Necessity for Survival

When it comes to animals and their rights, there is a definite line between our needs and our taking advantage of those species that we consider inferior. As long as man has existed he has been carnivorous, and the same holds true for many other species of animals. Animals are a necessity to humans for survival, whether it be for food, clothing, etc. However, the unnecessary torture of animals through testing is not a necessity for human survival. When it comes to the needless torture of animals that we claim to benefit, the animals lives need to be taken into consideration. S. F. Sapontzis gives his theory as to why animals should not be used in testing. To start with, animals are not capable of giving their consent to be used as subjects in an experiment. Secondly, "experiments can only be performed on an individual who is willing, morally speaking. Therefore it is immoral to use animals in experiments" (Sapontzis 209). It would be great if this world where our lives were actually governed by morals. The sad truth is that we do not. Until we do, someone is going to have to stand up for the silent majority that is incapable of voicing its opinion. When there is torture and unjust treatment towards humans, people then realize that it is wrong. These people realize that it's wrong when it comes to animals as well. 

Medical Reasons

“It is a simple fact that many, if not most, of today’s modern medical miracles would not exist if experimental animals had not been available to medical scientists. It is equally a fact that, should we as a society decide the use of animal subjects is ethically unacceptable and therefore must be stopped, medical progress will slow to a snail’s pace. Such retardation will in itself have a huge ethical ‘price tag’ in terms of continued human and animal suffering from problems such as diabetes, cancer, degenerative cardiovascular diseases, and so forth.” 
What do you feel is more important - the life of your child or the life of a few rats? These comments are often brought up in animal rights debates. On the one side the animal rights campaigners, on the other side researchers intent on finding new medicines to improve the quality of human life. Animal activists claim that animal testing, or 'vivisection' is a scientific disaster and that thousands have been injured or killed as a result of it and time and time again researchers have been lead into a blind alley. Vivisection literally means, "cutting while still alive," but these days it refers to any experiments conducted on animals. According to the 1999 U.K. Vivisection statistics published by the government, 2.66 million animals were subjected to experiments 'likely to cause pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm' in the U.K. alone.

Special Controls

Special controls on laboratory animals have been in place since 1876. These have been revised in 1986. These laws are now more commonly known as the revised Animals Act of 1986. This law allows for scientist to perform testing while also safe guarding the animals. Prior to any testing a cost benefit analysis must be applied. In this analysis they review the potential research benefits with the potential for animal suffering. All registered facilities are also required to establish an Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) that reviews and approves procedures involving animals before they take place. This organization also inspects facilities semiannually for compliance with the AWA. At least one member of the committee must be a veterinarian. At least one member must be a "public" member, not affiliated with the institution, who represents the general community interest in the care and treatment of the animals. Research facilities must undergo many regulations to ensure animal safety. These regulations are being met on a monthly basis. 

Contradiction

"Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is: 'Because the animals are like us.' Ask the experimenters why it is morally OK to experiment on animals, and the answer is: 'Because the animals are not like us.' Animal experimentation rests on logical contradiction." stated Professor Charles R. Magel ("Animal Testing 101"). We all use some product that has been tested on animals. Something as simple as the soap we use every morning in the shower has been tested on an animal. But when using this product do we think of what the animal has gone through to put this product on the market? It is estimated that 150 million vertebrate animals and non-human primates are used for animal testing world-wide ("Animal Testing"). That is a large number of animals tortured and more than likely killed. Animals do not have a voice to tell us to stop, therefore an animal cannot fight back to stop something bad that is happening to them. We, as humans, should not be doing such an injustice to these animals.

Safety Test

There are three common safety test that are in use and considered to be the most 
controversial. Among these are the Draize, LD50, and the skin irritancy test. The Draize test is a test of how a chemical effects irritation in the eye. This test is performed on rabbits who under controlled supervision have a chemical force into one of their eyes. The eyelid is then held shut to prevent the chemical from being flushed out. For the next couple of weeks the rabbits are tested for blindness and other damages that result. Besides being abusive, the test is imprecise given the fact that a rabbit eye is unlike the human eye in physical makeup. A rabbit eye lacks tear ducts to flush out foreign objects unlike humans who can produce tears to protect the eye. 

Cruel

Another cow goes through a painful shock that was supposed to kill him, but instead he is barely knocked dizzy.  He is then forcefully lifted by only one foot, experiencing excruciating pain and moved to the worker who is supposed to carve out his arteries.  The worker does not cut the cow right or even give him enough time to fully bleed out and die.  The cow is then skinned alive.  Factory farming by definition is an industrial way of farming that breeds and raises animals to later kill them.  The main purpose of factory farming is to produce as much meat, eggs, and milk as possible, however there have been questions regarding whether factory farming is ethical.  Even though some people believe they are just animals, animals should have more rights because too many animals are being raised and slaughtered for food, painful methods are being used to kill these animals, and animals are mistreated and living in poor conditions their whole lives.

Factory Farming

Too many animals are being raised and slaughtered for food so limits should be put on the number of animals killed.  In 1999, 4 million sheep, 23 million ducks, 38 million cattle, and 8 billion chickens were slaughtered (Currie-McGee).  These animals are living very short, hard lives just to fulfill the purpose of being food for humans. With this many animals being killed a year there should be a limit to the number of animals killed each year.  According to the USDA, a typical American annually consumes 64 pounds of beef, 47.8 pounds of pork, 52 pounds of chicken, and 14.5 pounds of seafood (Currie-McGee).  The number of animals that were slaughtered for this amount of food is ridiculously high, and this is just one person.  The growing rate of vegans and vegetarians shows that people do care and that there is a solution for the slaughtering of all these animals.  About 100 million hogs are slaughtered annually in the United States (Kallen).  This rate of hogs dying is insane and will probably only continue to grow if people don’t start doing something about it.  It is not right to kill so many of these innocent animals.  Factory farming is killing way too many animals for food and using harmful and harsh processes to kill these animals.