The Hidden Truths of Animal Testing
At the University of Utah, a monkey named Frik sways back and forth in his dirty, steel cage. In an effort to study brain activity and psychological patterns, lab technicians drilled two holes into his skull, inserted titanium screws, and attached them to a device that restricts him from moving from the neck up. He is deprived of water so that he will cooperate with the technicians when they temp him with a few drops (PETA). He is only one of thousands of monkeys, mice, rabbits, dogs, cats, and sheep being tested on at the university.
Everyday, masses of animals like Frik suffer in vain for the sake of medical and cosmetic testing, and even military training exercises. The tests are largely unreliable and inaccurate, and there are several alternatives to this cruel testing that cause no harm to animals or humans. Yet the government continues to fund, and in some cases, require this abuse (SourcWatch). The unethical, unnecessary, and futile continuation and funding of animal testing for the sake of human vanity is a flaw of the American government- one that reflects political ignorance and disrespect for living things apart from human beings.
On average, 114 million animals die every year at the hands of testing (Kanade.). Many Americans are aware of the tests preformed on animals for the purpose of medical research. Fewer people know about the cruelty involved in cosmetic testing. There is a common notion that cosmetic testing entails tests that remain external. On the contrary, cosmetic tests can be more painful than those of medical testing. In a test called “the Driaze test”, product is applied directly into the animal’s eye (typically rabbits) in order to document the affects on the cornea (AnimalLiberation). More often than not, the animal suffers blindness, bleeding, discharge, and in some cases, loss of the entire eye itself. In the “LD50” test, scientists feed animals lethal doses of cosmetics and observe the cause of death. If there are no side affects, then the product is ruled harmless (AnimalLiberation). Many of these lab animals are euthanised after the experiments regardless of the severity of the injuries. But the most atrocious form of animal testing comes in the form of military training. Representatives from PETA explain the violent murders of innocent animals that the American Department of Defense conducts for the sake of barbaric military experience. “Even though superior non-animal alternatives are available…. In the current training exercises, live pigs are shot, stabbed, and burned; live goats have their legs broken with bolt cutters and cut off with shears; and live monkeys are poisoned with harmful chemicals.” (PETA.) How’s that for supporting our troops? Thousands of dollars of military funding get drained in the completely immoral murder of blameless creatures. Dr. Michael P. Murphy of Indiana University, who is on the general counsel for Iraq War Veterans Organization explains, “no animal model can adequately duplicate the anatomy of injuries inflicted upon the human body in war.” (PETA). Not only is it inhumane, but it is hardly significant in the practice of training. It is seemingly a means by which to desensitize soldiers to death, suffering, and murder to those at war.
In an effort to better human wellness, animal testing has always been turned to as a way to protect us from detrimental medical and cosmetic side affects. However, animal tests yield results that are hardly accurate to assign safe human consumption. Animals and humans metabolize a striking 83% of substances differently (Lewis). It is commonly known that chocolate, the food humans are so fond of- is toxic to the liver of a dog. Imagine the differences humans and animals bear when it comes to drugs. One of the most well known incidents that was born from animal testing was the controversy over the drug Thalidomide. It was taken by pregnant women as sedative to cure morning sickness in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Despite being tested safely on thousands of animals, it caused 10,000 mothers to give birth to children who had grotesque deformities of the limbs, spine, and genitalia (cerhr.niehs.nih.gov). It is far too common for drugs that are judged safe on animals to devastate humans who use them. Too often, the heartbeat of a warm animal is taken senselessly for a futile experimentation.
With all of the alternatives to testing on animals, it is astounding that corporations and research groups continue to use animals as a target for experimental cruelty. The rise of technology has allowed scientists to come up with ways of testing products that threaten no aspect of animal life. Eytex, a vegetable protein, has a molecular make up that is notably similar to that of a human’s cornea. Testing cosmetics on Eytex allows researchers to form the same conclusions that they would from observing the eye of an abused bunny (AnimalLiberation). Multi-layered skin can now be grown in labs and tested on to examine cell damage in lieu of testing products on the backs of unknowing creatures (AnimalLiberation). Not only are these alternatives more affective than testing on innocent life, but they are cruelty free and innovation in scientific progression.
Few people know that the sensual smell of musk, used in fragrances and perfumes, is collected from the body of the Musk Deer- an endangered species in India due to the high level of poaching it has suffered (animalInfo). In an effort to send a cruelty free message, The Body Shop- an advocate against animal testing- created a fragrance called White Musk, derived from an animal-free musk hybrid created in a laboratory (TheBodyShop). The product is now it’s number one selling perfume. For those who refuse to address that animal testing is a thing of the past, The Body Shop makes a testament to prove them wrong. In medical realms, torturing animals like Frik is no longer a reputable or acknowledgeable way to draw conclusions about treatments for humans. For military usage, animal experimentation is not only barbaric and brute like, but it is money spent worthlessly that drains the blood of guiltless bodies for ignorance’s sake. The argument that testing on innocent beings is a needed sacrifice for advances in medical, cosmetic, and military fields is not longer a valid argument. For a practice that has gone so out of style, the government continues it as though it is the latest fashion.
No comments:
Post a Comment