In this blog post, we will look at how animal testing contributes to human survival and development and the ethical issues that arise from it, and consider whether there is a way to meet both values at the same time.
Historically, humans have valued animals based on how much they contribute to their own interests. This instrumental view is deeply rooted in human traditions and habits, and has led to the perception of animals as beings that exist to satisfy human desires, such as by becoming our food, providing comfort and pleasure, becoming clothing and household goods, or even fighting for us. This has been the case from ancient times to the present day without question or criticism. However, as people gradually realized that animals are not just tools with instrumental value for humans, they began to criticize the unethical perception of animals. People realized that animals are not just moving tools without souls, minds, emotions, or personalities, but sentient beings with rich emotions, and began to pay attention to the unethical acts that humans have taken for granted for a long time. Among them, animal testing is recognized as an immoral act that does not promote human needs and lacks justification.
Human needs refer to the elements essential for survival, and in the modern era, they include maintaining health and longevity. Animal testing continues to satisfy this interest, but it is a serious problem from the perspective of ethics and morality. In this article, we will look at the ongoing animal testing by dividing it into product testing, medical testing, and military testing, and examine the inefficiency of the testing and the unfair abuse of animals in the testing process, and discuss practical alternatives to testing.
First, let’s take a look at product testing. Toxicity testing, which is conducted to determine whether a newly developed product is harmful to humans, does not contribute to the urgent interests of humans, and is therefore immoral and unnecessary. Typical examples of toxicity testing include the Draize test and the LD-50 test. In the Draize test, the head of a rabbit or dog is fixed and then an experimental substance such as ink, bleach, or detergent is injected into the eyelids to observe how much pus is produced in the eyes and how much the infection progresses. This experiment is repeated several times over a period of up to three weeks, and the test animals suffer extreme pain before being finally slaughtered. The LD-50 test is an experiment that measures the lethal dose of a substance by introducing it to half of the test animals. During the experiment, a tube is inserted into the throat of the test animals and the test product is administered, and the experiment continues until half of the test animals die. It is not difficult to argue the need for such toxicity tests, but animals are deprived of their right to life during the experiment and are subjected to extreme cruelty. This is a cruel act caused by human selfishness, and sacrificing animals can never be justified. Newly developed products are often not essential for human survival, so it is necessary to improve the quality of life through improvements to existing products rather than toxicity testing. Therefore, commercial product testing is not related to the urgent needs of humans, but simply stems from the economic interests of companies trying to make a profit from new products.
In the case of medical experiments, the development of new drugs may seem like an essential element for improving the quality of human life, but the way in which medicines for humans are tested on animals and then marketed is inefficient and dangerous. Due to anatomical, genetic, and histological differences between animals and humans, it is difficult to apply animal test results directly to humans and can pose serious risks. For example, thalidomide, an anti-nausea drug developed to alleviate morning sickness in pregnant women, caused serious deformities in human fetuses when tested on animals such as dogs, cats, and monkeys, causing great damage. There are many other cases in which animal testing results have had adverse effects on humans, showing that animal testing can actually endanger human health. Although some drugs have been introduced thanks to animal testing, there have been many cases of lives lost as a result. Overconfidence in the results of animal testing threatens human health, and it is unconscionable to continue testing without acknowledging that biological differences can lead to different test results.
Animal testing in the military is also irrelevant to the urgent concerns of humans. For example, experiments are sometimes conducted on monkeys in a radioactive and electric shock environment to see how a pilot is affected when performing a mission in a radioactive environment. In addition, experiments are conducted at Fort Detrick and the UK’s Porton Down Defense Research Agency to observe symptoms such as dehydration, anemia, and convulsions in beagles and other animals by administering TNT and glutaminase. These military experiments have nothing to do with the urgent concerns of humans and are nothing more than simple animal abuse.
As such, many experimental animals die without being properly used in experiments. The animals that remain after the experiment is over are slaughtered because they cannot be returned to the ecosystem, and unnecessary sacrifices for bio-experiments are being repeated. Is there any way to replace it? Practical alternatives include cell tissue culture, physical-chemical methods, and computer simulations. The method of culturing human cell tissue and conducting experiments can produce results that are directly applicable to humans, rather than animal experiments, and experiments can also be conducted using physical-chemical analysis or computer simulations. If these various alternative methods are actively used, the need for animal experiments can be greatly reduced.
In conclusion, most animal experiments are not related to the urgent needs of humans and do not contribute to human life, health, and happiness. Animals are being sacrificed as tools for human greed and economic gain, which is an immoral and unreasonable act. Therefore, we must find alternative solutions and uphold ethics and morality, even if it takes time. The future of humanity will continue to develop in a world where all living things coexist.
