Another harsh thing handlers do is take out dog’s vocal chords so they don’t disturb the lab workers. As for death to an animal; the experimenters will euthanize the animal after being tested on or will use the animal again for further testing until they are dead or useless. If you don’t believe the cruel ways animals are treated, go on youtube and search for: PLRS: undercover at a product- testing lab.
The author's comments: There are also a list of websites on both sides of the issue for students to check out. The sections are: These resources are most helpful for students doing extended school projects (like the UK Extended Project Qualification [EPQ]) as well as university students who are required to write more detailed arguments. General Wikidot.com documentation and help section. Click here to toggle editing of individual sections of the page (if possible). Watch headings for an "edit" link when available. Notify administrators if there is objectionable content in this page. Each year all over the world millions animals are maimed, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and otherwise hurt and killed in the name of science mba career essay examples, by institutions, cosmetics companies and scientific centers. Substances that we use every day, such as eye shadow, soap, lip gloss, cleaning products and etc. may be tested on rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and other animals. Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License View and manage file attachments for this page. Still other people think that animal testing is acceptable because animals are lower species than humans and therefore have no rights. These individuals feel that animals have no rights because they lack the capacity to understand or to knowingly exercise these rights. However, animal experimentation in medical research and cosmetics testing cannot be justified on the basis that animals are lower on the evolutionary chart than humans since animals resemble humans in so many ways. Many animals, especially the higher mammalian species, possess internal systems and organs that are identical to the structures and functions of human internal organs. Also, animals have feelings, thoughts, goals, needs, and desires that are similar to human functions and capacities, and these similarities should be respected, not exploited, because of the selfishness of humans. Tom Regan asserts that "animals are subjects of a life just as human beings are, and a subject of a life has inherent value. They are. ends in themselves" (qtd. in Orlans 26). Therefore, animals' lives should be respected because they have an inherent right to be treated with dignity. The harm that is committed against animals should not be minimized because they are not considered to be "human." First, animals' rights are violated when they are used in research. Tom Regan example of good essay plan, a philosophy professor at North Carolina State University, states: "Animals have a basic moral right to respectful treatment. This inherent value is not respected when animals are reduced to being mere tools in a scientific experiment" (qtd. in Orlans 26). Animals and people are alike in many ways; they both feel, think, behave, and experience pain. Thus, animals should be treated with the same respect as humans. Yet animals' rights are violated when they are used in research because they are not given a choice. Animals are subjected to tests that are often painful or cause permanent damage or death, and they are never given the option of not participating in the experiment. Regan further says free online law essays, for example, that "animal [experimentation] is morally wrong no matter how much humans may benefit because the animal's basic right has been infringed. Risks are not morally transferable to those who do not choose to take them" (qtd. in Orlans 26). Animals do not willingly sacrifice themselves for the advancement of human welfare and new technology. Their decisions are made for them because they cannot vocalize their own preferences and choices. When humans decide the fate of animals in research environments, the animals' rights are taken away without any thought of their well-being or the quality of their lives. Therefore, animal experimentation should be stopped because it violates the rights of animals. Finally, the testing of products on animals is completely unnecessary because viable alternatives are available. Many cosmetic companies, for example, have sought better ways to test their products without the use of animal subjects. In Against Animal Testing. a pamphlet published by The Body Shop, a well-known cosmetics and bath-product company based in London, the development of products that "use natural ingredients, like bananas and Basil nut oil, as well as others with a long history of safe human usage" is advocated instead of testing on animals (3). Furthermore, the Draize test has become practically obsolete because of the development of a synthetic cellular tissue that closely resembles human skin. Researchers can test the potential damage that a product can do to the skin by using this artificial "skin" instead of testing on animals. Another alternative to this test is a product called Eyetex. This synthetic material turns opaque when a product damages it, closely resembling the way that a real eye reacts to harmful substances. Computers have also been used to simulate and estimate the potential damage that a product or chemical can cause, and human tissues and cells have been used to examine the effects of harmful substances. In another method, in vitro testing, cellular tests are done inside a test tube. All of these tests have been proven to be useful and reliable alternatives to testing products on live animals. Therefore, because effective means of product toxicity testing are available without the use of live animal specimens, testing potentially deadly substances on animals is unnecessary. For the speaking part, How I can prepare for speaking part3. I have looked at all ielts cambridge book from 1-8. I found that part3 are difficult. And the final questions, last time that I took the IELTS speaking exam, I try to explain as much as I can. then the examiner stoped me and interrupted me in some questions. In the first part, I asked the examiner to repeat one questions two time and he ended up with change into new questions. I got IELTS speaking with 6.0 :( Do you things what I have done affect my score to be badly? Hi Simon resume writing services in us, I really appreciate your work. It does help me a lot. Thank You, It would be wrong to ban testing on animals for vital medical research until effective alternatives have been developed. Is it an insufficient discussion of only discussing the medicine part? A couple of people noticed a typing mistake: it should have been "through", not "though". I've changed it now. (270 words sample essays for grade, band 9) There are various disadvantages of over aged employees. Firstly, they always follow fundamental approach to work and they adopt traditional ways. It creates hurdles mostly, because, we are living in competitive world where we need to follow efficient methods to accomplish particular task. Secondly, we are living in the era of Information Technology and different computer tools are available to perform tricky tasks with no difficulty. However, our older generation is slow to react for technological advancements. Lastly, in these days, workplaces are very strict in order to maintain professional atmosphere, entrepreneurs urge to communicate professionally and follow proper dress code, on the contrary, over aged people are unable to cope with these restrictions that eventually disturbs the office environment overall. Let’s brace the cruel reality: if not for new medicines developed at the cost of animals, thousands or even millions people might have died. I don’t mean to say that lives of human being are more valuable than animals’ essay for my life, but this is the natural rule of “survival of the fittest”. In an inappropriate analogy, just like we can’t blame a lion for hunting a deer in order to stay alive, we can’t blame scientists for doing experiments on animals in order to advance human benefits. Hi Simon how many paragraphs Do we need to make in Hi Simon! On the other hand, it is also possible to make the opposing case. It is often argued that in fact the benefits of research using animals do not justify the suffering caused. People often have this opinion because animals and human are never exactly the same. A second point is that humans have no moral right to do experimentation on animals, their lives should be respected. A particularly good example here is it has taken over 35 years of failed HIV vaccine clinical trials for researchers to seriously question the usefulness of non-human primate HIV experimentation. On top of this, we also realized that the rodent model of diabetes is wrong. Regarding the essay above, could you please explain the grammar condition in the conclusion. It is true that the usage of animal for medical testing in the medical world and other fields are common this day. For some people who love’s animal, this kind of practice should be stopped, since it is immoral. On the other hand, those experiments should be allowed, since it has created so many new medicines that brings benefit for mankind. I agree that the experiments should be acceptable as long as the purpose is for humanity. Hai, In conclusion,animal tests have both beneficial and detrimental effects,but these tests should not be banned.We should continue to conduct these tests by minimizing the suffering of laboratory animals,and treating our fellow creatures as mercifully as possible to demonstrate our humanity. It is true that researchers are doing many experiments on animals due to find out new medicines and provide people with more safe drugs. Although there are convincing arguments in favor of avoiding such experiments on animals, I believe that these experiments will give us more benefits. It is true that medicines and other products are routinely tested on animals before they are cleared for human use. While I tend towards the viewpoint that animal testing is morally wrong essay 5 paragraph, I would have to support a limited amount of animal experimentation for the development of medicines. your blog is really helpful for all of us preparing for melts On one side of the argument there are people who argue that the benefits of animal testing considerably outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for believing this is that many important medical discoveries involved experimentation on animals. It is necessary to do medical tests on new drugs. It is also possible to say that animal testing help to advance medical and scientific knowledge. One good illustration of this is the breast cancer drug tamoxifen, arguably one of the most important cancer drugs off all time, was developed with the aid animal research. Over the years, it has been saved hundreds of thousands women's lives. On the other hand, reliable alternatives to animal experimentation may not always be available. Supporters of the use of animals in medical research believe that a certain amount of suffering on the part of mice or rats can be justified if human lives are saved. They argue that opponents of such research might feel differently if a member of their own families needed a medical treatment that had been developed through the use of animal experimentation. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal testing for non-medical products, but I feel that it may be a necessary evil where new drugs and medical procedures are concerned. of their own families needed a medical treatment that had been developed though the use of animal experimentation. Some good argument can be made for the benefits of animal testing.On the individual level,animal testing can reduce dangerous level before testing on a group of patients.For example,we develop and test and vaccines by laboratory animals,which assess the safety of new medical treatments.Without animal testing,many new drugs would be extremely unsafe.On the economic perspective,this can also reduce investment risks for medical companies before they start the mass-produced productions.From social perspective,these tests can advance scientific knowledge and contribute to more scientific discoveries. It is thus very clearly organised paper writing services online, with each body paragraph having a central idea. You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. This animal testing essay would achieve a high score. In this essay, you are asked to discuss the arguments for and against animal testing, and then give your own conclusions on the issue. The essay is similar to an essay that says "Discuss both opinions and then give your opinion " but it is worded differently. Write at least 250 words. 'Although it may improve the lives of humans, it is not fair that animals should suffer in order to achieve this'.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
ArchivesCategories |