Argument Essay - Animal Testing is necessary
Is it really necessary to take the lives of animals in the name of science and for the betterment of humanity? For animal rights activists, like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the answer is no. PETA pressures labs into halting experiments, because they believe that animals are not to be used by humans for food, clothing, entertainment, or to experiment on (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Its stance is that any testing is painful, inhumane, and unnecessary when alternatives are available. The PETA website says that animals, like humans, have interests that cannot be sacrificed or traded away simply because it might benefit others. Essentially, PETA is of the opinion that animals and humans should have identical rights.
In their press releases PETA puts out pictures of rabbits with open flesh wounds and dogs with rashes on their skins - all in an attempt to disgust people into sympathy for their cause.
In actuality the number of lab animals used has been cut in half in the last 25 years (James-Enger). Of the animals used, 90 percent are rats and mice (James-Enger). Moreover, 11 million animals die each year in animal shelters (Americans for Medical Progress) and an astounding 95 percent of the animals that die in America do so from human consumption (James-Enger). The reason that animal testing is appropriate is that there are regulations in place to minimize testing and pain, the alternatives are insufficient for now, and most importantly the information obtained from experimentation is irreplaceable. While animal rights groups such as PETA advocate abolishing all animal testing that inflicts pain on animals, proponents of testing cite laws and regulations which minimize pain and discomfort.
PETA's position is based on the belief that humans...