animals
have failed in humans, and over 85 HIV vaccines failed in humans after working well in non-
human primates.

There is increasing demand for cruelty-free products.

More than one-third of women only buy cosmetics from brands that do not use animal testing.
[136] The market for cruelty-free cosmetics (products not tested on animals) is estimated to
reach $10 billion by 2024. [137] At least 37 countries have banned or restricted the sale of
cosmetics with ingredients tested on animals, including nations in the European Union. [138]
In the US, California became the first state to make it illegal to sell most cosmetics that
underwent animal testing.

Most experiments involving animals are flawed, wasting the lives of the animal subjects.

A peer-reviewed study found serious flaws in the majority of publicly funded US and UK
animal studies using rodents and primates: “only 59% of the studies stated the hypothesis or
objective of the study and the number and characteristics of the animals used
Defense to their attacks:

Attack 1: you find cure from animal testing

Defense 1: u kill a lot of animals to achieve that and theres other solutions
did u know that in 2020 in the agriculture department only there was mmore 300.000 animals tested
involving pain and suffer and some of them died in one year

how would you feel if it was your dog or cat or another animal u have...

Option against animal testing 1 :

human volunteers is a good solution also just like they did in covid 19 at leat when u experiment on
human they do it from their own volunties

not like animals we pratically oblige them to do it they have no choice.

Option againt animal testing 2 :

there are alternatives that can replace the animal testing method; its the vitro testing

the vitro diagnostics tests are done on samples such as blood or tissue that have been taken from
the human body Almost every type of human and animal cell can be grown in the laboratory.

Scientists have even managed to coax cells to grow into 3D structures, such as miniature human
organs, which can provide a more realistic way to test

Secondary effect for animal testing:

1- Forced chemical exposure in toxicity testing, wich can include oral force-feeding, forced
inhalation, skin or injection into the abdomen, muscle…
2- Exposure to drugs, chemical or infectious disease at levels that cause illness, pain and
distress, or death genetic manipulation
3- Prolonged periods of physical restraint
4- Food and water deprivation
5- Infliction of wounds, burns and other injuries to study healing
6- Infliction of pain to study its physiology and treatment
7- Electric shock
8- Killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck breaking, decapitation…
Comparison:
1- Our organisms are different: 

we have to know that not all the species react to drugs the same way, or have the same body
reactions. Let’s take the example of Penicillin which is fatal to pigs. Ibuprofen causes kidney
failure in cats and dogs. And morphine, a depressant in humans, has the opposite effect in
horses. Why sacrificing animals if this is not even worthy ? in addition, More than 90% of
human clinical tests fail, even if they have previously been successful in animals. 

Why not test on voluntary patients who are condemned, rather than torturing millions of
animals which in the end do not give reliable results? 

2- Animal testing is expensive and inefficient Experiments on non-human animals can be

just inefficient . These tests waste millions of euros, time and resources that could have been
spent on studies relevant to humans or invested in finding alternatives that do not involve
animal suffering. 

Here are some examples of testing costs: 

Animal testing in the cosmetics industry: eye irritation: 2,200 euros for the injection of the
substance into 1 rabbit. There are more than 42,000 million animal tests worldwide. 

Currently, there are more than 65 validated alternative methods to animal testing, such as fake
skin, developed in the laboratory and mimicking human skin and mucous membranes (eyes
and mouth). 

For example, there are fake skins developed in laboratories that mimic human skin and
mucous membranes (eyes and mouth). 

In the field of medical research, it is possible to work on blood from voluntary human donors,
to work on cells taken from voluntary donors, for a large number of diseases. Without causing
them suffering. 

Even pedophiles, murderers and rapists are not as badly treated as these innocent and
vulnerable creatures.
Extra:
- Facts and Statistics About Animal Testing Each year, more than 100 million animals—including mice,
rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds—are killed in U.S.
laboratories for biology lessons, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation,

and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing.

- Both healthy and diseased tissues donated from human volunteers can provide a more relevant
way of studying human biology and disease than animal testing.