Dorothy Lu
ENGL 21003: Writing for the Sciences
Professor Justine Matias
September 20th, 2022

The City College of New York

Animal Testing

Take a look at any of your beauty products whether it be your perfume, makeup, or shampoo; you may notice that many of them have a cruelty-free label on them. This is primarily due to the animal rights movement where many individuals are fighting for better treatment for animals. This movement gives a voice to the animals that we’re utilizing for entertainment and research. One aspect that the animal rights movement targets are animal testing and animal research. Despite the animal rights movement, however, animal testing has been proven to provide medical and scientific breakthroughs in research and is deemed a necessity by many scientists and medical professionals.

Animal testing is a procedure used globally on various species of animals ranging from fish to primates. Animal testing is used to assist researchers and scientists in better understanding certain biological processes, genetics, diseases, and potential treatments. Animals are used in testing primarily due to their biological similarities to humans as well as their shorter lifespan compared to humans. The debate regarding animal testing and research involves both the process in which animals are being tested on as well as the ethics behind animal testing. According to the organization Down to Earth, when animals are used for testing in labs for pharmaceutical companies or beauty companies, it typically involves the injection of chemicals into their bodies or a forced insertion orally or through the nostrils. Chemical drips into the animals’ eyes are also very common to observe the effects of particular drugs and products that may be visible. Ethics of animal testing involves whether animal testing is morally correct and what limitations if any, are associated with the procedure. The Animal Welfare Act (1966) is a federal law that regulates and ensures the proper treatment of animal subjects used in testing, research, and transport (nal.usda.gov). Experimentation discusses the act of using animals as test subjects for research involving toxicology to assist scientists in determining the possible effects of specific drugs on humans. Like many debates, there are two sides to animal testing which include, the majority of scientists and researchers, that are for animal testing and those that are against animal testing.

According to Dr. Abu Sadat Mohammad Nurunnabi et al., the global annual rate of animals being used for research and experimentation ranges from 10 million to over 100 million (28). Dr. Nurunnabi is an internationally trained physician, educator, and researcher in bioethics and public health (ResearchGate). According to Dr. Nurunnabi, these experiments and research include genetics, developmental biology, animal behavioral studies, toxicology, and drugs and cosmetic testing (28). Although in many countries, the use and treatment of animals in research and testing are regulated to certain degrees, some do not have proper or any limitations on animal testing and experimentation. Supporters of animal testing usually comprise of scientists and researchers, for example, the British Royal Society. The British Royal Society has claimed that almost all medical achievements in the 20th century have been due to the utilization of animals in science and research in areas where even the latest technology is not able to accomplish. However, animal rights activists and groups such as PETA have argued against this claim stating that the majority of these tests and achievements are outdated and were a result of cruel and poorly regulated practices (Nurunnabi et al. 28). The two opposing views from medical and research professionals and animal rights organizations show that the debate surrounding animal testing and animal research is still ongoing.

Other supporters of animal testing and animal research include DruSafe, a nonclinical safety assessment group, the pharmaceutical industry, and health authorities. Companies and the pharmaceuticals industry are developing alternative ways for preclinical testing; however, they’ve stated that until then, the use of animal testing is necessary to ensure the safety of humans (Mangipudy et al. 439). Through risk evaluations, risk management, and hazard identification, many companies along with the vast majority of the pharmaceutical industry have emphasized the necessity of preclinical trials to construct and test hypotheses on non-human subjects to identify the characteristics of new drugs before they are administered on human subjects to avoid adverse reactions. With alternative methods still in development, the most effective way that researchers and scientists believe to proceed with preclinical research is through animal experimentation (Garattini & Grignaschi 32). According to Peter Heining, a toxicologist and preclinical safety executive director, the use of nonclinical toxicity testing are crucial to assess the risk of certain chemicals and drugs for human consumption, however, he also states that the conditions and safety regulations in which these tests are performed can be improved and will require a new and more pure experimentation strategy (468). This means that although many researchers and scientists believe animal testing is a necessity in scientific and medical research, many of them do believe that the procedure and conditions for these tests are not necessarily ideal. Many individuals including scientists believe a refined testing procedure should be put in place to allow a more ethical and acceptable environment for animal testing.

So, the next time you pick out your shampoo or your foundation, do some research to determine whether you want to go cruelty-free or stay loyal to the brand that utilizes animal testing. Animal testing assists researchers and scientists in ensuring that we get the most effective and safe products for consumption. On the flip side, the tests conducted on these animals may seem unethical and not moral to the general public. Until the development of an alternative way for preclinical research, scientists will continue to use animals in assessing the risk of chemicals and drugs before human testing.

Works Cited

“Animal Welfare Act.” National Agricultural Library, https://www.nal.usda.gov/animal-health-
and-welfare/animal-welfare-act

Garattini, Silvio, and Giuliano Grignaschi. “Animal Testing Is Still the Best Way to Find New
Treatments for Patients.” European Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 39, 2017, pp. 32–
35., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2016.11.013.

Heining, Peter, and Tristan Ruysschaert. “The Use of Minipig in Drug Discovery and
Development.” Toxicologic Pathology, vol. 44, no. 3, 2015, pp. 467–473.,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192623315610823.

Mangipudy, Raja, et al. “Use of Animals for Toxicology Testing Is Necessary to Ensure
Patient Safety in Pharmaceutical Development.” Regulatory Toxicology and
Pharmacology, vol. 70, no. 2, 2014, pp. 439–441., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.07.014.

Nurunnabi, Abu Sadat Mohammad, et al. “Animal Research in Medical Science: Pros and
Cons.” The Journal of Popular Medical College, vol. 02, no. 01, Jan. 2012, pp. 28–33.

“The Cruelty of Lab Animal Testing.” Down to Earth Organic and Natural,
https://www.downtoearth.org/innocent-animals/animal-testing/cruelty-lab-animaltesting