essay about animal testing should be banned

Essay on Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned

Students are often asked to write an essay on Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned

Animal testing is unkind.

Animal testing often causes pain and suffering to animals. They are kept in small cages and are used for experiments that can hurt them. This is not fair because animals feel pain just like we do. We should not make them suffer for our benefits.

Not Always Useful

Many times, tests on animals do not give results that are helpful for humans. This is because animals and humans are different. So, the pain we cause to animals may not even help us in the end.

Better Options Exist

Nowadays, we have other ways to test products that do not involve hurting animals. Scientists can use computer models or grow human cells in labs. These methods can give us good information without causing harm to any living creature.

250 Words Essay on Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned

Animal testing: why it should be banned.

Animal testing refers to scientific experiments using non-human animals as subjects. For many years, animals have been used in experiments to study diseases, test medicines, and explore other scientific questions. However, there are many reasons why this practice should be banned.

Pain and Suffering

Animals experience pain and suffering just like humans do. In animal testing, animals are often subjected to painful procedures, such as surgery, injections, and exposure to harmful chemicals. They may be kept in cramped and unsanitary conditions and denied proper food, water, and veterinary care.

Unreliable Results

Animal testing results are often unreliable when applied to humans. Animals may respond differently to drugs and treatments than humans do, leading to inaccurate or misleading findings. Additionally, the stress and fear experienced by animals during testing can affect the results, making them even less reliable.

Alternatives to Animal Testing

Today, there are many alternative methods available that can replace animal testing. These methods include computer simulations, cell cultures, and human tissue models. These alternatives are not only more humane, but they are often more accurate and reliable than animal testing.

Ethical Concerns

Animal testing raises serious ethical concerns. Many people believe that it is wrong to harm or kill animals for the sake of scientific research. Animals are sentient beings who deserve to be treated with respect and compassion.

In light of the pain and suffering caused to animals, the unreliability of results, the availability of alternatives, and the ethical concerns, it is clear that animal testing should be banned. It is time to move towards a more humane and ethical approach to scientific research.

500 Words Essay on Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned

What is animal testing.

Animal testing is the use of animals in experiments and other scientific studies. Animals are used to test products such as medicines, cosmetics, and chemicals, as well as to study diseases and develop new treatments.

Why is Animal Testing Bad?

Animal testing is bad because it causes pain and suffering to animals. Animals are often subjected to painful procedures, such as surgery, injections, and exposure to toxic chemicals. They may also be deprived of food, water, and sleep.

Animals Are Not Like Humans

The results of animal tests are not always accurate because animals are not like humans. They have different bodies, different metabolisms, and different immune systems. This means that drugs and chemicals that are safe for animals may not be safe for humans.

There Are Alternatives to Animal Testing

There are many alternatives to animal testing that are more accurate and humane. These alternatives include computer models, cell cultures, and human tissue samples. These alternatives are often more cost-effective than animal testing and do not cause pain and suffering to animals.

Animal Testing is Cruel and Unnecessary

Animal testing is a cruel and unnecessary practice. There are many alternatives to animal testing that are more accurate and humane. We should ban animal testing and replace it with these alternatives.

Animal testing is a cruel and unnecessary practice. It causes pain and suffering to animals and is often inaccurate. There are many alternatives to animal testing that are more accurate and humane. We should ban animal testing and replace it with these alternatives.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Essay on Which Economic System Is The Best And Why
Essay on Where Do You See Yourself In The Future
Essay on Whatsapp Boon Or Bane

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Is Animal Testing Ever Justified?

The E.P.A. recently said it would move away from requiring the testing of potentially harmful chemicals on animals. Do you support the decision?

essay about animal testing should be banned

By Natalie Proulx

Find all our Student Opinion questions here.

On Sept. 10, the Environmental Protection Agency said it would move away from requiring the testing of potentially harmful chemicals on animals, a decision that was hailed by animal rights groups but criticized by environmentalists and researchers who said the practice was necessary to rigorously safeguard human health.

What are your thoughts on animal testing? Do you think it is ever justified? Why or why not?

In “ E.P.A. Says It Will Drastically Reduce Animal Testing ,” Mihir Zaveri, Mariel Padilla and Jaclyn Peiser write about the decision:

The E.P.A. Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the agency plans to reduce the amount of studies that involve mammal testing by 30 percent by 2025, and to eliminate the studies entirely by 2035, though some may still be approved on a case-by-case basis. The agency said it would also invest $4.25 million in projects at four universities and a medical center that are developing alternate ways of testing chemicals that do not involve animals. “We can protect human health and the environment by using cutting-edge, ethically sound science in our decision-making that efficiently and cost-effectively evaluates potential effects without animal testing,” Mr. Wheeler said in a memo announcing the changes. The E.P.A. has for decades required testing on a variety of animals — including rats, dogs, birds and fish — to gauge their toxicity before the chemicals can be bought, sold or used in the environment.

The article continues:

The practice of testing with animals has long prompted complex debates driven by passionate views on morality and scientific imperative. Reaction to Tuesday’s announcement was no different. “We are really excited as this has been something we’ve wanted for quite some time,” said Kitty Block, the president and chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States, an animal protection organization. “The alternatives are the future. They’re more efficient and save lives.” Kathleen Conlee, the vice president of animal research issues at the Humane Society, said the E.P.A.’s move is “broad-sweeping and significant.” “This is the first time a government agency has made such a commitment and timelined its specific goals along the way,” Ms. Conlee said. “There’s been a lot of positive action among other federal agencies, but we want to see all government agencies take this step.” Tracey Woodruff, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco’s school of medicine, said current alternatives to animal testing are somewhat useful. But Dr. Woodruff, who worked at the E.P.A. from 1994 to 2007, said only animal testing — a process honed over decades — was robust enough to gauge chemicals’ impacts on people of various ages, genetics and health backgrounds. “I definitely think we should be investing more in this research,” she said, referring to alternative testing. “But it’s really not ready for making decisions yet — at least the way that E.P.A. is making decisions.” Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist at Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, said she was very concerned by the announcement. Dr. Sass said animals were still necessary to study chronic conditions, like cancer and infertility. Cells in a petri dish cannot yet replace whole living systems, she said. “The E.P.A.’s deadline is arbitrary,” Dr. Sass said. “Our interest isn’t in speed, it’s getting it right. We want proper animal testing because we don’t want harmful chemicals to end up in our food, air and water.”

Students, read the entire article, then tell us:

Do you support the decision by the E.P.A. to move away from requiring the testing of potentially harmful chemicals on animals? Or do you think animal testing is still necessary to regulate harmful substances that can have adverse effects on humans?

How important is it to you that the toxicity of chemicals and other environmental contaminants is rigorously studied and regulated? Why? Do you think not testing on animals hinders those efforts?

The Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Veterans Affairs are among the government agencies that still rely on animal testing. Do you think animal testing is important in these sectors or any others? Why or why not?

Do you think animal testing is ever justified? If so, what should be the criteria for when, how and on what animals testing is done?

Students 13 and older are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

Natalie Proulx joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2017 after working as an English language arts teacher and curriculum writer. More about Natalie Proulx

Invertebrates
Best Dog Collar
Best Smart Dog Collar
Halo Dog Collar
Spoton vs Halo Collar
SpotOn Dog Collar
Best Dog Fence
Best Invisible Dog Fence
Dog Accessories
Dog Training
Dog Harness
Dog Leashes
Dog Grooming
CBD for Dogs
Dog Age Calculator
Dog BMI Calculator
Dog Chocolate Toxicity Calculator
Dog Food Calculator
Dog Harness Size Calculator
Dog Life Expectancy Calculator
Puppy Weight Calculator
Dog Water Intake Calculator
Dog Crate Size Calculator
Dog Onion Toxicity Calculator
Dog Raisin Toxicity Calculator
Pet Sitter Rates Calculator
Dog Groomer Tip Calculator
Dog Quality of Life Calculator
Cost of Owning a Dog Calculator
Raw Dog Food Calculator
Dog Dad Shirts
Dog Mom Shirts
Automatic Litter Box
Cat Accessories
Cat Collars
Cat Grooming
Animal Abuse
Animal Laws
Animal Rights
Animal Testing
How to Help
Facts & Stats
Our Campaigns

Animal Testing Should Be Banned Completely – A Heart-Wrecking Situation

Monika Martyn

January 19, 2023.

WorldAnimalFoundation.org is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn More

It’s hard to imagine, as an intelligent species, we’re still discussing animal experimentation. There’s no doubt that animal testing is to the apparent benefit of people. However, that doesn’t make it right that over 100 million innocent animals suffer for our well-being.

Animal experimentation needs to end. It’s not a question of right or wrong. Animals have feelings and the right to live without cruelty inflicted on them for the sake of testing chemicals. Period.

So why do we continue to abuse, cage, cripple, infect, and kill dogs, cats, monkeys, mice, and rats in animal experiments? This is not about thanking the cosmetic industry (Europe, India, Israel) for condemning and banning animal tests. It’s about saving the 100 million abused animals in American laboratories.

Here’s what you need to know to stop the abuse and end animal experiments.

Why Is Animal Testing Bad?

It just is. Animal testing andanimal experiments inflict inhumane suffering on animals. These creatures never consented to have experiments conducted on their bodies, skin, or DNA.

The debate over whether it’s right divides the room. Many people believe animal testing is barbaric and outdated. Others argue that scientific progress has helped save millions of human lives.

It’s Unethical

There are billions of great people in this world. Together, we need to end torturing 100 million animals. Animals experience pain, loneliness, fear, and emotions, just like us. When they have to endure scientific and medical experiments, it’s incomprehensible.

Animal Testing Is Unreliable

Animals and humans share some similarities. It’s one of the main reasons the debate gets so heated: animals have feelings too.

Our differences contribute to the failure of human clinical trials. Many of the pharmaceuticals end up being too dangerous and ineffective for human consumption. That means we subject innocent animals to horrendous suffering for a small return of success.

Up to 95% of experimental drugs that pass animal tests fail in human and clinical trials.

Additionally, some medicines that may work for us are dangerous for animals. For example, aspirin is toxic to animals but is safe for human use. We wouldn’t be able to get it from pharmacies if it had been tested using current animal testing standards.

It’s Bad Science

People believe in science as proof. Therefore, according to the National Institute of Health, 95 out of 100 drugs developed with lab animals fail. In no other facet of life would we accept these results as a ‘good idea.’ It’s proof that animal experiments don’t work.

Animal Testing Is Dangerous for Humans

Sometimes math and science don’t work. A few years ago, big pharma pushed a new wonder drug, Vioxx, to treat arthritis patients. It was a welcomed relief. Lab monkeys and five other animal species showed improvements on paper.

Yet, in the aftermath, patients who took the prescribed pills faced a graver issue. Studies showing 320,000 heart attack and stroke victims proved that lab results didn’t help humans. Sadly, 140,000 people died because of Vioxx.

Another clinical trial ended badly for patients who either suffered severe liver damage or death from Hepatitis B due to a drug experiment conducted on animals.

In 2016, another miracle drug that was reportedly going to treat all kinds of conditions killed a volunteer and left four patients with devastating brain damage. This experimental drug passed muster on mice, rats, dogs, and monkeys. Sadly, nobody reported how those animal subjects felt after having the medication forced on them.

In a new monoclonal antibody treatment tested on monkeys at 500 times the recommended human dose, human volunteers suffered near-fatal allergic reactions.

Human beings often volunteer for human trials to help find cures for human diseases. Animal research facilities should promote the health of animals, not human health.

It’s Wasteful

No doubt, we want our loved ones to receive the best care. Unfortunately, animal experiments only make the grade about half the time. The rest end up in the trash as failed and worthless. The sad part is that research using lab animals takes enormous resources and squanders money, time, human intelligence, and creativity.

All that waste causes human suffering on top of animal suffering. According to Dr. Richard Klausner, “We’ve cured mice of cancer for decades. It simply didn’t work on humans.”

Cancer is nasty. But if animals ultimately fail in medical research or other laboratory experiments, why don’t researchers use advanced technology to test harmful substances?

It’s Archaic

Scientists have compassion too. Many have created modern, effective non-animal testing methods that are cost-effective, fast, and deliver more accurate results without animal testing. These non-animal methods include micro-dosing, in vitro testing, organs-on-chips , simulators, and advanced computer modeling technology.

Humans share genetic information and DNA with plants and animals. For example, cows and humans share about 80%, and common fruit flies about 61%. A banana has 60% human DNA.

It’s possible to look at this debate from two sides. One is to explore the common DNA and use it to our benefit. The other is if they share that much genetic material with us, does it make sense to harm them?

Animals Feel Pain

Evolutionary biologist Marc Bekoff and his many colleagues have done all the necessary research to prove animals feel pain. Mammals share strong similarities in the nervous system, chemical transmitters, emotional states, and perceptual tools to prove animals experience pain. That they experience pain differently is irrelevant.

The Animal Welfare Act should protect animals. Yet lab animals like mice, rats, reptiles, amphibians, and birds used in labs don’t fall under their protection. Instead, lab animals endure inhumane procedures and treatments like scorched skin, immobilization, inhaling toxic fumes, and holes drilled in their skull and spinal cords crushed.

Often, lab animals receive no administered pain relief and are left to suffer intense pain. These institutions, by law or regulations, don’t have to provide any.

Yet, in experiments, when many animals like rats, mice, and chickens trapped in barren cages have access to self-administered pain relief, they use it to reduce the pain. Wild animals also nurse their wounds, show distress, and seek shelter.

They learn to avoid situations that relate to bad experiences with pain. This action indicates that animals are aware of the pain and can associate it with experiences from their past.

It’s Unnecessary

It’s challenging to review pictures of animals used without consent and not form an opinion.

The main reason for banning animal testing, aside from sparing animals the pain, is that we don’t need it. Animal testing should not be part of a university lab experiment paid for by the tax-payer who is against animal torture in the first place.

Animal Testing Is Dangerous for Non-Human Animals

That is the point. It’s not only dangerous, cruel, painful, and inhumane; some of the methods harken back to medieval torture chambers.

Imagine mice, rabbits , rats, and guinea pigs with their eyes burned from drip chemicals or toxic potions smeared into their exposed skin tissue without pain medication.

It’s hard to think about a human consenting to the Draize or LD50 Test. This test measuring toxicity often leads to blindness, scarring, death, and insurmountable pain.

Years from now, the LD50 will be on display in museums as one of the wickedest torture animal tests. This substance test is inflicted on animals to be fatal in 50% of the test subjects. Researchers strap animals to tubes and inject the test substance directly into the sequestered animals’ stomachs. Until they die, which can take days or weeks, animals suffer.

The animals die agonizingly, suffering internal bleeding, diarrhea, vomiting, paralysis, convulsions, and horrendous pain. Death becomes their relief.

Facts About Animal Testing

The first fact is that animals suffer. The second is that we must stop animal testing.

The law requires 12,000 animals subjected to over 50 experiments to endure for a company to register a single pesticide. No one argues that pesticides must meet safety standards.

According to the statistics reviewed by the National Institute of Health, only 5% of drugs tested on animals show positive results, while 95% are worthless. That is a bad score. Sixty percent of no-consent animals are exposed to biomedical research and product safety testing.

According to the Humane Society, animals and humans are very different. Animal subjects don’t suffer from the same illnesses as humans. So why are we testing on animals when they don’t contract many human illnesses? HIV, schizophrenia, Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, and certain types of cancer are human diseases.

Substances that cause cancer in people affect animals differently, and only one-third cause cancer in animals. Animal research conducted on over 100 mouse cell types discovered that regulating genes in mice match human DNA. How can you create an exact science and get valid human responses on that foundation?

How to Stop Animal Testing?

Every day, we use products that cost an animal its life or severe pain. Awareness campaigns are only a starting point. Choosing animal cruelty-free products is another. The science supporting animal testing stands on faulty ground. Instead, all industries should concentrate on using new methods and technologies to conduct research that works.

Some industries, like cosmetic companies, are making strides and not testing on animals. However, there’s much room for improvement in the household cleaner, deodorant, fem hygiene, and thousands of pharmaceutical products.

Animal rights activists paved the way to end suffering for endangered species , lab animals, and domesticated animals.

Alternative Ways of Experimenting

People are smart. Technology has exploded in the last few decades. We can use human cells and tissue, 3D printing, robots, and computer modeling to get more accurate results faster. They’re also cost-effective and don’t subject animals to cruel and unnecessary animal tests.

If this was painful to read, the article has done its job.

In conclusion, animal testing and research must be banned worldwide, as it is against animals’ rights and causes unwanted suffering to lab animals. Also, now there are other available methods to test product toxicity. Cruelty against animals should not be taken lightly just because they are not “humans.”

We’re on the precipice of human evolution and developing a united mindset to stop animal testing once and for all.

Every individual has the power to influence change. Choose cruelty-free products, become involved, champion the cause, and help millions of animals. The USA Government has finally passed a law banning animal testing on cosmetics.

Join the conversation and become an animal advocate. You are the difference!