Term+3+Assignment+4+Distinction+Essays


 * __Term 3 Assignment 4 Distinction Essays__**

//**Question3. The use of animals in experiments should be banned. Discuss.**// For many centuries, people have experimented on animals. Before we plunge into the discussion of this controversial topic, it should be known to us that the main reasons of animal experimentation are: firstly, to find out more about the animals themselves, and secondly, to test substances and procedures to see if they are harmful, and cosmetic products, medicine and surgical techniques fall in this category. There has been a growing consensus that it is not acceptable to test products on animals, and animal rights activitists have resorted to trespassing, violence, death threats, in the pursuit of ending this practice. On the issue whether animal experimentation should be barred, it should be noted that the results obtained may not be reliable. The anatomical and physiological differences between the animals and us, humans, can adversely affect the results of the experimentation, as it can never be guaranteed that the effect on a particular animal will produce the same effect on humans, and this is further proven by statistical figures, which show that 40 percent of the consumers who have consumed a cosmetic product, which was safe on animals, during it’s early stages of release, have been hospitalised , and with this, many medical experts agree that data from animal experimentation cannot be extrapolated safely to human patients. However, on the other hand, animal experimentation may not be necessarily bad. Testing on animals have improved our quality of life, as it has aided the development of various vaccines for many life threatening diseases, like Herpes Simplex, Polio, Rabies, Mumps, Hepatitis B, and viruses related to organ transplantation rejection. In addition to this list, animal experimentation has also helped in the refinement of procedures related to blood pressure measuring, and the perfection of the heart and lung diseases. Anaesthesia, which is used to numb he body during surgery and acute pain, is only available today after successful animal experimentation. Without the practice, many of us would be suffering from life threatening diseases, and we would have to endure the pain during an operation m and thus, it would be impractical to bring animal experimentation to a halt. The world of science has on record more than 400 methods that can effectively replace animal experimentation, and this is a vital factor to ponder on as an average of 33 animals die in laboratories worldwide each second. With these advances in the field of science and technology, the astounding figure of 12 million animals that die annually due to animal experimentation, can be finally spared the horror of their harsh deaths. Growing tissues, cells, organ cultures, cloned human skin cells, could be employed to produce more effective results, as reported by the newspapers. Thus we should cease animal experimentation in the areas where effective alternatives are available. However, analysis has shown that animals also benefit from the experimentation. Heart worm medication, which was devised from research on animals, today, has saved the lives of many dogs. With these medical advances, we could help save the lives of many. Rabies, which was once a fatal and lethal can now be eliminated, by injecting dogs with vaccines. Animal experimentation, has also helped us to learn more about other animals, like cats, which showed their diet, and the reason behind how they live longer, and remain healthier, which we could benefit from. Thus animal experimentation should be continued as it benefits both sides, humans and animals. No matter how hard we try, distinguishing between the right and wrong when it comes to such a sensitive issue is indeed rather challenging. However, on a personal notes, yes, it is absolutely inhumane to consider animals as worthless objects which have no sole purpose but to serve as the means to an end that will benefit only the human race. It is emotion that guides us to such measures to keep the human race going, but on the other hand, it is this very emotion that has our hearts go out to all the defenceless animals, to empathise with their pain, as they are put through such tests and experiments. Finally, our sole endeavour should be to come out with a middle path, that will secure the lives of both species, and enable us to coexist in a state that is beneficial to both. Sean Lee (26/30)

Isabel Tay(3) question 3 Using animals for medical experimentation, product testing and education is a controversial subject that often leads to a heated debate whether animal research will better the lives of humans. The other issue that arises is whether it is worth killing so many animals for the sake of just a few humans? Firstly, with animal testing, ensured safety of humans is an advantage that cannot be obtained by using other methods. In many countries, for example the United States of America and United Kingdom, all prescription drugs must be tested on animals before they are allowed onto the market. To ban all animal experiments would be paralysing modern medicine, to perpetuate human suffering and to endanger human health by allowing products such as insecticides onto the market before testing them for toxicity. A pharmacologist, William DH Carey demonstrated the importance of animal testing in a letter to the British Medical Journal in 2009. It said "We have 4 possible new drugs to cure HIV and we're going to test it on rats, mice, dogs. Drug A killed all the rats, mice and dogs. Drug B killed all the dogs and rats. Drug C killed all the mice and rats. Drug D was taken by all the animals up to huge doses with no ill effect. Which of those drugs should we give to some healthy young human volunteers as the first dose to humans? The answer which is 'obvious', would be Drug D, even to a 12-year-old child. However, there is a high possibility that none of these drugs can be used as even Drug D could cause damage to humans as the human body may react differently compared to how the mice, rats and dogs may have reacted. Also, animal research can show if the substances and procedures are harmful. Humans are not significantly benefited by wearing animal fur, but they are benefited by the animals research that found a vaccine for polio, and both humans and animals have benefited scientific experiments that have helped find a vaccine for rabies. Is it better to have thousands of dogs suffer from rabies because we would not do research on a few hundred for a vaccine, even if it caused those dogs pain? Should thousands of human lives not be saved because we can't use animals to find cures for AIDs, cancer and Alzheimers? The benefits that have been reaped because of these experiments include our understanding of the human nervous system, the development of insulin, antibiotics and vaccines against hepatitis and polio. A mother of a child whose life has been saved by these discoveries can make a case as poignant as any animal-rights advocates. But then we would call this speciesism, the assumption that the child's life is worth more than that of an animal. Yet, is it better to let a child die rather than cause and animal pain from experimentation? Is the child's life worth less than that of the animal? However, the benefits of animal testing to human beings are not proven. The practice of animal experimentation and testing continues not because it is the most accurate or reliable means of research, but rather because of tradition, peer pressure and enormous promotion from those with strong vested interests. In a study that spanned over 10 years and has not yet been repeated, the Food and Drug Administration began in 1990 to follow all the new medications it released for side effects. In that study, they found 198 new medications. But 52 percent were either recalled or relabeled secondary due to side effects not predicted in animal tests. A similar study done by Mark Levin, CEO of Milenium Pharmaceuticals done in August 2008, examined 6 drugs, the side effects of which were already known in humans. The study found that animals correctly predicted 22 side effects but incorrectly identified 48 side effects that did not occur in humans, while missing 20 side effects that did occur in humans. This means that the animals were incorrect 76 percent of the time. Also, animal testing causes suffering to animals. Animals have to right to be treated as beings of value in themselves, not as the means to human ends. Apart from the fact that millions of animals die each year in experiments, others are not often adequately anaesthetised and are abused by handlers and experimenters. To infect monkeys with the AIDs virus or to expose rodents to toxic chemicals and radiation is simply not acceptable, whatever the supposed benefits. The National Cancer Institute tested 12 anti-cancer drugs on mice that are currently being used successfully in humans. They studies mice that were growing 48 different kinds of human cancers and treated them with 12 drugs. They found that 30/48 times the drugs were ineffective in the mice. Not only was the study inaccurate, it also caused pain to mice as they had to grow human tumors. In conclusion, my essay has shown both sides to this controversial topic. I feel that the use of animals in experiments should not be banned. This is because if we stop using animals in experiments, we will be paralysing modern medicine. Thus, human's suffering would be prolong. Furthermore, we do not use animals for self pleasure, but for the preservation of human life. Human life is the most paramount. We can also improve the situation by using better medical care, experimenting on cell cultures instead of whole animals and avoid using animals for experiments in areas such as cosmetic testing which does not alleviate human suffering or cure known diseases.

Question 3

Ever since the 19th century, humans have been conducting experiments with the use of animals. If there were never any research or experiments with animals, medicine, as we know it today would not exist.

Animal research has enabled the human race to find treatments for cancer, antibiotics for infections, vaccines to prevent some of the most deadly and delibilitating viruses and surgeries for injuries, illnesses and deformities, saving millions of lives every year. For example, the cure for small pox, a deadly disease was discovered through scientific research conducted on cows and the disease is now completely eradicated from the surface of planet Earth. Insulin, the chemical used in hospitals to control diabetes was also discovered through experimenting with animals, dogs and fishes to be exact. A vaccine for rabies was also created through researching and experimenting with dogs and rabbits. These are just a few of the many diseases that researching and experimenting on animals has helped to either cure or prevent. In fact, an estimated amount of twelve million people are saved every year thanks to experiments conducted on animals in the past.

Not only has experimenting on animals helped to improve our everyday human lives, it has also helped improved the lives of many animals ranging from household animals to endangered species as well. Through researching on animals, scientists have come up with vaccines against common viruses in animals. Some examples would be rabies, distemper, tetanus, and parvovirus. The vaccines wielded by the research and experiments conducted on animals have saved the lives of countless animals worldwide. In the past few years, Scientists who specializes in animal nutrition have also come up with special food for household pets, claiming that it is a “scientific diet”. The food has proven to have the abilities of boosting the animal’s immune system, build their brains, strengthen bones, improve their digestive system and allow old dogs to live longer. All these are only achievable through the research and experimenting conducted on animals. The usage of animals in medical research has indeed improved life, as we know it not only for us humans but animals as well.

Although the research and experiments conducted on animals may seem like a noble thing for us humans to do, it is in fact not as it seems. Most of the experiments conducted are rather cruel, for example, ripping out an animal’s intestine to drop few drops of prototype vaccines on it, testing medicines on them, feeding them with “new” food, putting them through extremely torturous experiments. Although the scientists are doing this in the name of science and are just attempting to improve the lives of human beings and animals, the processes taken behind their achievements are just downright cruel. Many of the animals used die either for, during or after the experiments and only the minorities survive. In fact, an estimated amount of three million animals are used and experimented on for medical advancement in the United Kingdoms alone. One can only few sympathy for the countless animals around the world which have been sacrificed for the name of science.

Further more, the vaccines and medicines reaped from these experiments may not always be useful for us human beings. For example, there are some chemicals that only certain species of animals are able to make use of and are either poisonous or useless when the enter the human bloodstream. There are several incidents whereby vaccines wielded from animal research ended up killing the people who tried it instead of curing the illnesses. Hence, the use of animals in experiments may not always be good.

In conclusion, my essay has shown both sides of this controversial topic. Despite the suffering inflicted on animals used in experiments, I feel that the usage of animals in experiments should not be banned as the advantages of using animals in experiments have overshadowed the disadvantages of using animals in experiments. Besides, if the human race does not conduct research and experiments on animals, we will not be able to find many vaccines in the future and we will be easily prone to new diseases that recently appeared on the face of Earth like swine flu, SARS and bird flu. If we were to ban the use of animals in experiments over cruelty, we will be depriving ourselves of opportunities to cure diseases and save countless lives. Which would be worse? The loss of a few million animals a year or the loss of a few billion people a every time a new virus appears? Imagine if there were no experiments conducted on animals, would you and me even be alive today? Would we be able to survive our first case of chicken pox, a common flu? Hence, I strongly believe that the use of animals in experiments should not be banned but instead be promoted as it is for the greater good of both the human race and the animals.

Laiyuen 2LY 25/30 cheers (:

Question 3:

The use of animals in experiments has been a long debated topic. People from all walks of life have been taking sides on the matter, attempting to either urge on or be rid of this method. But should this really be banned? Is the harm it has brought really beyond reason? Or is it indispensable for breakthroughs in medical science? This is my stand on the topic.

With sacrifice comes gain. The experiments animals are used for a variety of purposes, from medical to pure scientific study. The results gained from the loss of one animal’s life may save hundreds of millions of lives. For example, a potential cure for cancer could be attained from studying the properties of sharks which provide immunity from it. Furthermore, if this supposed ‘cure’ is tested on other animals and proved to be harmful instead, it would have prevented an epidemic of sorts which may have killed or harmed many. In addition, these benefits may not necessarily be used on humans alone, but rather, may be used for the lives of animals. For example, performing experiments on a dog via autopsy may provide much surgical knowledge on the particular species, potentially saving many animals’ lives in the future.

The use of animals for experiments is also more widely accepted as an efficient and acceptable method of experimentation. Most of the animals such as rats and fruit flies reproduce rapidly, simply meaning that the test subjects will be plentiful, saving both the time and money required to acquire more animals. This will allow for quick research, minimising delay between experiments and lead to faster results, possibly saving lives or providing benefits sooner. Compared to other methods such as cell culturing which takes time to create the “test subjects”. Furthermore, precautions are taken to make sure that animals receive the least amount of pain possible during and after the experiment. During the experiments, animals are put on anaesthetics during experiments in order to greatly reduce the pain. Also, animals are usually “put to sleep” after the experiments to prevent subsequent suffering afterwards, especially when the damage done to an animal is irreversible. As such, only 7% of animals used in experiments suffer more than minimal pain, and even these mostly including experiments already involving the factor of pain.

Of course, animals have rights too. Though not many animals suffer immensely during these experiments, it is still considered a crime, if you will, against them. Imagine a human in place of the animal, the process would be put into completely different words. It may go something like this: Poison (anaesthetics), torture (experiment with chemicals), and murder (“put to sleep” to minimize pain). When the tables are turned, it does not look pretty. Doesn’t it? First we numb the animal’s entire body, possibly completely immobilising it, then we pour chemicals or rub some tainted lotion on it, possibly leading to infection, bleeding, pain or death in its whole, and if it still survives, we simply kill it off and throw it aside like a used tissue. Sometimes the way that the animals are treated throughout the testing process may prove unforgivable, especially when viewed from a literal angle.

Moving on, even though most animals used in the lab share 99% of genes with us, there are still flaws that have to be taken into consideration. Tests on these animals may still be inaccurate due to most of them reacting differently from humans to certain factors or objects. For example, lemon juice is perfectly safe for human consumption, however some animals may die from drinking it. Furthermore, though only a minority of tests may have issues in its accuracy, it may still jeporadise the safety of organisms all over the world. As stated before, if even the slightest error in results is made, it can lead to dire consequences. If for example, a group of mice is tested with a supposed vaccine for AIDS and proves compatible with it, developing immunity from the disease, scientists will probably assume the best and put it on the shelf for the public. But what if the results were different due top the difference in physical qualities between the two? Many may die or fall ill from this one mistake. Similarly, if the test results from a specific species of animal “verify” the credibility of a substance and that substance is used on another species of animal, the effect may also prove as devastating. For example, if a new supposed more effective form of anaesthetic was tested on a rat and proved successful and that anaesthetic was used on a dog during experimenting, not only would this cause incredible suffering to animals widespread, but may again cause inaccuracy to the experiment. Same goes for if the animal was being put on it for the sake of operating (to save its life). Hence, even a minority of inaccurate results can prove devastating to the entire populace as a whole.

With all this said, I believe that using animals for experiments is still beneficial and should not be banned. This is simply because the pros outweigh the cons. Furthermore, the cons can be easily solved. With the substantial use of the 3Rs, namely Replacement (use of non-animal experimenting methods), Reduction (use of fewer animals to attain the same amount of information or attaining more information with the same amount of animals) and Refinement (minimizing of pain) during and before experimentation on animals, it can still remain a relatively humane, effective and efficient practice. Furthermore, the possibility of inaccurate results can be easily overcome via further testing by other non-animal experiments. I do agree however that we cannot take these animals’ lives for granted and as such, should only perform extremely beneficial tests on them such as medical experiments. For how can we risk another’s life purely for the sake of our materialistic gain such as testing of cosmetic products? Therefore, though experimenting on animals should be cut down to a minimum and limited to certain aspects only, it should not be completely banned, for the good of people and animals alike.

-Clement Ng 2LY (21/30) Revised... alot :D

Question 3: The uses of animals in experiments are no stranger to industries all over the world. Regardless of whether it is in the biomedical field, the cosmetic industry or the manufacturing industry, they rely heavily on animal experimentation for their own purposes. However, there has been much controversy over the issue of whether to ban animal experimentations, with animal rights groups and supporters of animal experimentations having heated debates over past few years. Animal experimentations bring about many advantages in its own right. Firstly, animal experimentation in the biomedical industry has no doubt greatly reduced the amount of human suffering and deaths due to deadly diseases. The use of animals in experiments aids researches in finding cures, drugs and treatments to improve health and medicine, and still remains a crucial step for the investigation and treatment of serious diseases such as cancer, heart disease and acquires immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). There have been numerous lifesaving medical breakthroughs that are the result of animal experimentation, for example, organ transplants, open heart surgery and vaccines for many deadly diseases. Thanks to the use of animals in experiments, many deadly diseases that once killed millions of people each year are now either treatable or have been eradicated altogether. Hence, many precious human lives were saved due to animal experimentation. Similarly, many contagious diseases such as small pox, measles and chicken pox were brought into control due to the vaccines which were found using animal experimentation. Furthermore, animal experimentation not only benefits humans, but in benefits the animals themselves as well. Animal research and experimentation have also brought about several life-saving treatments for cats, dogs, and wildlife in general. Vaccines for rabbits, parvo virus, feline leukemia and infectious hepatitis have also been found due to animal experimentation, contributing to longer, happier and healthier lives for animals. Treatments that have been found due to animal experimentation also helps to save, enhance or extend the lives of animals, and new reproductive techniques prove to be of tremendous help in protecting threatened species. Therefore, animal experimentation benefits humans as well as animals. Secondly, animal testing also ensures the safety of drugs or products such as pesticides, air fresheners or food additives before they are launched in the market for human consumption. Animal testing allows researchers to initially gauge the safety of drugs, factoring in details such as side effects, thus making them able to counter these possible harms, even before humans are exposed to the drug. Serious side effects from drugs such as organ failure, rashes, tumors or cardiac arrests, may be detected beforehand, and this means that human harm is reduced, and lives are saved, because the drugs are safe for consumption. This in turn improves the quality of human life. Additionally, past experience has shown that animal experimentation is the most reliable way to test for the toxicity of products and medicines. If animal testing were to be banned, it would be equivalent to paralyzing modern medicine, perpetuating human suffering, and endangering human health by allowing products such as insecticides or air fresheners to undergo human consumption before testing them for toxicity. Furthermore, it would cause the development of future medical treatments to be extremely limited. Also, there are other alternatives to animal testing, one example being the use of embryonic stem cells for testing of toxicity. This method may not only reduce the costs and time spent for testing of toxicity, but it can also greatly reduce the amount of animals which are harmed during animal testing. If more countries were to adopt the stem cell testing method, then the number of animals used for experiments would be tremendously reduced. There are many disadvantages of animal experimentation as well; one particularly haunting one being the inhumane suffering these animals are put through. Animals have lives too, and have the right to be treated as beings of value in themselves, and not as the means to human ends. While humans are self-proclaimed to have a higher status than animals, it does not enable us to commit unethical and morally unjust acts such as simply injecting animals with deadly viruses, or exposing them to radiation or toxic chemicals, whatever the supposed benefits. Furthermore, many sources have revealed that experimentations have caused tumors in rodents, blindness in rabbits, and other horrendous side effects among the animals. It may be even be said that with such horrible effects, animal experimentation is no different from animal abuse! Sometimes, during experiments, these animals are not adequately anaesthetized, and are abused by handlers and experimenters. Supposedly, this will never stop as long as society endorses animal experimentation. Furthermore, most animal experimentations are done on animals that have very different physiologies, thus reacting very differently from human beings towards a substance, which undermines the argument that these experiments are a reliable guide to human reactions. According to studies, 83% of substances are metabolized differently by animals and humans, which means that while substances such as lemon juice are safe to humans, they are deadly poisons to some animals. Another example is that a contraceptive called Tamoxifen was once developed which was tested on rats. It worked as intended, and was given to humans. However, it had the opposite effect on women, actually increasing their fertility! Therefore, it may not be reliable to use animals in experimentations. Therefore, I conclude that the use of animals in experimentations should not be banned, and the reduction of human suffering is our first priority. Animals themselves also benefit greatly from animal experimentations. Even though it entails the suffering of a few animals, it saves even more lives in the long run, making it justifiable for animal experimentation to continue. However, researchers and experimenters should make it a point to reduce the suffering as well as the quantity of the animals used in these experiments. A suggestion would be to implement strict regulations on the conditions as well as the treatments of these animals, making sure that the suffering they are put through is in the minimum. Factors to be considered would be the conditions in which they are kept in, making sure they are well-fed and kept in healthy environments, and making sure that they are properly anaesthetized before experimentations. Of course, exceptions do apply, and I feel that animal testing in the cosmetic industry should be avoided, as cosmetic products are not vital to human health, and are in fact only a means of beautifying ourselves. To harm animals for the cosmetic industry, such as blinding rabbits just to make a new type of mascara, is simply inhumane. Animals are values of being in themselves and to kill or harm them in experiments just for frivolous means of human enjoyments such as cosmetics, should not be condoned. All in all, I feel that while animal experiments in industries such as the medical industry, which prove to be important in sustaining life and activity, should be allowed, industries that use animal experimentations for means of unnecessary enjoyment such as the cosmetic industry, should be banned. -Carisa Lam, 2LY 25/30.