Running Head: ANIMAL TESTING

Animal Testing: When Innocence is Taken for Granted

British Literature Honors
E. Tawes

Toni McCoy
April 15, 2015

ANIMAL TESTING

Animal Testing: When Innocence is Taken for Granted

What is animal testing?
One of the most controversial topics throughout all of the world is whether or not to use
animals for experimentation with cosmetics, medication, food additives, etc. Many
people argue that animal testing takes away the freedom and safety of undeserving
animals for selfish human purpose. The others argue that experimenting on the animals is
a part of science, product testing, and education, so it is essential (MacClellen 2014).
And sadly, some people dont even know the cruelty that goes on in the testing facilities
that the animals are being held up in, caged, and killed. A good amount of the research
that we have on certain products have relied on animal testing, whether it be directly or
indirectly (MacClellen 2014). Animal testing is used for human benefit relying on the
similarities between humans and animals and is regulated all across the world, while also
being outlawed in many countries. (MacClellen 2014). There is no specific type of
animal that laboratories use. Many species of vertebrates/invertebrates that are used
include; nematodes, zebrafish, fruit flies, and mice as popular choices (MacClellen
2014).

Why is it so bad?
People seem to go against animal testing mainly for the reason being that there is no
benefit on the animal (MacClellen 2014). According to Harm and Suffering,
Every year in the U.S., over 25 million animals are used in biomedical experimentation,
product and cosmetic testing, and science education. This includesdogs, cats, ferrets,
rabbits, pigs, sheep, monkeys, chimpanzees, and more. However, the majority of animals
in labs (over 90 percent) are rats, mice, and birds. Some estimates place them in the tens

ANIMAL TESTING

to hundreds of millions
When millions of animals are being tested on each year, that puts a big effect on population
count. In toxicity tests, it is not uncommon at all for an animal to die, even before the test is over
with. Animals who are finished with and survive in their research, can still be killed afterwards,
with the exception of chimpanzees (Harm and Suffering). It isnt fair for an animal to be taken
into a laboratory and be shoved into a small cage, just for them to die soon after with torturous
tests being put on them. Many animals do not even get to experience their lives due to being put
right into testing facilities after birth.
Life in the testing facilities are anything but comforting. Along with the tight, compacted
cages, the animals stress level can become dangerously high. All they can do is sit inside of their
cages, unexposed to fresh air and natural behavior. Though some facilities do have outside
cages, they rotate the animals, which doesnt give them a lot of time outside. The loud noises,
cramped cages, bright lights, and lack of enrichment can all be causes of the animals high stress
level and can even lead to physical symptoms. (Harm and Suffering). The term stress-induced
psychosis is used to describe the stress level the animals undergo in the laboratories. An
undercover lab investigation was done in 2009 that revealed monkeys spinning around in their
cages, biting open wounds, chewing off their fur, and basically mutilating themselves (Harm and
Suffering).

Testing
There isnt just one type of testing that the animals go through. One of the more popular
tests that get put on animals is for cosmetic purposes. This is also one of the most controversial
types of testing because people know that cosmetics have nothing to do with animals, therefore
should not be the subject of choice (MacClellen 2014). Some cosmetic tests include skin care
and hair dyes and can include painful tests (Do You Know How Your Mascara Is Made 2014).

ANIMAL TESTING

Despite cutting-edge technology, the majority of American citizens disagreement, and the harm
done on the animals, the United States still goes for animal testing for cosmetic products simply
because its what we have always done (Do You Know How You Mascara Is Made 2014). A
good amount of countries have even outlawed cosmetic animal testing, including: India, the
United Kingdom, the rest of the European Union, China, and North Korea, (Do You Know How
Your Mascara Is Made 2014, MacClellen 2014). Instead of continuing testing on innocent
animals, the researchers could use information from the past and see what ingredients could be
reliable for future products (Do You Know How Your Mascara Is Made 2014).
Another type of test put on animals, is the toxicity test. Toxicity tests involve needles,
and can cause possible diarrhea, convulsions, bleeding, paralysis, seizures, and even sometimes
fatality. In the oral toxicity test, a syringe is inserted into the mouth of usually a rat, and an
excessive dose of a certain substance is forced down the throat. This test is to see the amount of
the particular substance causes death to the animal. This test can go on for months until the
researcher gets the information that he or she needs (Do You Know How Your Mascara Is Made
2014). Human clinical and epidemiological studies, experiments with cadavers, volunteers,
patients, computer simulations, and mathematical models are all different alternatives that could
be used for toxicity tests (Bidnall 2007). Even toxicologist Kristie Sullivan believes that we
need better ways to test certain toxic chemicals (Mone 2014). Another type of toxicity test is the
reproductive toxicity test. The researchers expose pregnant rats and mice to certain substances a
for up to two generations, and often do this test by force feeding the rodents (Do You Know How
Your Mascara Is Made 2014).
A third type of test is the carcinogenicity test. This is where rodents are exposed to to a
certain product every day for up to two years. Scientists do this test to see whether or not the
rodents develop tumors (Do You Know How Your Mascara Is Made 2014). Being exposed to a
chemical everyday for two years is very cruel, and just for the outcome to see whether or not the

ANIMAL TESTING

animal develops a tumor should not be worth all of the pain the animal has to go through.

A Literary Comparison
In the novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, Dr. Frankenstein takes his curiosity and
testing to the extreme. He develops a test with dead body parts, he put them together, and
brought the creation to life. This associated to animal testing because both Dr. Frankenstein and
researchers take science too far with what they do. Putting the lives of the villagers in danger
with the monster Dr. Frankenstein creates, and the lives of the animals being testing on takes
science too far.
In Conclusion
Animal testing is disapproved by anyone who isnt actually doing the harm to the
animals. There is plenty of other methods to test certain products instead of locking up animals
in cages only for them to be mentally and physically abused. MacClellen argues that:
Those opposed to animal testing on scientific grounds cite the unreliability of predicting
effects in humans based on animal models. Some argue that animal testing is not costeffective; they assert that, given the substantial costs of conducting animal tests, which
often last years and cost millions of dollars, the goal of improving human health would be
more fully and efficiently realized through a reallocation of funding to implement
existing medical technologies more widely. Some argue that much animal testing is
immoral because the animal suffering caused is greater than the expected benefits to
humans. The stronger animal rights view is that each animal has inherent moral worth,
which prohibits humans from using them as experimental subjects for any reason.
Any country that still relies on animal testing for certain products/research should try more
efficient methods that dont offend the majority of the people in their country while also harming
and taking advantage of innocent animals that have no control over what tests scientists do on

ANIMAL TESTING

them. In the words of Jeremy Bentham, The question is not, can they reason, nor, can they talk.
But, can they suffer?

ANIMAL TESTING

References

Animal Aid. (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/experiments/ALL/730/
Bidnall, D. (2007). Animal testing. Alive: Canadas Natural Health & Wellness Magazine, (299),
48-51. Retrieved April 16, 2015, from
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=824dace8-9f1a-4a5c8b0c-b682c7a9edc3%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4103
Croswell, A. (2014, January 7). 5 Ways Animal Testing Hurts Humans. Retrieved April 15, 2015,
from http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/5-ways-animal-testing-hurtshumans/
Do You Know How Your Mascara Is Made? (2014, February 10). Retrieved April 16, 2015, from
http://www.humanesociety.org/news/magazines/2014/03-04/be-cruelty-free-campaignto-end-cosmetic-animal-testing.html
Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research. (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from
http://www.neavs.org/research/harm-suffering
MacClellen, J. P. (2014). Animal Testing. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 15, 2015,
from http://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?sid=41dc7f63-5b30-453d-83ede3af97891fb6%40sessionmgr4004&vid=3&hid=4110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdm
Umc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=ers&AN=89473959
Mone, G. (2014). New Models in Cosmetics Replacing Animal Testing. Communications of the
ACM, 57(4), 20-24. doi:10.1145/2581925. Retrieved April 15, 2015, from
http://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=41dc7f63-5b30-453d-83ede3af97891fb6%40sessionmgr4004&vid=7&hid=122

ANIMAL TESTING