Experimenting on Animals

Testing animals is wrong and completely cruel, and they should be banned for good. Animals have rights like we do. All day everyday, people are using animals for horrible, cruel and half of the time tests

that are useless. These animals do not have anyway to fight for their rights. For this reason is why there should be a law to protect them from these kinds of things.

Even though most of the experiments are ran by private industries, most experiments are conducted by public organizations. The U.S. Government, Air force, and also the Army especially has created and carried out many harmful and cruel animal experiments. These experiments have been designed where innocent animals would suffer and even die, not even being certain these horrible experiments would even save someone’s life, or help people at all; but for the hundreds or even thousands can be said for other experiments studied around the world each year. Narrowing things down to studies done on innocent dogs, some of this information will shock a lot of you: For example, The Lovelace Foundation, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, scientist made sixty-four dogs to inhale “radioactive Strontium 90” for a “Fission Product Inhalation Program” that started back in 1961, which was funded by the United States Atomic Energy Commission. During this study, twenty- five of these dogs died. Some of deaths happened with an epileptic seizure; some died with brain hemorrhages. There were even dogs that became anemic, feverish, and wouldn’t eat. Animals should not have to go through these kinds of experiments for scientist to experiment their new ideas; this is just an example of some of the experiments animals have to go through.

Most people nowadays even doctors and scientist are asking themselves if the killing and suffering of these animals is worth the sake of human beings. Is it right to dissect a worm or a frog to teach high school students? But then again, should “We study life to protect life” the problem of killing animals to study education, biomedical research, and cosmetics can be called”vivisection”. Thirty to forty millions of animals will be killed every year in the US for research, education, and testing. Even though vivisection serves to be very important for doctors and scientist to work in research and may help people, the harm that comes to these animals defiantly out-weighs the benefits.

In 1983 the Institute Laboratory Animal Resources (ILAR) estimated 17-22 million animals were experimented on during that year on painful experiments. They stated that all animals had pain relieving drugs for these painful experiments and 69% of the animals never even made it out alive.

German medical student invented and abpactus cell myograph which allows students to study nerve and muscle physiology on each other instead of animals (Meyer, 1990). There are other alternatives for experiments other then putting these animals through cruel tests, such as, three dimensional models, video tapes, the use of cell cultures, or even preserved specimens. If we could get The United States to pass a bill stating that it should be illegal to perform such cruel and harmful experiments by proving that these other alternatives do work then these innocent animals wouldn’t have to go through these horrible tests.

In conclusion, it is hard to believe what these animals go through so we can benefit from their experiments. Kolar states that “Despite all of this, animal experimentation has become a cruel reality in the world today”. (Kolar, 2006). And that is completely true and honest. If the people of the United States would put more money into trying to find other ways to tests their products, then innocent animal that can’t fight back would have a chance. Animals have rights just like we do.


Meyer, N. (1990) The myograph and `self test’. Euroniche newsletter, 3, 12-13.

Kolar, R. Animal Experimentation. Science & Engineering Ethics. (Jan 2006), vol. 12 issue 1,p111-122 12p. Retrieved July 24, 2007 from InfoTrac Onefile database.

Langley, G.R. Animals in Science education-ethics and alternatives. Journal of Biological Education. Winter91,vol.25 issue 4,p274,6p,1bw. Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the InfoTrac Onefile database.