Animal testing is the use of animals in scientific experiments.

Most animal testing is done by universities, pharmaceutical companies, and medical schools. Most animals used for research are breed for the specific purpose of testing and few animals used for testing are captured from the wild. Some animal testing is done for basic research such as behaviour studies and genetics while other animal testing is done for the benefit of humans. This research includes drug testing, surgical procedures, medical equipment, and somewhat inconsequential applications like; cosmetics, and other household products. Most animals that are used for researched are euthanized once the experiment is finished. Opinions about the ethics of animal testing have shifted greatly through the end of the 20th century and into the 21st century. Some question the accuracy of animal testing and if animal testing can be done humanely. Others argue that animal testing is an invaluable tool for research and that countless lifesaving medical breakthroughs are the result of animal testing. Many who are against animal testing claim that the treatment of the animals is inhumane. Many groups argue that animals have the same right to life as human beings and that it is not worth euthanizing animals for the benefit of mankind. Many also argue that using animals to test the effects of cosmetics and household products is not an important enough reason to sacrifice an animal. Animal testing is also incredibly expensive. The cost of housing, storing, and caring for animals is very high. Animals used for testing are usually obtained from specific breeding facilities and come with a hefty price tag. 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 thus affect the accuracy of tests. Many drugs being tested on animals react differently when a body is under stress. Those who argue for animal testing point out all the amazing breakthroughs that have already come from animal testing research such as organ transplant and open-heart surgery techniques; life saving drugs; effective insulin and cancer treatments; and vaccines for deadly diseases like polio, rabies, rubella, and tuberculosis. Animal testing also benefits the lives of animals such as the heartworm medicine that has saved many dogs lives. Many regulations and laws are put into place to insure that animals are treated as humanly as possible. Animal abuse is rare in animal

testing facilities. Researchers are looking for the best possible solutions to medical problems. Animal testing is the most accurate way to learn the effects of substances in a living body. Using cell cultures can only reveal side effects on a molecular level and cannot unfortunately, reveal side effects like organ failure, rashes, tumours, or cardiac arrest like animal testing can. Using computer models cannot always predict unknown variables that can be discovered with animal testing. Animals may not have the exact same philology as humans but animal testing is accurate enough to test whether a substance is even safe enough for human trials. Cons Against Animal Testing In animal testing, countless animals are experimented on and then killed after their use. Others are injured and will still live the remainder of their lives in captivity. The unfortunate aspect is that many of these animals received tests for substances that will never actually see approval or public consumption and use. It is this aspect of animal testing that many view as a major negative against the practice. This aspect seems to show the idea that the animal died in vain because no direct benefit to humans occurred from the animal testing. Another con on the issue of animal testing is the sheer cost. Animal testing generally costs an enormous amount of money. Animals must be fed, housed, cared for and treated with drugs or a similar experimental substance. The controlled environment is important but it comes with a high cost. On top of that, animal testing may occur more than once and over the course of months, which means that additional costs are incurred. The price of animals themselves must also be factored into the equation. There are companies who breed animals specifically for testing and animals can be purchased through them. There is also the argument that the reaction of a drug in an animal's body is quite different from the reaction in a human. The main criticism here is that some believe animal testing is unreliable. Following on that criticism is the premise that because animals are in an unnatural environment, they will be under stress. Therefore, they won't react to the drugs in the same way compared to their potential reaction in a natural environment. This argument further weakens the validity of animal experimentation.

Animal Testing Statistics

Animal testing statistics is a touchy and sensitive subject for many individuals. There is a lot of hue and cry over the ever increasing animal testing statistics from organizations working in the field of animal rights. To know more about the animal testing statistics, read on... It is all about sensitivity and empathy that us humans are capable of showing towards other species that share this world with us. For a long time, we have used animals especially, guinea pigs, cats, mice, rabbits, monkeys and dogs etc, for the purpose of testing drugs and cosmetic formulations. The animal testing statistic is on the rise because pharmaceuticals and cosmetic companies along with domestic product manufacturers are spending billions of dollars on animal testing. They are using these animals to test their chemical preparations or drugs on, in order to detect and study the effectiveness or the adverse effects of such drugs. Animal Testing Statistics Animal testing is a multifaceted issue. There are those people who lend their support for animal testing and naturally, some are against it. There are individuals, who cannot weigh the animal testing pros and cons to decide for themselves which side of the fence they are going to get off. Individuals, who doesn't know anything about animal testing statistics or choose to ignore what it implies are also part of the scene, through their consumption of the products tested on the animals. The issue is now being weighed in numbers i.e. animal test statistics. The following are some of the animal testing facts based on the data available, especially, in the United States:

Each year 56 to 100 million cats and 54 million dogs are born in the United States. Annually, the number of dogs and cats that are put to death in animal shelters is between 10.1 and 16. 7 million. Dogs and cats that are used in research are taken out of animal shelters. These animals would otherwise be euthanized. Their number comes to approximately 1.1% of dogs and cats euthanized in shelters. At the most one dog or cat is used in research while at the same time 50 are destroyed in animal shelters. The approximate number of animals used in research, each year, is 17-22 million which is much smaller as compared to the 5 billions animals that are killed and consumed for food, each year. Most of the research is conducted on rodents such as rats or mice. Rodents constitute 85-90% of the research animals. Out of the total, only 0.5% of research animals are non-human primates. It is said that 61% of the animals used in research suffer no pain, as against 6% that experience pain. 31% of the animals are relieved of pain through a euthanasia. The animal test statistic points to the fact that 50% of all animals used in cosmetic testing die 2-3 weeks after the experiments.

The animal statistics also show that at least 12 million animal testing experiments were conducted in Europe during 2005. In 2005, 2.3 million animals were used in France, where as Germany made use of 1.8 million animals. Finland and Ireland managed to lower the number of animals used for testing. On the other hand, animal testing statistics make it clear that countries like Sweden, Spain and Greece almost doubled their use of animals for testing. In Europe, there is a lot of public support for ban on animal testing. On the contrary, animal testing statistics show that there is a 2.3% increase in the number of animals used for testing. The United Kingdom has banned cosmetic testing since 1990. France, which is one of the most influential nations in Europe, is against the ban on animal testing.

Animal Testing Pros The arguments forwarded by the cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies, government and private research firms and individuals that support animal testing are as follows. Here is an animal testing pros list:

Animal testing helps them in making safe products, before they are launched in the market for human consumption. The decrease in human deaths due to cardiovascular diseases is because of the knowledge gained out of animal testing and research. The animals are used in research, only when they are indispensable. Animal testing helps preserve the environment. During research the animals are treated humanely.

Animal Testing Cons The basic argument that the animal rights activists have managed to gain public support for, is that under the disguise of these tests the animals are genetically modified, force-fed with harmful chemicals, blinded, scalded and are mimed. This is nothing but animal abuse or animal cruelty. The following is an animal testing cons list:

The side against the animal tests proclaims that the main reason for conducting animal tests is to earn profit at the expense of animals and avoiding lawsuits from unsatisfied consumers. Most of the times, these animals are used in the research of the conditions or diseases that are not found in them naturally, such as different type of cancers to which humans falls prey or HIV. Animal rights activists believe that animals have as an equal right to life as that of human beings and they are especially against animal testing in cosmetic industries. They also propose that alternatives available to animal experimentation such as chemical assay tests, tissue, cell and organ culture systems, cloned human skin cells and patches, computer and mathematical models be employed, which they think, will produce the same results as that of animal testing.

The issue of animal testing is muddled because of both sides presenting their own information on this subject, supplemented with animal tests statistics, in the

ways best suited for them. It appears that the decrease in the number of animals used for the testing, in one place is compensated by the increase in the number of the same, in other parts of the world.