PROS AND CONS OF TESTING ANIMALS

Many brands test their products in animals, there are some pros and cons to do it. Is it woth to test in animals? In my opinion they shouldn’t do it and here are some reasons:

• It is cruel and inhumane: as Humane Society said, “all of the animals that are being tested, are to forced feeding, food and water deprivation the infliction of burnsand other methods to study the healing process, etc”. These animals are put into cruel proyects until they died. 

• Most experiments are flawed, wasting the lives of the animal subject: a peer-reviewed study discovered that in the majority of the animal studies in UK and USA: “only 59% of the studies stated the hypothesis or objective of the study and the number and characteristics of the animals used.”

• The succeess in animal testing is not proportional to human safety. There are somes cases that the proyect worked in animals; however not in humans. For example with thalidomide, it was tested on pregnant cats, guinea pigs, and mice, there were no cases of congenital disabilities reported. But when it was administered to pregnant women, the results were severe deformities that affected about 10,000 babies.

• Now, there exists other methods to replace the animal testing: such as in vitro testing (tests done on human cells or tissue in a petri dish) offer opportunites to replace animal testing. Technological advancements in 3D printing, allow the possibility for tissue bioprinting. Artificial human skin, such as the commercially available products EpiDerm and ThinCert.

• It is very expensive: animal testing generally costs enormous amount of money. The animals must be feed, housed, cared and treated with drugs or similar experimental substance. Besides, the price of the animals it’s expensive too.