Editorial: Animal Testings Should be Banned in the United States

Lisa Wang, Reporter

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Imagine standing in a laboratory. Countless cages, row upon row, fill the room.. Each has a rabbit in it, whose eyelids are held open by clips, keeping it from blinking. These rabbits are currently the subjects of eye tests for cosmetics use, and will probably not survive afterward.

Testing on animals should be banned in the United States.

Animal testing is brutal and unethical. Experimental procedures with animals can cause both physical and psychological suffering for the animals according to the Humane Society International, a group dedicated to animal rights. The cruel conditions that animals commonly encounter in experiments include vulnerable feeding and inhalation, food and water deprivation, restrained physical activities, burns, and more. For instance, as an evaluation of new cosmetics and other personal care items, use rabbits as their subjects in Draize tests. The National Anti-Vivisection Society, a non-profit animal welfare organization, said “[The Draize test] has been used to measure the inflammatory response produced when a test substance is applied to the shaved and abraded skin of a group of rabbits, and can cause intense pain, burning and itching.” The rabbit’s skin is abraded when adhesive tapes are being firmly pressed on it and being quickly stripped off. This process continues to repeat until several layers of skin have been removed.

Many individuals deeply believe in the idea that animal testing is beneficial to humans. In fact, the federal Food and Drug Administration approved a drug after relying on animal testing does not necessarily mean the drug is safe for human use. According to Animals Friend Croatia, an organization who promotes animal rights, the case of Thalidomide proves their point. The drug that caused around 10,000 defects in infants and over 100,000 deaths worldwide in the late 1950s to early 1960s, according to the Thalidomide Society. Thalidomide was approved for human use thanks to  animal testing. Furthermore, the use of animal testings is by far not as successful as people imagined. According to a journal article from the National Center for Biotechnology Information, “In 2004, the FDA estimates that 92 percent of drugs that pass preclinical tests, including ‘pivotal’ animal tests, fail to proceed the market.”

In a likewise, scientists have already developed strong alternatives for animal testing, and they are less expensive and more accurate. Sophisticated tests using human cells and tissues (vitro method), progressive computer-modeling techniques(silico model), and human volunteers are all substitutions according to PETA. Other ways still remain in the development stages but hopefully, they will replace animal testing soon.

Many organizations and interest groups are in acting to rescue animals who suffer in needless laboratory testing. Support these movements by donating to the American animal rights organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, who seeks to protect different animals from being abused in lab experimentations.