lternatives In Testing
http://www.neavs.org/alternatives/in-testing
My Topic:
we should not experiment on animals
What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to find good points of non-animal testing.
Notes:
1. Alternative scientific tests are often more reliable than animal tests.
For example, experiments on rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, mice, monkeys, and baboons revealed no link between glass fibers and cancer. Only after human studies was found to be more accurate in identifying chemical skin irritants than traditional animal tests. In comparison studies, EpiDerm correctly detected all of the test chemicals that irritate human skin, while tests on rabbits misclassified 10 out of 25 test chemicals—a full 40% error rate.
2. The use of human tissue in toxicity testing is more accurate than the animal models.The “Lethal Dose 50” (LD50) test forces animals to ingest toxic and lethal substances to the endpoint of where 50% of the animals in the study die—and those that do not are later killed. The late Dr. Bjӧrn Ekwall (Cytotoxicology Laboratory in Sweden) developed a replacement for the LD50 test that measured toxicity at a precision rate of up to 85% accuracy compared to the LD50 rate of 61-65%.
3. Non-animal tests are more cost-effective, practical, and expedient.The traditional testing of chemicals using animals can take up to five years per substance and cost millions of dollars, while non-animal alternatives can test hundreds of chemicals in a week for a fraction of the cost.
4. Cruelty-free products are more environmentally friendly. In toxicity testing, researchers breed, test, and ultimately dispose of millions of animals as pathogenic or hazardous waste. Cruelty-free testing is less harmful to the environment or creates less waste.
Final Thoughts:
Through this sources, I can know that benefit of non-animal testing. And, I can combine this sources with alternatives to animal testing in my essay! Also, I believe that non-animal testing is more effective in various aspecst.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기