Essay by Anonymous UserHigh School, 12th gradeA+, March 1997

download word file, 19 pages 3.3

- He gave me a 90%, so I guess he liked it!!


Many people today, including scientists and doctors, are questioning the suffering and killing of animals for the sake of human beings. Is it morally correct to dissect a frog or a worm for the purpose of educating a high school student? On the other hand, must 'We study life to protect life' (1:131) The issue of killing animals for the use of biomedical research, education, and cosmetics can be referred as 'vivisection'. Twenty-five to thirty-five million animals are spared in the U.S.A. each year for the purpose of research, testing, and education. Although vivisection serves as an important tool for scientists and doctors to work in research and may benefit humans, the harms indeed outweigh the benefits.

Animal experimentation was not common until the early nineteenth century and emerged as an important method of science. The first recorded action of vivisection was the study of body humors by Erasistratus in Alexandria during the third century (1:3).

Later, in A.D. 129-200, the physician, Galen, used five pigs to investigate the effects of several nerves (1:4). He is considered to be the founder of experimental physiology. During the Renaissance Era, Andreas Vesalius conducted experiments on monkeys, swine, and goats (1:3). By the late eighteenth century, the methods of scientific discovery were changer to experimentation of live animals by two French physiologists, Claude Bernard and Francious Magnedie. They revolutionized methods of scientific discovery by establishing live animal as common practice (1:4). Claude Bernard believed that in order for medicine to progress, there must be experimental research, and affirmed that 'vivisection is indispensable for physical research'. This is when the anti-vivisection movement was established ('vivisection').

There are different views as to why or why not there should be animal experimentation. For...