Kluttz 1

Genesis Kluttz
Professor Deneshia Smith
English 101
October 20, 2015

Animal Experimentation
Many products are approved by animal experimentation. Without the help of these
animals, the products would not exist. These products include fragrances, medicines, and much
more. Some people disagree with these experiments because they feel that animal experiments
are morally unthinkable and animal testing is not necessary. Animal testing leads to the
suffering and death of millions of animals. On the other hand, people such as myself, find these
experiments useful and beneficial because the use of animals is needed for biomedical research
in order to seek advances in human health. Uncovering these breakthroughs might mean the end
of animal testing.
On April 3, 2015, a newspaper article by Justin Gooden stated Oxford Centre for Animal
Ethics concludes that the practice is unthinkable and that In terms of harm, pain, suffering,
and death, this constitutes one of the major moral issues of our time.(Gooden) The article also
suggested the entire scientific community be present to read it. A growing majority of the public
is now opposing the experimentation on animals. This evidence backed that the results from
animal experiments rarely help humans. I think that this is not true. Even though, animals and
humans may not be the same, some animals are relatively close to humans. This makes them the
perfect candidate to complete experiment.

Kluttz 2

However, on July 17 2015, the animal lovers rejoiced when the US Fish and Wildlife
Service announced that Chimpanzees in biomedical research labs would be protected under the
Endangered Species Act. This act took effect in September, is a triumph for researcher Jane
Goodall. She is a vocal champion of chimpanzee conservation. Goodall, 81, and the fish and
wildlife service announced a proposal in 2013 to give chimps in captivity the same "endangered"
status as chimps in the wild.(Freeing Chimpanzees) Francis S. Collins has noted that The
chimp, our closest relative in the animal world, deserves special consideration and respect." And,
of course, unpersuaded, science moved on, and have found alternative methods that involve a
"brain in a dish" or a "liver on a chip" (a cluster of cells that allows research without animal
testing). In fact, "there are currently no active biomedical research projects using chimpanzees
supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)," a spokesperson told the Globe this week.
The NIH will only consider supporting research projects that are reviewed by an independent
review panel, the Chimpanzee Research Use Panel, and that are consistent with criteria set down
by the Institute of Medicine. (Freeing Chimpanzees) With that being said, I believe that since it is
our closest relative, it is the perfect test subject. Yes, they are endangered animal but, they can be
used for major breakthroughs.
There are some beneficial reasons to experiment on animals. On April 24 th 2015, Patients
with aggressive brain tumors finally had reason for hope. Thanks to the work of scientists and
physicians at Duke University, created an experimental new treatment for glioblastoma
multiform, or GBM. This aggressive tumor kills about 12,000 people in the U.S. each year. This
extraordinary development would not have been possible without animal research and would not
be in the process of saving the lives of patients who, just months ago, had little hope of survival.
Yet many in the animal-rights community condemn the use of any animals in medical research

Kluttz 3

and continue to push for testing bans. Such efforts ignore the fact that when it comes to medical
research, animal models are absolutely necessary. The brain-tumor treatment developed at Duke
is a re-engineered poliovirus. The new virus designed by researchers helps the body's immune
system to recognize and attack cancer cells. As in countless other revolutionary therapies, animal
research played an invaluable role in creating this treatment. (Trull)
Before human trials began, the re-engineered virus was injected into the brains of
macaque monkeys, whose systems operate similarly to those of humans. Since the raw poliovirus
often results in paralysis, such testing of the modified virus made sense and helped demonstrate
that the body's immune system would cripple brain tumors if injected with the re-engineered
virus.This was not the only instance where animal models proved crucial for the Duke team.
While developing their therapy, these researchers relied on years of previous primate research.
More recently, animal research has helped pave the way toward restoring vision. Last September,
a Japanese woman became the first person to undergo an experimental stem-cell treatment for
blindness. The procedure was deemed safe for humans after several studies involving monkeys
and mice. (Trull)
The greatest medical contributions from animal research may still lie in the future. In a
study published last year in the journal Stem Cell Reports, scientists in France and Germany
were able to regenerate damaged brain areas in mice for the first time. The discovery could lead
to treatments for human brain damage caused by everything from strokes to bullet wounds.
(Trull)
Even though, these successes, critics continue to attack animal-research methods as
needlessly cruel. Activists have succeeded in pressuring all but one major airline to stop carrying
animal models to research labs. That is a problem for scientists in the U.S. Most monkeys come

Kluttz 4

from Asia and Mauritius, where they are humanely raised on farms. In addition, researchers have
had to turn to charter carriers. As a result, costs per animal have tripled. (Trull)
Policymakers and scientific authorities agree: U.S. research must do more to avoid and
minimize animal testing. However, the practice, they say, must reach a minimum-not a complete
halt. Public support for animal testing has been in steady decline since the 1950s, dropping from
above 90 percent in 1949 to only 57 percent in 2013. And that number is likely to fall even
further, with younger demographics opposing animal experimentation in even greater numbers
than previous generations. For many laboratory scientists, this waning approval is not cause for
concern, because a near-identical trend is emerging within the research community, and more
and more U.S. labs are using innovative cross-disciple. But while compassion and ethics are
indeed factors, the new prototype is actually driven by striving for improvement that is a
hallmark of the best science. In 2014, the limitations of animal testing appear to have caught up
with research and development, leading many to question whether the practice is still relevant.
(Ericson)
The most obvious problem is the fundamental biological difference between humans and
the animals used in research. The inner workings of rat and human may be similar, but they are
by no means identical. When it comes to drug discovery and development, these limitations can
jeopardize every segment of the pharmaceutical pipeline, from synthesis to prescription. Side
effects are missed, and millions of dollars are wasted. Even if a new chemical thing is considered
safe at the animal stage, it still only has an 8 percent chance of being approved for human use.
That does not mean animal testing does not work--in fact, the Food and Drug Administration
instructions used in virtually all drug review processes. For instance, pick any drug you have
heard of; it was probably tested on a rat. However, there is significant room for improvement.

Kluttz 5

Moving away from animal testing will require some lateral thinking: Life must become a little
more abstract. An example, this is called in silico modelling. It sounds complex, but it is really
just a fancy term for computer simulation. After centuries of scholarship and decades of
technological breakthroughs in computation, many biological reactions can now be emulated and
predicted with sophisticated algorithms.(Ericson)
In conclusion, I do agree with animal experimentation because I feel that the
experimentation is very beneficial to me and expand technology. This could be the cure to big
problems such a cancer and other big problems and diseases.

Kluttz 6

Work Cited
Ericson, John. Breakthroughs Might Mean the End of Animal Testing. Newsweek. 28
Marc. 2014: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 October. 2015.
Freeing Chimpanzees from the Research Lab. Boston Globe. 17 June. 2015: A.10.
SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 October. 2015.
Goodman, Justin. "Animal Experiments Are Morally 'Unthinkable'." People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals. 03 Apr. 2015: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 Oct. 2015.
Trull, Frankie L. "Animal Testing and Its Gifts to Humans." Wall Street Journal. 24 Apr.
2015: A.11. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 04 October. 2015.