Modified:
14 May 2008
by Flossy

Votes So Far:

For:

100%

Against:

0%

Neutral:

0%

Total Votes:

4

 
Points For:

Points Against:

Debate Starter:

Jaimeharvey
Top Contributors:
Related Debates:
Subscribe to Debate

Join Mailing List

Tell a Friend


Key Links
arrow The debate is that:

Animal testing for medical research is necessary and acceptable




All points for
All points against

Animal research has played a vital role in a great many of the major medical advances of the last century


According to the US-based Foundation for Biomedical Research, ‘animal research has played a vital role in virtually every major medical advance of the last century – for both human and veterinary health. From antibiotics to blood transfusions, from dialysis to organ transplantation, from vaccinations to chemotherapy, bypass surgery and joint replacement, practically every present-day protocol for the prevention, treatment, cure and control of disease, pain and suffering is based on knowledge attained through research with lab animals.’
Without such testing, most, if not all of these procedures that save thousands of lives and elevate the pain of millions of people would simply not be possible.
Just a few of the many named examples of the advances made possible through animal testing include [source: Foundation of Biomedical Research]:
Smallpox eradication (testing with cows)
Polio eradication in the developed world (mouse & monkey)
Availability of insulin (fish & dog)
Tetanus vaccines (horse)
Rubella vaccines (monkey)
AIDS treatment (monkey)




There are no satisfactory alternatives to animal research


Alternatives to animal testing do exist and scientists already use them. In fact, they are mandated to do so by law wherever possible. Such alternatives exist in the form of computer modeling and in vitro testing (testing on a cell culture).
However, living organisms are incredibly complex systems. The only possible way to build a model that accurately represents them is through animal research. It is currently not possible to build a complete human model as it is simply too sophisticated for current computers. For example, no computer model could predict the effect of a electrode insertion therapy for Parkinson’s disease on the human brain, which is capable of performing 100’000’000’000’000’000 operations per second. Yet this can be done using an animal model.
Computer models are currently at the stage of predicting molecular interactions, however they are still a great way to go before they could accurately model even the most basic of organisms, let alone the incredibly complex human body.
Furthermore, it would be in the pharmaceutical companies’ interests to do use alternatives wherever possible – imagine the cost to housing, maintaining and testing on animals.




Future medical developments will depend on continued animal research


In the hunt for vaccines and therapies for AIDS, Parkinson’s Disease and all other human diseases, animal research is at the forefront. If history has shown us anything, it is that animal research has consistently provided answers – 71 of the Nobel Prizes for Medicine won in the last 103 years were awarded to scientists who used animals in their research.




Animal research is extremely tightly regulated by independent authorities


In the last five years in the UK, no fewer than three independent inquiries have been carried out into the effectiveness of animal research in developing medicines for human use. The House of Lords Select Committee, the Parliamentary Animal Procedures Committee and the independent Nuffield Council on Bioethics all concluded that testing on animals is a scientifically sound method, has yielded great results in the past, and is crucial for future advances.
The animals used for research in the United Kingdom must be specially bred by registered license holders. Research is not performed on stray animals or unwanted pets. This is strictly illegal. The use of chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas has also been banned since 1986. The vast majority of research is conducted on rodents, with a smaller percentage using fish, reptiles, and birds. A very small percentage is conducted in larger mammals.




BullSh**!


Only unsympathetic people towards animals would think this!! What if you were the one with drops of neat shampoo being put into your eyes, unable to blink to wash it out? How would you like to have a cigarette put in your mouth and not be able to remove it because your hands were tied? The list goes on, and so does the pain for animals!! As for saying that it helps research, crap!! an animals body and make-up is not the same as a human…so why would you need to experiment on them? I say, anyone that thinks that, should be locked in a room with the animals they have tested on!!




Vote on the overall debate: Animal testing for medical research is necessary and acceptable

What do you think?  Vote on this point below.
Absolutely Agree For
Strongly Agree For
Mostly Agree For
Partially Agree For
Neutral
Partially Agree Against
Mostly Agree Against
Strongly Agree Against
Absolutely Agree Against

Comments about this debate

There are no comments for this debate


Add your own comment

Login or register to leave a comment
Loading...