Living in the liberal-centric Marin my entire life, those around me have uniformly told me that animal experimentation is wrong. Period. However, what I was not exposed to is the fact that animal testing, although commonly used in the context of cosmetic testing, is very common in medical and pharmaceutical testing and has likely saved the lives of millions of people. For many people, this is reason enough to hop on board. However, despite my newfound knowledge of the benefits of animal testing, I believe this practice is an ethical atrocity. Here's why:
For one, animal testing is grounded on the ideal that a human life is worth more than an animal life. Animal testing has persevered all these years because of the idea that “great benefits for humanity” morally rationalize harming animals (BBC). However, there is no true evidence that humans are worth more than any type of animal. Even though animal testing has saved millions of lives, the practice can't possibly be considered morally acceptable if those lives have been saved at the cost of other lives. 1 human life does not equal 4 rabbit lives. Everything on this planet is here for equally important reasons and therefore should be valued equally.
Although death is considered to be the ultimate injustice that these animals suffer, the reality is that their lives are even more horrendous. Although experimenting parties are told by law to try to minimize suffering, the lives that these animals live are horrendous and essentially the equivalent of torture. Not only is animal testing based on the ideal that animal lives are worth less, it also assumes that their emotions are worth less. How can this practice possibly be justified when it disregards the very thing that we humans pride ourselves on- emotional capacity?
Looking deeper into the ethical dilemma that is animal experimentation, I came across a article from the Wall Street Journal about the medical benefits of animal testing. The author, clearly in favor of the practice, mentioned how new studies in research labs around the country have led to potentially amazing developments in the world of medicine. For her, I just have one question. Just what makes us better than them? Animal testing, as a whole, demonstrates human's disconnect with nature and our innate ego-centricity. Saving lives is saving lives. But killing in order to save lives is not saving lives, it's just killing.
To be a philosopher is not merely to have subtle thoughts, nor even to found a school…it is to solve some of the problems of life, not only theoretically, but practically. – Henry David Thoreau
I like how you address that humans are no better than animals and that the ends do not justify the means. Even though this inhumane practice has resulted in medical advances, it is morally wrong to put another creature through both physical and emotional torture. I feel that we, the human population, have overstepped. And as a result, we created a bloated image of our importance on this world leaving environmental pollution and animal abuse wherever we go.
ReplyDeleteIt is quite incredible how humans can put themselves in a state of mind of believing that they are superior to another equally living, breathing being. I very much appreciate how you state that we are not more valuable than an animal's life because they too are here for a reason. Emotional and physical torture are a serious matter regardless on the being it is inflicted on. It is saddening that the highlights are the advancements of medicine so that the issue of animal testing is overshadowed. Every life and death matters.
ReplyDeleteThe industries that animal test are disgusting. Your marin-ite insights-ie, animal testing is just wrong- parallels how I've been raised. However, your post opened up my eyes to why in particular these practices are wrong, and just how many animals are killed per year in this practice.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with you. Ever since I saw the Legally Blonde movie about animal testing, it has become more apparent to me that animal testing is not okay. I've also owned beagles and they are the most commonly tested on dogs, and it doesn't seem ethical to declaw them, make it so they can't bark, and never walk outside their cage. I agree with you that animal life is equal to human life. (Speaking of, you can use the app "cruelty cutter" to see whether your products are animal cruelty free and scan items in the grocery store)
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Olivia. There is definitely a sadistic logic to behind torturing animals to save human lives. In your research did you come across any alternatives to animal testing?
ReplyDeleteI really like your point about the comparison between human beings and animal. We, as human beings, are actually one type of animals. We (human beings and animals) are equal. The only problem I personally want to ask is what's next if human beings abandoned animal testing? Animal testing is definitely not OK, but scientist will need something to prove their hypothesis or test their products if human beings want to be more advanced in someway.
ReplyDeleteYour two concluding sentences leave me thinking. I agree that animal lives should be worth just as much as humans and that it is wrong to kill so many animals to save a couple of humans. I kept thinking about human testing. We would never put humans through the same things we put animals through, that is unethical. But if a person is already sick they can do trials that help advance medicine. This seems a better way to test new medicine. The people sign up for the trial so they know what they are getting into. The animals have no choice.
ReplyDelete