Animal Testing

All of us have surely heard about PETA. PETA is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. So readers, you sure have guessed what this article is all about! Whenever you hear the word PETA, the first thing that flashes in your mind is "please no more animal testing!". Though it is a boon for science, on the other hand it is unethical as well. With new diseases cropping up on a daily basis, scientists, researchers and pharmacists rake their heads in finding cures for the already existing infinite incurable ailments. In such cases, animal testing becomes a necessary evil. Approximately, 50-100 million vertebrate animals (mice, rats, fish, dogs etc.) are tested for pure research in different fields (like genetics, behavioral studies and developmental biology). These results are of great help in making many drugs and medicines.

Experimenting with Animals: The Good and Bad

Experimenting on animals is one of the best means to understand the effects/side effects of chemicals within a living entity. One of the justifications for animal testing in the field of research, is that animals are more sensitive to changing conditions (be it a change in habitat or environment) and their sensitivity factor helps in acquiring accurate results in research of antibiotics and medicines.

Pros
Many vaccines for grave diseases like TB, rabies, polio, measles, mumps and rubella have been developed with significant help from animal research. Even antibiotics, HIV drugs, insulin and cancer treatments rely on the results from these studies. Open heart surgeries and organ transplants have been successful post this procedure. Animals like white mice, guinea pigs and rabbits are specifically bred in medical schools and pharmaceutical industries for animal experimentation, as these animals are highly sensitive to temperatures and surroundings. The reasons citing animal testing pros, in the medical and research perspective are listed below:

• Eye irritation (To determine the response of the eyes to external stimuli)
• Acute toxicity (To check for the reactions on exposure to chemicals, by consuming, inhaling or through skin)
• Skin irritation/sensitivity (To assess the potential risk of a substance that can cause mild irritation or severe damage to skin. Guinea pigs are used for this purpose.)
• Dermal penetration (To calculate the risk posed by a foreign substance in the bloodstream, which has been absorbed by the body through skin)
• Carcinogenicity (To check the reaction of carcinogenic or cancer causing agents within the body)
• Mutagenicity (Checking for any genetic mutation factors caused in the response stimuli)
• Neurotoxicity (This test aims at finding out if alterations in the nervous system occur because of foreign substances)
• Ecotoxicity (To determine if the environment is getting affected by negative effects of chemicals. Fish are used for testing.)
• Pyrogenicity (To check the level of elevated temperatures in an animal body due to bacterial organisms)

Cons
One of the famous controversial examples, I would like to cite here is the Draize eye test, which was carried out in 1944, by John H Draize PhD. (a scientist at United States Food and Drug Administration). The purpose of this test was to assess the irritation in the eye caused by various external factors (like chemicals). Rabbits were used for this test, where a substance was placed in an eye of the restrained rabbit, letting the other eye control the reaction. Hence the natural response to the stimuli was prevented and the reaction in eyes was assessed after an hour. The same procedure was repeated for an interval 1-14 days. The level of irritation was calculated, based on the observation of cornea, conjunctiva and iris of the eye. It was observed that the tested rabbit suffered redness in eyes, bleeding in eyes and blindness in extreme testing. At the end of the experiment, the tested animal was killed to relieve it from suffering. This test was criticized for the inhuman approach towards the rabbits. Also there is a significant difference in the eye structure of the mice and humans. Hence the test was not acclaimed much but became popular in an infamous way for the cold blooded tactics used in the research. Today, also most of the animal testing methods are carried out in such manner.

One of the major animal testing cons is that it is a costly affair. The costs incurred in animal breeding in captivity, housing, feeding, caring, testing and treatment with drugs are quite high. The genuineness of these experiments become questionable when the testing does not yield the desired results. So at the end of animal testing cycles, many animals actually die without a justification (that the purpose of the research was served). The debate is getting stronger by the day and many people deem it absolutely unethical. It is not just about medical grounds alone, but most of the animal testing is also done from cosmetic perspective which questions the sensitivity of humans towards animals.

Animal testing, as can be observed has its own pros and cons. Scientific research and medical science does require testing with animals. To what extent, is the question that bothers.No matter how much this testing is required, some disturbing questions yet go unanswered!

• Is it fair to subject animals to despicably cruel methods of testing, to produce results which may or may not be effective on humans?
• Is it fair to inject external genes into these animals to be tested in animal experimentation processes, bringing unfavorable genetic mutations in them?
• Are animal rights that unimportant?

A thought to ponder! Science has its inevitable dead ends too! While I conclude, I would like to reminisce a beautiful statement made by Albert Schweitzer ~ "Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight". His lines just summed it all! The pros and cons of animal testing is a contentious debate, and the take, no wonder is tough!!