Quang 1

Tuan Quang
Professor: Holly Batty
English 113B
23 February 2016
Animal Testing: Thinking About a Better Future
Nowadays, humans require better medicine in order to improve their lives. It is a reason
why they need animals as tested objects in order to observe reactions between medicine and their
bodies. People who work in a laboratory know that most of chemicals in medicine are highly
toxic so that they want to see how long animals can resist these toxic chemicals. Testing on
animals can save many peoples lives; however, they dont know that companies who test
medicine have to kill millions of animals. Although people believe that testing on animals can
make humans lives better every day because we know approximately how much medicine can
affect our bodies, I argue that testing on animals should be abolished because it is unethical,
risky, and wasteful.
Although people can get satisfactory experiments in testing toxic chemicals, most testing
on animals is brutal and unethical because people can feel suffered and agonized because they
have to see animals dying gradually in testing containers. Animals can have feelings like humans
so that animals also have levels of pain as much as humans levels. According to Rachel Hajar,
M.D., Claude Bernard, known as the father of physiology, stated that experiments on animals
are entirely conclusive for the toxicology and hygiene of man. The effects of these substances are
the same on animals, save for differences in degree (Hajar, para 3). Based on Rachel Hajar,
Claude Bernard wants to demonstrate the relationship between humans and animals can actually
have same feelings of being affected by toxic chemicals. It is a reason why animals can feel

Quang 2
suffering and painful as much as humans can feel. Because we think that humans are high level
of thinking, we assume that we can freely test or even kill low level of thinking animals. It is so
contradictory that humans can share love with humans but not with animals. Animal testing is so
unethical to test and let animals suffer until they cannot resist anymore. Even animals cannot
have feelings or emotions like humans, animals can have basic emotions such as pain, exciting,
sadness. If we know that humans have to share their love to people and natures, we have to admit
that animal testing is brutal and should be abolished.
Some people think that animals reactions on chemicals are the same on humans
reactions; however, animal testing is not accurate as humans think. Effects on animals and on
humans are slightly different because animals do not have completely biological and physical
bodies as humans bodies. Stachura can indicate that The U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) mandates that drugs under development go through a preclinical testing phase that
includes animal testing. Unfortunately, animals and humans differ greatly biologically. Many
drugs are safe for animals but not safe for humans (147). We can see that not all products from
animal testing work. We can observe that some chemicals of products do not affect animals;
however, these chemicals can be toxic chemicals for humans. We actually just test animals
reactions but we not sure about humans reactions. It is a key that we need to resolve. Moreover,
Stachura has a demonstration to show that Approximately 125,000 Americans have died from
FDA-approved medications (147). It is so contradictory about the fact that animal testing is
good on humans bodies. 125,000 people are died is not a small number that we can ignore. This
evidence wants to show us that animal testing is unreliable. We cannot trust completely on
companies who provides results for animal experiments. If FDA still keeps approving animal
experiments, there will be more than thousands of people dying every year. In order to protect

Quang 3
people, the government should abolish animal testing and find alternative ways for animal
testing.
Technology keeps changing every day and every year so that humans always find ways to
substitute for animal testing. The advantages of technology will change ways how we test on
animals. We can reduce numbers of dead animals every year. The fact that Claire Andre and
Manuel Velasquez provide is About 20 million animals are experimented on and killed
annually, three-fourths for medical purposes and the rest to test various products. An estimated
eight million are used in painful experiments (Of Cures and Creatures Great and Small, para 2).
If we keep doing this animal testing, animals will gradually extinct. This extinction will make
our nature unbalanced and more disasters will destroy us. Nobody wants to see this utopia;
however, we will see it if we continue doing animal testing. On the other hand, if we cannot test
on animals, technology is more accurate and precise than animal testing. Human can have better
lives and people will not worry about safety of chemicals. According to Kojima, H, For the
promotion of 3Rs (Reduction, Refinement, Replacement) principles of animal tests, the EU and
Us established the European Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and the
Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM)
(331). It indicates that humans try to find ways to substitute for animal testing with highly
efficient, and economical. For example, right now, we have an artificial heart that we can test on
it easier than an animals heart. We are in modern world that means we can find better ways to
make testing more advanced and accurate. It is a reason why animal testing should be no longer
exists because we already have better methods for testing. Furthermore, companies can save
tremendous amounts of money every year. According to U.S Congress, Office of Technology
Assessment, With an estimated 17 million to 22 million animals used in laboratories annually in

Quang 4
the United States (II). This number can make us recognize that testing companies have to pay
millions dollars for animal testing. However, they can use this money for investing machines or
technologies that can make better testing for chemicals. Testing animal is a way that makes
humans waste money for an unreliable testing.
Nowadays, some people still think that animal testing can protect humans lives because
they can apply efficient chemicals for their products. They also believe that they can freely use
animals because animals are presents from our nature. However, they do not know that abusing
animals can cause many consequences such as extinction, unbalancing biological systems, and
many dominating animals. Gradually, there will no more animals for humans to test. We have to
know that nature is necessary for us to survive. Without nature, we have nothing to survive. If
nature is devastated, animals will die and humans have nowhere to live.
Testing animal is a mistake that humans are facing. In order to make our lives and nature
better, we should know to stop testing animal. Stopping is the only way to minimize a number of
thousands of dead animals every year. With better technologies, humans can do something to
change how we test chemicals. We have to know that we need animals to survive. One day, we
will recognize that animal testing should be abolished to make humans not only have better lives
but also can harmonize with our nature. We have to make actions to stop this situation so that we
can have a better future.

Quang 5
Works Cited
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. "Of Cures and Creatures Great and Small." - Resources.
N.p., 16 Nov. 2015. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Hajar, Rachel. "Animal Testing and Medicine." Heart Views : The Official Journal of the Gulf
Heart Association. Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd, n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Kojima, H. (2007), Trend on alternative to animal testing. International Journal of Cosmetic
Science, 29: 331. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2494.2007.00376_1.x
Stachura, S. "Drug Safety: An Argument To Ban Animal Testing." Journal Of Nursing Law 12.4
(2008): 147-156 10p. CINAHL Plus with Full Text. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Alternatives to Animal Use in Research,
Testing, and Education (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, OTA-BA273, February 1986).