The field of science and technology has embraced the use of animals in research and development immensely. Various bodies have been put in place to oversee this research hence ensuring that the intended objectives are achieved as fast as possible. The use of animals in research has elicited a heated debate as some individuals support the entire issue and others vehemently reject it. This has led to increased controversy in the use of animals in scientific research and development. For instance, the supporters argue that the use of animals in research has led to the discovery of vaccines and different drugs that are vital in healing humans and animals, which have a shorter lifespan compared to humans. On the other hand, opponents argue that the use of animals is immoral and inhuman and that animals react to drugs and other components differently compared to human beings. This paper explicates the arguments for and against the use of animals in scientific research and development.
Most proponents argue that the use of animals in research facilitates the discovery of vaccines and drugs that are useful for curing human disease. They argue that the animals that are used in research have provided the medical community with an easier time of dealing with different illnesses that inflict human beings leading to many deaths. Prior testing and research on animals gives medical practitioners a clear opportunity of the component of a particular disease and the manner in which it could be effectively cured. For instance, proponents argue that the use of animals in research has enabled practitioners to deal with conditions such as anxiety, phobias, schizophrenia, and retrograde amnesia (American Association for Laboratory Animal Science 2). This is facilitated by the fact that some of these animals have similar physiological systems compared to those of human beings. Chimpanzees have been the commonly used animals in the determination of conditions relating to human beings because of their perceived relatedness to human beings. The use of animals in medical research has effectively enabled practitioners to determine the manner in which different medical components would work in human beings due to the reactions that are observed in the bodies of animals. The determination of the nature of the reactions facilitates corrections in the most possible areas and leads to further developments in areas that are perceived to be weaker and inefficient in the treatment of human beings.
-
0
Preparing Orders
-
0
Active Writers
-
0%
Positive Feedback
-
0
Support Agents
Another significant argument by the proponents is that animals have a shorter lifespan compared to human beings and hence it would be better to use them and save life among humans. Proponents argue that most of the animals on earth have a very limited lifespan. This means that they do not have the capacity to live for a longer period due to their nature or the continuous changes in climate. It is vital to save human life by using such animals in research and effective development of the field of science. They argue that there would be minimal impact in cases where a single animal accidently succumbs to death during a research project. This is better that losing human life. Furthermore, proponents point out that the short lifespan among animals will help in the discovery of dynamic changes that could be made to the different aspects of human life. The different generations of animals that are used in research will help in the determination of generational changes in vaccines relating to human beings. This dynamism is significant as it helps in the provision of adequate care to human beings. Moreover, the short lifespan of animals will help in an accommodation of technological changes in the development of different human aspects (Sharp).
Conversely, opponents argue that the use of animals in research is an unethical and inhuman act. It must be noted that animals are living things and have the capacity to feel pain just like human beings. They have feelings like human beings and need to be treated with care like other living things that are receptive to stress and other painful experiences. Opponents claim that animals also complain through their relevant sounds and it would inhuman to make them a subject of the research. Opponents argue that it is improper and unethical for human beings to treat animals in a manner that they would not like to be treated. They assert that animals also have rights that should be effectively respected by all human beings. The respect of animal rights would be vital in the development of the friendliness that exists between animals and humans (Cohen and Regan 20). It will also depict the respect that human beings hold for animals. Therefore, the rejection of animal rights and the use of animals in research is not in line with the established ethical standards hence out rightly unethical and unacceptable.
Opponents of the use of animals in research point out that animals react differently to drugs and vaccines and should not be used in research. Opponents observe that there has been rampant use of animals in research relating to the discovery of human medication and other significant aspects. This is because of the assumption that animals have a similar physiological composition like that of human beings. Animals could react positively hence misguiding most of these researchers. These measures could be applied on human beings hence leading to complications that may not have been anticipated before. In fact, the reliance on some of the tests carried out on animals and their application in dealing with human conditions could lead to deaths that had not been planned. Therefore, it must be noted that animals could react differently to drugs and vaccines intended for human use. This could lead to wrong tests and treatment among human beings hence undesired deaths.
In conclusion, the field of science and technology has embraced the use of animals in most researches. This ensures that the intended test leads to the results required by these researchers. Therefore, there has been intense research involving the use of animals as the potential tests for the success of the desired product that is brought into the market. The use of animals in research has elicited a lot of controversy and has led to heated arguments among individuals. The debate involves those individuals against the use of animals and those in support of the use of animals in research. Thus supporters assert that animals have facilitated the discovery of vaccines and drugs used in the treatment of human illnesses. In addition, they observe that animals have a shorter lifespan compared to human beings hence facilitating the discovery of the dynamic changes relating to the medical backgrounds of human beings. On the other hand, opponents assert that the use of animals is unethical and unacceptable. This is because pain is inflicted on animals. They also assert that animals could react differently compared to human beings hence leading to confusing outcomes. The use of animals in research remains a controversial topic with many questions to answer.