Animal Testing (Essay Sample)

Animal testing
Tutor:
Name:
Course:
Date:
Thesis statement
The research below focuses on the background of animal testing; the meaning of animal testing, its history. It also addresses the stakeholders that are for the animal testing as well as those that are against the animal testing. Some of the stakeholders whose views are taken into account are People for Ethical treatment for Animals (P.E.TA) (Watson, 90). The other stakeholder is Bayer. Bayer is an international enterprise with vital competencies in the sector of health care, nutrition besides high tech materials (Harrison, et/al, 34). And lastly the other stakeholder is European Partnership for Alternative Approaches for Animal Testing (EPAA) (Monamy, 97).
The term "animal testing" means the procedures done on the bodies of the animals. It is majorly for the purposes of research into pure biology and ailments, evaluating the efficiency of new medicinal yields. Moreover, it is also meant for testing the health of human beings besides assessing the safety of the environment of consumer and industry products.
History about animal testing
Animal testing began a long time ago. The time dates back to the fourth and third centuries. Early Greek writers documented some of these early animals testing. Aristotle and Erasistratus were probably the first few individuals in the history of animal testing. The first person who dissected mammals like goats and pigs are Galen. He was among the very few physicians who lived in the by the then times of history. However, later on animal testing was introduced in Spain as an experimental method of testing the surgical operations and steps before using them in the doing surgery to us human beings. A surgical doctor, Ibn Zuhr (Avenzoar), introduced that notion. Later on in 1242, circulation of blood in mammals was provided by a scientist known as Ibn al-Nafis.
The year 1996 also marked a very significant year in the history of animal testing. Successfully, the Dolly sheep was born. Dolly was cloned from an adult cell. It was the first in the history of animal testing. Ian Wilmut, Keith Campbell besides other individuals at Roslin Institute situated in Scotland, plus a biotechnology company that funded the whole process of cloning dolly. The main reason for cloning dolly was to confirm if the somatic cells would form a whole organism.
Currently, animal testing is still in use in the in researchers that targets to get a solution to medical challenges from Alzheimer’s disease. Other challenges include spinal cord malfunctions, multiple sclerosis and many other states where there are no valuable in vitro model system existing.Stakeholders against animal testing
P.E.T.A is one of leading stakeholders who are against animal testing. It came into the sight of people in 1981. It sends its employees secretly into research laboratories, factory farms and shows to document the handling of animals. These people may take many months pretending to be employees of such places. They ends end making copies of very many documents and putting on some secretive cameras. Some of the conducts of P.E.T.A have resulted into the government’s actions against the institutions like the universities. Case example was in the year 1990. The organizations used the same trick and sent its workforces to pretend as employees of Carolina Biological. They discovered that cats were being mistreated in the organization. P.E.T.A has and agenda, the organization is very frank about their stand; they also rationalize whatever argument they can for them to support their point of view (Harrison, et al.67). The organization is strongly campaigning for the welfare of animals. They also consider abolition of animal testing. Their main aim is to reduce, refine and replace the animal testing. P.E.T.A aims in improving the welfare of these animals in research centers even if they are facing a variety of challenges ranging from finance to the material resources (Newkirk 64). In fact P.E.T.A even organizes donation of funds from the public to help them materialize their actions. P.E.T.A recently reported by the P.E.T.A eye witnesses to the Association press, it disclosed that workers brutally dealt with the animals particularly the primates-and thoroughly mistreated them at the Primate Products Inc. (PPI). Florida imports, keeps, sell, and buy, of these animals for chief purpose of experiment and animal testing. PPI is very notorious and sends these animals even to Charles River Laboratories international where these animals end up in turmoil and torture during the experiments. They also send some to other universities like University of Pittsburg, besides university of Maryland. P.E.T.A also campaigns for the welfare of animals in all setting. For instance their campaign where they agitated that people should tell the world that animals are not ours, they tried to safeguard the interest and welfare of these animals even pets.
Another important specific argument was the case where P.E.T.A launched a campaign name ‘end the circus’ the campaign contributed to reduction in the evils against the animals.
Stakeholders like Bayer and EPAA are typically against animal testing. Bayer is much interested in the identification and use of alternative methods of animal testing in the laboratory. They argue because animal experiments should be minimized as much as possible and alternatives used without interfering with their products. However, to some extent they also claim that use of animal testing is indispensable (Monamy 85). Bayer has firmly engaged in the advancement of non-animal testing Activities for years. A particular role is given to its collaboration with the European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods. In that, the legislation process ensures validation of new methods and their inducement into the European legislation. EPAA is committed to gathering of knowledge, resources and research in order to jointly curb the animal testing with their partners.Stakeholders for animal testing
Among other stakeholders that support animal testing is the US Environmental Protection Agency. The organization requires for the harmful pesticides to be on tested on the dogs. The dogs are forced to eat these very poisonous substances. The poisons are pumped into the dogs and cannot escape from the animal. They believe that by so doing, they are safeguarding the welfare of human beings from the effects of such harmful substances (Hayhurst 54). The result helps in knowing the dangerous aspects of the pesticides in the environment. The agency is charged with the responsibility to safeguard the environment. They believe in using these animals to prove the efficiency of these substances in our environment. In a bid to enforce and enhance their policies, the agency mistreats these dogs and makes them undergo serious torture. Actually they support the animal testing by arguing that it’s the best way they can tests the substances and keep our environment safe for any toxic substance. By using dogs to test the healthiness of these substances, it indicates that the agency supports the idea of animal testing.
Another important stakeholder that is also pro animal testing in the U.S is the food and drugs administration. The administration mandates the firms that manufacture and produce the fluoride products to stuff the teeth of rats with these substances for a period not less than two weeks. These rats end up losing their lives due to such long distress. They support the animal testing since they argue that ...