Animal Rights

Many humans use animals for testing each year. Animal testing is when the animals are put through something or injected to see how they react to what medical research they have been used for. Animals are used to find cures for diseases or to test drugs that have mild side effects. They are also used to test materials for cosmetic research.
Except for severely limited medical research, animal testing should be outlawed. Animal testing endangers the animal’s lives and may cause serious side affect that last the rest of their lives. Others believe that they should not test medicine on humans because humans’ lives are more precious than that of the animals. They believe that since animals have no rights that they should be used for testing.
There are three very important reasons why animals should not be used for testing harmful or dangerous materials. One of these is that testing and its use is trivial in the cosmetic industry. The second reason is that animals have rights and animals can feel pleasure and pain just as humans do. The third reason is that testing is cruel and unusual.
Another reason is that animal testing and its use is trivial in the cosmetic industry. Testing on animals for the cosmetic industry is not necessary because they have many other ways to find out if it harms the human race. The testing that goes on is harmful to the animals and can cause serious side effects. The cosmetic companies hold down bunnies in vices and spray the cosmetics into their eyes to see if it cause them redness, stinging, or even blindness. They also have baboons strapped down with their heads in vices to do certain tests on them. Animals are also used by pharmaceutical companies to produce drugs and health supplements. They estimate that 17 to 22 million animals are used each year for medical research, and these estimates do not include rats, mice, fish, and farm animals. That means that 90% of all research animals are not included in the statistics. Too many animals are being tested and they do not even need to use the animals for these tests. They can use computer software materials and get the same results.
One more point is that animals do have rights. The activists of the animal rights movements do not claim that animals are the moral equivalent of humans, just that their feelings deserve some consideration. Animals are just as alive as we are and they follow the course as we do, they find food, they produce offspring, they overcome challenges, therefore, they have intelligence. We argue that humans have many qualities – such as a complex language, sophisticated reasoning, and a highly evolved culture; that animals do not have. The animals also have this, dolphins communicate with each other, and the baboon uses sticks as a tool to gather ants, and still animals are not significant. Many animals are used, and even killed, for the sake of medical research. The have a right is to have a claim or entitlement to something and to have that claim recognized by others. The bad news for animals is two-fold. First, in all the cases of women’s rights, the abolition of slavery, and ending apartheid, a good part of the political momentum comes from the oppressed themselves. Secondly, empathy for the oppressed by influential outsides came because the outsides could identify with the oppressed – because they are human. So we must continue to stand up for animal rights. No animal needs die when software can be used for testing.
The third, and final reason to defend animal rights, is that animal testing is cruel and unusual. Animals are used every day to help find a cure for a certain disease in many painful ways. In 1984 at LaLoma Medical Center in California, a child had a heart transplant with a baboon’s heart and dies only two days later. Some called it a medical miracle. Other thought is unholy to mingle body parts of humans with animals. The early vivisection’s (the cutting open of living animals without any anesthetics), shed light on biological functions, but also killed many animals in the process. The first kidney transplants were done on ver hundred of dogs and are not relatively