While many organizations are against animal testing and believe it has no impact on our research today, there are plenty of scientists and different research centers that contradict their opinion.
According to the Foundation for Biomedical Research, animal testing should actually be called animal research instead. It is thought that animal testing is overall better than the alternatives that have been discovered over years such as computer modeling and cell structures. In fact, many of the experiments that have been conducted have won the Nobel Prize for scientific achievement. One of the most recent scientific discoveries has been the discovery of principles for introducing specific gene modifications in mice using embryonic stem cells. This is just one of many breakthroughs that have been discovered through testing animals such as mice and dogs. While they still do use cats and dogs, the amount of cats and dogs being tested has gone down tremendously from previous years. Since 1973, the number of dogs used in biomedical research has declined 67% and the number of cats 63%, showing that researchers are trying their best to cut down the use of larger animals.
The FBR states that a huge majority of animals being tested do not even experience any pain. According to the 2000 USDA Annual Report, 63% of animals experienced only a slight or momentary pain, like an injection. The pain that animal activists talk about the USDA tries to reassure their good intentions by confirming that they could not use anesthesia to help the animals experience less pain, because it would have interfered with the experiment *. While animal testing may cause minor pain and deaths in many cases, scientists believe that it is essential to findings of major breakthroughs in scientific research. According to Dr. George Poste, director of the Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University and also a veterinarian, to figure out the root of some deadly diseases and how they can resist treatments, animal testing is a necessity**. He also goes on to say that many people don’t support the use of animals to test fashion products and makeup, but can understand the use of animal testing for medical research. On the supporter’s side of the argument, animal testing is a necessity for medical research, and will be beneficial to us in the future.
* "Animal Research Saves Lives." Foundation for Biomedical Research. 4 Feb. 2008 <http://www.fbresearch.org/Education/quickfacts.htm>.
** Poste, George. "Animal Testing, a Necessary Research Tool, for Now." The Arizona Republic. 3 Sept. 2006. Arizona State U. 4 Feb. 2008 <http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0903poste0903.html>.