Animal Research

PETA is one well known animal rights organization committed to protect animals. Indeed, they are so popular they have become a household name. Many celebrities have become supporters of their campaign. Even to the point of posing naked in photographs to demonstrate their repulsion to animal exploitation. Yet, animals have always been used to benefit human kind. In fact, it is one of the very reasons we have survived as a species. We consume meat for food, put on fur for warmth, and use animal strength for labor. We even extract their hormones to treat many human diseases. Is the use of animals for research and experimental purposes any different?
Animal rights organizations maintain that the use of animal in research is unnecessary, primitive, and outdated. For instance, PETA (2010) claims that products get pumped into animal’s stomachs, rubbed into their skin, and squirted into their eyes for apparently no good reason. Instead, they cite computer models and cell structures as better alternatives (para. 3). Although our survival is no longer dependent on animals for food, warmth, or labor, the use of animals in research and experimentations is something that we cannot live without. We are a species plagued with many mental, behavioral, and medical problems. It is a fact that animal research has aided in the discoveries of many treatments including: Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, manic-depressive illness, obesity, drug addictions, depression, and many more disorders (Carlson, 2005, p. 19). The fact remains that these discoveries can only be made through biological research. Complex behavior and internal processes for one cannot be studied using computer models and cell structures as they cannot reflect the on goings within the context of a whole organism (Canadian Council on Animal care, 2010). They are simply no substitute. Without the use of animal research, we are unable to make progress in understanding and treating human diseases.
Supporters of animal rights argue that the use of animal research is inhuman and cruel. This is basically a misconception. The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) is a governing body that reviews all research involving animals. Its job is to make sure that the use of animals is justified by the benefits of the study. It also makes sure that any pain and suffering that might occur are minimized (American Psychological Associated, 2010, para. 1). The IACUC inspects project and facility that uses animals, reevaluates the overall animal care and use program, and helps develop and deliver training and educational programs to the research community and the public on animal care and use (Carlson, 2005, p. 18). In addition to this, researchers are required to consider the implementation of the so called, “Three R’s” of research design. The Three Rs stand for Replacement (using non-animal technique such as computer modeling and cell cultures when possible), Reduction (reducing amount of animals) and Refinement (minimizing animal suffering and treating them humanely) (Canadian Council on Animal care, 2010).
Animal activists claim that animal research is unreliable and even dangerous. They further argue that there is a physiological difference between humans and other animals that prevents the results from being relevant to humans. However, one is only to look at the many medical discoveries that have come through animal testing to see that this is not the case. The discovery of insulin, vaccines and antibiotics, open heart surgery techniques, organ transplants, in-vitro fertilization, HIV drugs, hormone replacement therapy, organ rejection, and many other came about because of animal research (Singh, 2009). It is true that there is a difference between the physiology of animals and that of humans but if you really think about it, it is also true about one human individual to another. The fact is, the physiology of humans and animals are similar enough to yield the significant discoveries and knowledge we are all benefiting from today.
There is always going to be those who oppose animal research. Yet, history has proven its effectiveness and usefulness. All individuals have, in one form or another, benefited from its findings. The reality is animal research is important and indispensible


References
Canadian Council on Animal Care. (2010). Satisfying the replacement principle. Retrieved
May 7, 2010 from http://www.ccac.ca/en/CCAC_Programs/ETCC/Module03/04.html
Carlson, N. R. (2005). Foundations of physiological psychology (6th Ed.). Boston: Pearson
education, inc.
Herzog, H. (2010). American Psychological Association: Discussing ethnical issues in
psychological research. Retrieved May 7, 2010 from
http://www.apa.org/education/k12/ethical.aspx
PETA. (2010). PETA people for the ethical treatment of animals: Animal Testing.
Retrieved May 7, 2010 from http://www.peta.org/actioncenter/testing.asp