Quang 1

Tuan Quang
Professor: Holly Batty
English 113B
23 February 2016
Animal Testing: Thinking About a Better Future
Nowadays, humans require better medicine in order to improve their lives. It is a reason
why they need animals as tested objects in order to observe reactions between medicine and their
bodies. People who work in a laboratory know that most of chemicals in medicine are highly
toxic so that they want to see how long animals can resist these toxic chemicals. Testing on
animals can save many peoples lives; however, they dont know that companies who test
medicine have to kill millions of animals. Although people believe that testing on animals can
make humans lives better every day, I argue that testing on animals should be abolished because
it is unethical, risky, and wasteful.
Although people can get satisfactory experiments in testing toxic chemicals, most testing
on animals is brutal and unethical because people can suffer and agonize because they have to
see animals dying gradually in testing containers. People know that humans and animals usually
have the same DNA structures so that results for animals testing will be more precise. According
to Rachel Hajar, M.D., Claude Bernard, known as the father of physiology, stated that
experiments on animals are entirely conclusive for the toxicology and hygiene of man. The
effects of these substances are the same on animals, save for differences in degree (Hajar, para
3). Based on Rachel Hajar, Claude Bernard wants to demonstrate the relationship between
humans and animals. I agree with Rachel Hajar about the point that testing on animals are
efficient; however, it is so brutal to see animals suffering until they are dead. Animals can

Quang 2
actually have same feelings of pain when being tested by toxic chemicals as humans. It is a
reason why animals can feel suffering and painful as much as humans can feel. Because we think
that humans are high level of thinking, we assume that we can freely test or even kill low level of
thinking animals. It is so contradictory that humans can share love with humans but not with
animals. Animal testing is so unethical to test and let animals suffer until they cannot resist
anymore. Even animals cannot have feelings or emotions like humans, animals can have basic
emotions such as pain, exciting, sadness. If we know that humans have to share their love to
people and natures, we have to admit that animal testing is brutal and should be abolished.
On the other hand, some people think that animals reactions on chemicals are the same
on humans reactions; however, animal testing is not accurate as humans think. Effects on
animals and on humans are slightly different because animals do not have completely biological
and physical bodies as humans bodies. Stachura can indicate that The U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) mandates that drugs under development go through a preclinical testing
phase that includes animal testing. Unfortunately, animals and humans differ greatly biologically.
Many drugs are safe for animals but not safe for humans (147). We can see that not all products
from animal testing work. We can observe that some chemicals of products do not affect animals;
however, these chemicals can be toxic chemicals for humans. We actually just test animals
reactions but we not sure about humans reactions. It is a key that we need to resolve. Moreover,
Stachura has a demonstration to show that Approximately 125,000 Americans have died from
FDA-approved medications (147). It is so contradictory about the fact that animal testing is
good on humans bodies. 125,000 people are died is not a small number that we can ignore. This
evidence wants to show us that animal testing is unreliable. We cannot trust completely on
companies who provides results for animal experiments. If FDA still keeps approving animal

Quang 3
experiments, there will be more than thousands of people dying every year. In order to protect
people, the government should abolish animal testing and find alternative ways for animal
testing.
For changing better ways to check chemicals, technology keeps changing every year so
that humans always find ways to substitute for animal testing. The advantages of technology will
change ways how we test on animals. We can reduce numbers of dead animals every year. The
fact that Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez provide is About 20 million animals are
experimented on and killed annually, three-fourths for medical purposes and the rest to test
various products. An estimated eight million are used in painful experiments (Of Cures and
Creatures Great and Small, para. 2). If we keep doing this animal testing, animals will gradually
extinct. This extinction will make our nature unbalanced and more disasters will destroy because
biological systems are disrupted. Nobody wants to see this dystopia; however, we will see it if
we continue doing animal testing. On the other hand, if we cannot test on animals, technology is
more accurate and precise than animal testing. Human can have better lives and people will not
worry about safety of chemicals. According to Kojima, H, For the promotion of 3Rs
(Reduction, Refinement and Replacement) principles of animal tests, the EU and US established
the European Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and the Interagency
Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) (331). It
indicates that humans try to find ways to substitute for animal testing with highly efficient, and
economical. For example, right now, we have an artificial heart that we can test on it easier than
an animals heart. We are in modern world that means we can find better ways to make testing
more advanced and accurate. It is reason why animal testing should be no longer exist because
we already have better methods for testing. Furthermore, companies can save tremendous

Quang 4
amounts of money every year. According to U.S Congress, Office of Technology Assessment,
With an estimated 17 million to 22 million animals used in laboratories annually in the United
States (III). This number can make us recognize that testing companies have to pay millions
dollars for animal testing. However, they can use this money for investing machines or
technologies that can make better testing for chemicals. Testing animal is a way that makes
humans waste money for unreliable and unreliable testing.
Nowadays, some people still think that animal testing can protect humans lives because
they can apply efficient chemicals for their products. They also believe that they can freely use
animals because animals are presents from our nature. However, they do not know that abusing
animals can cause many consequences such as extinction, unbalancing biological systems, and
many dominating animals. Gradually, there will no more animals for humans to test. We have to
know that nature is necessary for us to survive. Without nature, we have nothing to survive. If
nature is devastated, animals will die and also humans have nowhere to live.
Testing animal is a mistake that humans are facing. In order to make our lives and nature
better, we should know to stop testing animal. Stopping is the only way to minimize a number of
thousands of dead animals every year. With better technologies, humans can do something to
change how we test chemicals. We have to know that we need animals to survive. One day, we
will recognize that animal testing should be abolished to make humans not only have better lives
but also can harmonize with our nature. We have to make actions to stop this situation so that we
can have a better future.

Quang 5
Works Cited
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. "Of Cures and Creatures Great and Small." - Resources.
N.p., 16 Nov. 2015. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Hajar, Rachel. "Animal Testing and Medicine." Heart Views : The Official Journal of the Gulf
Heart Association. Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd, n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Kojima, H. (2007), Trend on alternative to animal testing. International Journal of Cosmetic
Science, 29: 331. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2494.2007.00376_1.x
Stachura, S. "Drug Safety: An Argument To Ban Animal Testing." Journal Of Nursing Law 12.4
(2008): 147-156 10p. CINAHL Plus with Full Text. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Alternatives to Animal Use in Research,
Testing, and Education (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, OTA-BA273, February 1986).