My Take on Animal Research.

When I think of animal research, I picture great apes, monkeys, rats or rabbits with lipstick on their mouths, blisters, cuts, growths on their bodies, scientists sticking needles in their arms, the animals screaming out with terror and about to return them to their small, cold, hard cages where they are kept. I wonder if anything positive can really come of such suffering. Today in class, we talked about Baruch A. Brody and his viewpoint of how animals are inferior and, if testing benefits humans, it should be done. We have an obligation to our own species which overcomes the interests of non-human animals. Then, the point was brought up about where the line is drawn between animal testing. If it benefits cancer treatment research, then is this a more justifiable reason for testing on animals than stopping hang nails from happening? No matter what we test on animals, scientists realize results will differ because animals' anatomy differs from ours and what effects them one way could be totally different on a person. Basically, animals have a different genetic make up so the research that is done may be useless more often than not. So, what's the point of animal testing? Why do some companies choose to still practice it while others go out of their way to show that they do not?

Signs like "If we stop animal testing, who will stop the real killers?" convinces human beings that their interests are superior to animals and that all research is to benefit our species. To me, just like it’s wrong to experiment on children, people of color, disabled people or any human being without their consent, it’s also wrong to experiment on animals. Even though most animals used for animal testing are breed for that purpose, this is not justification to use them in such a way. This is like saying a person gave birth to a child and now that parent can do whatever she wants to the child because she gave it life for her own purposes. Animal testing is also expensive; housing, food, and caring for animals comes at a high cost. Also, because animals used for testing and research are in a lab and not their natural habitat, they are under a great deal of stress which can affect the accuracy of tests. Many drugs being tested on animals react differently when a body is under stress. Sure, there have been many breakthroughs in the medical industry when testing on animals took place but these results could have come about without sacrificing a life / well being of an animal. While there are endless lists of pros and cons about animal testing, but the question remains of whether the benefits of animal testing outweighs the problems associated with the practice?

My question to you is: If many companies and research facilities are able to test their products or ideas without the usage of animals, why is the practice still being performed if it is not necessary? What makes a company or scientist believe the benefits do outweigh the costs?