The Right Choice for Animal Experiments

The animals use in medical experimentation has had been one of the most divisive issues since the seventeenth century. Edward Augustus Freeman, one of the most distinguished of recent English historians stated, “The awful wrongs and sufferings forced upon the innocent, faithful animal race form the blackest chapter in the whole world’s history” (Freeman). In the United States, it is estimated that twenty to seventy million animals suffer and die in the name of research. At least thirty-three animals die in laboratories each second worldwide, one every four seconds (Does Animal Testing . . .   32). People say: We have rights over animals. They are given to us for use. Annie Besant is often described as a theosophist, educator and friend of India say: “[No one has the] rights to over them. [Everyone has] duties towards them” (Besant). At no point and time should we ever justify ourselves through the pain and suffering of another being. Animal experimentation is a matter of life and death, regardless of what position one takes. The better informed individuals are about the issues, the more rational and logical their actions will be.

The morality is rarely questioned by researchers, who generally choose to defend the practice rigidly, rather than challenge the obvious moral issues it raises. Experimenters betray their efforts to avoid morality. Scientists quickly learn to take on such a mind-set from their superior, as Cindy Mur, a teacher and an editor, explains: \"One message – almost a warning – that newcomers got was that it was controversial or risky to admit to having ethical concerns, because to do so was tantamount to admitting that there really was something morally wrong with animal experimentation, thereby giving ‘ammunition to the enemy’”. They ‘sacrifice’ animals rather than kill them, and they may note animal ‘distress‘, but they rarely acknowledge pain or other suffering (Mur). Humans are using animals in experiments without noticing that animals...