Animal testing belongs to one of the most contested issues of these days. With the growing interest in the use of cosmetics, which is produced after being tested on animals, many questions whether such animal treatment should be allowed at all. Given the fact that animal testing has played a huge role in the proliferation of medicine and the perception of health throughout the history, proponents claim that the animal testing leads to some real positive effects. However, the legal perspective implies that one shall not treat animals in the manner that they don’t deserve. Hence, animal lawyers are expected to have the final say in banning the illegal practice.
First and foremost, animal’s DNA is very similar to those of humans. For instance, chimpanzees share 99% of their DNA with humans, while mice share 98% of their DNA with humans. While looking above, you could see the main argument by those who still consider the animal testing as a legal practice. However, the very similar structure of animals does not give a right to humans to exploit them and use in the inhumane purposes. Therefore, the aminal testing certainly entails an illegal component in the core of the issue.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Animal Testing Peculiarities"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

The currently existing legislation provides a sufficient legislative basis for the protection of animals that are being useful for testing. At the same time, animal testing is perceived as an illegal practice until these days. Namely, laws have been regulated by the animal welfare act (AWA) like the access to clean water and food and regular inspection from vets. However, the AWA structure is rather vague, when it comes to the outcomes of the animal testing. That is why animal testing is being regulated in the limited ways. Yet, it remains the legislative basis to which many refer while debating about animal treatment. The current legislative basis event led to the growing interest in the area of aminal law. Those who work in the animal law can potentially influence the situation of the animal treatment for the better. Currently, animal lawyers are studying how giant corporations use animals for testing cosmetics and medicine. The advocacy for making animal testing illegal also pertains the component where the issue of lobbying is being raised. In particular, corporations possess operate within significant financial capacities and can influence the decision-making at the highest level to making animal treatment allowed. Commonly, advocates for animal testing refer to the similarity of the DNA of humans and animals and present the case as a unique opportunity to making the medical treatment possible.

In that regard, it is a striking why large corporations do not invest into alternative methods for medical and cosmetological testing and suggest using animals with the inhumane practices. It appears that high revenue along with lobbying prevails the logic of the needed investment. Hence, this is an opened an unexplored area that could provide an alternative solution to the animal testing.

While referring to the potential alternative of animal testing, one may refer to the process of studying cell cultures in Petri dish. Recently, it was claimed to be one of the most innovative methods to be used instead of animal testing. Instead of a continuous effort of investing into exploiting the animals, cash flows could be directed into specific areas that could lead to positive and ethical outcomes. However, the science has not provided a sufficient data that proves the data received from the Petri dish as viable for the further assessment. Another alternative decision is to put human cells in a dish and see how these cells would ultimately react. In this regard, one shall be aware of the potential issue of missing that may lead to a wrong reaction, be it a dish or a human body that could be alternatively tested. Therefore, one shall look at this method rather carefully and think carefully about the potential outcomes. However, one shall be aware that the use of such method would only be possible is the animal testing as such would be made illegal. Therefore, the lack of incentives and the lack of investment into proper research leads to the questionable exploitation of animals.

Currently, there is a positive trend in making animal testing illegal. In 2013, the supranational body in Europe known as the European Union banned animal testing in all of its 28 Member States. Besides that, Israel, India, and Norway followed the trend and made animal testing illegal, too. Currently, the United States along with Australia and New Zealand consider the ban on animal testing, too. In particular, the Humane Society of the United States drafted ‘The Humane Cosmetics Act,’ which was already presented to the US government. However, no decision has been made regarding animal testing.

While taking the information presented above, one may conclude that animal testing is not the best method that can be used for testing cosmetics and medicine. Personally, I think that this method entails a lot of misused funds, and could be changed into something that is more ethical and humane. Moreover, despite the increasing amount of research and the seek for alternative methods of testing; the animal testing remains the most popular method that is protected by legislation in multiple states. Thus, the future is not behind the animal experiments. Hence, the governmental authorities should seriously consider banning animal testing given the results it produces to the public and the inhumane implications.

    References
  • “Cosmetics Animal Testing Has Been Banned In These Amazing Places”.
    One Green Planet. N.p., 2017. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.
  • “Countries Around The World Work To Ban Cosmetics Testing On Animals”. PETA.
    N.p., 2017. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.
  • “Infographic: Ending Cosmetics Testing On Animals : Humane Society International”.
    Hsi.org. N.p., 2017. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.