Animal testing, also known as animal experiments is the act of using non-human animals in research, development projects or scientific experiments. Statistics reveal that, each year millions of animals such as dogs, cats, rats, mice, ferrets, hamsters and monkeys experience physical and mental torture due to scientific practices. Although some believe that these experiments are necessary on grounds of advancement of medicine, most people believe that these experiments are cruel, unethical barbaric and outdated. While the debate towards animal testing continues to linger on, many sides and opinions argue their point of view, persuading to attempt us to accept and idolise their opinion as the only accurate assumption.
The following articles have controversial views on the issue at hand. Dr Bella Williams opinion piece, ‘Animals play a small but vital role in research’ which occurred in the Manchester Evening News on the 28th of August encourages animal testing, suggesting that animals in fact, should be experimented on and animals are essential in scientific research, for developing medicines and safety testing. William's angles his article to rely on the emotional responses of the reader, As for Monika Merkes’ article, ‘Using Animals for Research’ which featured in the Conversation, on the 6th of August, who takes on a contentious perspective, contending that we should steer clear from animal testing all together. Unlike William's, she uses logical and factual information to sympathise with the reader, despite these conflicting sentiments, both articles compare in the same aspect of how they express their point of view. Both authors use a scientific based vocabulary to emphasise the impact the information has on us as readers.
William's feels very strongly towards the progression and advancement animal testing has brought upon medical history. “Many medical advances that we now take for granted such as antibiotics, blood transfusions, vaccines or asthma medication could never have been achieved without animal research”. The impact this sentence has on us is crucial. It leads us to look past the moral and ethical questions of animal testing, causing us to consider that without these experiments, civilisation would be nowhere as it is today. This effectively persuades us as readers to agree that its essential we continue to experiment on animals to continue medical progression….
Whilst the first article was characterised by the contribution animal testing has provided towards medical advancement…. Conversely, this article attempts to convince the reader that animal testing is not predictive of human health, and therefore, it should not continue. Merkes’ begins her article with overstatement and exaggeration to describe what happens to animals in regards to medical research. The distressing opening line referring to “inflicting pain and death on animals for the purpose of medical research”, effectively grasps the reader’s attention, making the situation sound much more extreme and vile. This provokes feelings of anxiety and disgust, with the use of the word ‘inflicting’ we are lead to believe that nothing but bloodshed and torture comes to these innocent animals. Thus positioning us as readers to be much more skeptical about animal testing and the results that occur. Further into the article, Merkes uses evidence to support her contention; “there are over 60 drugs that have been successfully tested on animals, but are toxic to humans. In fact 90% of all drugs fail in clinical trials.” by using factual based information from “Humane Research Australia”, we are situated to agree with Merkes hope for the prevention of animal testing as it is highly unlikely we will question this information that is believed to be true.
After deep consideration and research I have come to a conclusion with my opinion toward the help and harm coming from animal testing. I have decided that animal testing is very cruel and sometimes it doesn't even work not helping us as much as it is hurting animals. Animal testing is very cruel and sometimes it doesn't even work. Could you imagine being a defenceless little animal bred and born only to be cut open, injected and electrocuted until you die? Animal testing is extremely risky therefore, should not be allowed since it involves extrapolating data located in animals by using it for humans. This is because animals have different genes, proteins and metabolic pathways from that of humans. Although it is true that, these experiments help improve science, they also hinder medical developments. For example, in previous years, patient studies revealed a connection between cancer and tobacco use. Many scientists held this to be true since exceptionally strong evidence supported this relationship. However, during animal testing, tobacco repeatedly failed in producing cancer in the test subjects. Since the tests failed, warnings regarding the dangers of cigarette were dismissed for many years.
MY 2 ARTICLES.
FOR;
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/for-and-against-animal-testing-693965AGAINST;
https://theconversation.com/animal-research-provides-a-flawed-model-so-why-not-stop-7890THIS IS MY FIRST TIME WRITING COMPARATIVE LANGUAGE ANALYSIS SO A FEEDBACK WOULD BE GREAT AS I NEED TO HAND THIS IN TOMORROW.
Home
Help
Search
Login
