Introduction
Animal experimentation is the scientific use of animals for research and laboratory analyses. These experiments are common in medical schools, commercial facilities, universities and companies. Supporters of animal testing argue that majority of medical achievements are because of the researches.
However, some animal rights associations and organizations argue that the practice is cruel, outdated and poorly regulated. The activists argue that the costs incurred during research usually outweigh the outcomes or benefits of animal testing. The issue of animal research is today a major cause of debate and controversy. Animal rights associations argue that even animals have their rights. This paper discusses the issue of banning commercial organizations and companies from testing on different animals.
Effects of Banning Institutions from Animal Testing
The first implication of banning companies from animal testing is that they will have to develop new ways of product testing. After producing a certain product, different companies use animals to conduct their research. This makes it possible to determine the effectiveness of the product for human use or consumption.
However, a ban on animal testing will call for new approaches to carry out the same tests before declaring the products fit for human consumption. With the ban in place, companies will consider new options to ensure their business does not stop. If there is a ban on the testing, different companies will use huge resources and finances to conduct new researches.
They will also come up with new methods of testing their different products before deciding their effectiveness when used by human beings. In the book Animal Testing: Issues and Ethics, Stephanie has examined the ethical issues surrounding animal testing. She starts by stating that the practice is cruel and unacceptable. However, a ban on testing will call for new ways of testing the products. According to the author, the companies might be required to use human volunteers other than animals (Watson 37).
This can either threaten the health of the volunteers or lead to the production of substandard products because not many people will be willing to volunteer themselves. In the book, Watson Stephanie mentions that many companies, such as cosmetics manufacturers, will develop new methods of testing their new products.
The idea to ban companies from testing on animals will help improve the testing practices for various medical compounds and substances. The use of animal testing is not a good method to determine if human beings can use a certain drug without any complications. If the government bans animal testing, the companies will be required to consider modern methods for drug testing. According to Sheree Stachura, animal testing might not always reveal the best answers about the effectiveness of a certain drug.
A drug named choramphenicol was declared effective and safe for human use after several animal researches. However, this study found to be wrong after human intake. The idea to ban animal testing can force companies to come up with new testing procedures for their products. For example, pharmaceutical companies can use computer programs to test the toxicology of certain drugs (Stachura 149). In the article, the author supports the ban on animal research and testing.
The author believes that the ban will lead to better testing ideas and practices. If the government bans companies from using animals to conduct their studies and researches, it will be possible to have new methods for drug and product testing. It is notable that Sheree Stachura supports the opinion of the governmental bans. This will lead to the improvement in testing practices.
If the government bans companies from testing on animals, they might be forced to conduct their experiments and analyses in other countries were animal testing is still taking place. Many companies continue to carry various tests on animals in the developing world.
A ban on animal experimentation will result in a situation whereby our companies will consider the need to outsource the services from other companies in the developing world. This will be done as a way of promoting their scientific innovations and achievements. The restrictions will force many companies to test their drugs and products in certain countries such as India and China where there are no similar restrictions.
In these developing countries, the companies will not face any restrictions or obstacles. In the United States, many people and organizations have continued to protest because they are against animal testing. The companies will be required to outsource their activities and researches abroad.
The idea will make it impossible for these companies and organizations to offer useful products and materials to the consumers (Pocha 77). In his article Comparative Advantage, Pocha believes that any bans of animal research and testing will require different companies to test their final products in the developing world where there will be no similar restrictions.
The idea to place a ban on animal research will have adverse implications on learning institutions and research agencies. The author believes that it is unnecessary to implement the ban on animal experimentation and testing. The author also believes that there is need for new policies and ideas promote the success of these companies.
The other issue arising from the ban on animal research is that these organizations and companies will never be effective. It is agreeable that animal testing is an important exercise for scientists and drug researchers. The use of animals helps to determine the effectiveness of a certain drug before administering it to humans.
When there is a ban on animal testing, some companies will come up with new methods for drug testing while others will have to abandon the practice. This will result in a situation whereby the companies are no longer producing new drugs. In his article Toxicology for the Twenty-First Century, Thomas Hartung believes that these companies help a lot towards drug production. This means that animal testing will always be an important tool for individuals and companies who test various drugs.
The author states that the government should be aware of the dangers and risks of banning animal testing (Hartung 209). Even if the companies are banned from the practice, they will have to develop new ideas and methods of drug testing. For instance, the author identifies the use of omics technologies and bioinformatics as potential options to animal testing. Any ban on animal testing will result in a situation whereby companies come up with new ideas for drug and product testing.
A ban from testing on animals will force companies to face the conflict of ideas and interests. The idea to ban companies from testing on animals is important because it will help to give animals their rights and ensure healthy products are delivered to the users. Most of the companies will have to consider the issue of animal rights and at the same time safeguard the rights of the consumers. These companies will have to identify the best methods to test their drugs and products without necessarily having to use animals or humans.
This will help the companies to come up with new technologies though research and development. Some companies might come together and work on the available options. It would be necessary to help them come up with the best ideas for performing product testing and analysis. In his article, Kristian examines the political acts that require different manufacturing companies to stop all forms of animal experimentation and testing.
The author believes that the practice is effective but it does not consider the rights of animals and consumers. This leads to what the author calls conflict of interest (Fischer 176). The companies will be expected to think about the rights of animals and at the same time focus on the rights of the consumers. The important thing is to have the government and the manufacturing companies working together to develop the best alternatives to animal experimentation and testing.
The banning of companies from testing on animals will force the manufacturers to use conventional methods to test their drugs and products. Some of these methods include the use of rodent bioassays and computational modeling. Although these methods of drug testing are expensive and sophisticated, they are usually able to detect the exact biological implications and effects of the drugs under experimentation.
The use of animals might not identify the toxicity levels for various drugs and chemical substances. If the government bans companies from testing on animals, it will be possible for the manufacturers to consider new methods that can address the issue of drug toxicity in humans.
The practice will ensure new drugs are produced capable of treating various diseases and conditions. In the article Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: Defining New Risk Assessment Approaches Based on Perturbation of Intra-cellular Toxicity Pathways, Sudin Bhattacharya offers a discussion on the consequences of banning animal research and testing (Bhattacharya 8).
The researcher states that most of the animal tests are unable to detect the biological performance and roles of drug substances in the body. This means that new approaches can be considered for drug testing. The author believes that a ban on animal testing will make it easier for companies to use bioassays and computational modeling to test their drugs. Sudin stresses the need for alternatives to these practices and testing approaches.
Conclusion
Animal researches are widely used to test the effectiveness of drugs and other products. The practice is vital in the production of new drugs and substances for human use. However, most of these researches will cause enormous to the study animals. The lifespan of the animal is destroyed by these tests and experiments.
Different groups and activists have argued that it is wrong and unacceptable to cause these animals unnecessary pain. This calls for the best practices to safeguard the rights of these animals. This has resulted in a controversy with the government seeking to ban companies from testing on various animals. As discussed in this paper, the idea to ban these practices will force companies to seek new alternatives to safeguard their business.
Works Cited
Bhattacharya, Sudin. “Toxicity Testing in the 21St Century: Defining New Risk Assessment Approaches Based On Perturbation Of Intracellular Toxicity Pathways.” Plos ONE 6.6 (2011): 1-11. Print.
Fischer, Kristian. “Testing Bans and Marketing Bans Under The Cosmetics Directive.” European Food & Feed Law Review 4.3 (2009): 172-184. Print.
Hartung, Thomas. “Toxicology For The Twenty-First Century.” Nature 460.7252 (2009): 208-212. Print.
Pocha, Jehangir S., and H. Brown. “Comparative Advantage.” Forbes 178.10 (2006): 76-78. Print.
Stachura, Sheree. “Drug Safety: An Argument To Ban Animal Testing.” Journal Of Nursing Law 12.4 (2008): 147-156. Print.
Watson, Stephanie. Animal Testing: Issues and Ethics. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2009. Print.