1. What is my thesis?
we should not experiment on animals.
2. What types of source am I using to defend my thesis?
I am using statistics, result of studies and article.
3. Are my arguments mostly based on evidence, logic or emotion?
I think that there are no argument that is based on emotion. My arguments are mostly based on evidence because I will mostly use result of study and statistics.
First of all, animal testing reveals cruelty and hurts experimental animals. Some people believe that experimental animals died without pain during testing. But, If we see animal testing process, we cannot say it. The animal testing process shows that seriousness and cruelty of animal experiments. For example, In research and testing, animals are subjected to experiments that can include everything from testing new drugs to infecting with diseases, poisoning for toxicity testing, burning skin, causing brain damage, implanting electrodes into the brain, maiming, blinding, and other painful and invasive procedures. Also, Anesthetization, intubation, and euthanasia are also common lab procedures which require extensive training and skill. When improperly performed, these procedures cause extreme pain and discomfort. Like this, Many experimental animals suffer from physical distress during testing. Besides, They suffer from mental anguish. For example, Many animal experiments utilize restraining devices, designed to prevent an animal from moving. Also, Animals in labs suffer severe stress from day-to-day laboratory life. They spend their lives in barren cages, unable to make choices or express natural behaviors. Most never experience fresh air or sunshine, only bars and concrete. They show abnormal behavior because of poor environment. These animal experiments show that laboratory animals don't be respected. The rights of animals as well as human rights should be respected. So, Most animals should not suffer from not only mental anguish but also physical distress during testing any more because experimental animals are living creatures and should be respected.
Next, Animal testing doesn't work. Some people think that animal testing is most accurate and reliable method because animals share many genes with humans. However, animals is not little human. They can be a human and human also can be animal. So, they cannot get human diseases. For example, Chimpanzees, animals with whom we share more than 98% of our DNA, don’t suffer from fatal forms of AIDS, hepatitis B or common malaria – diseases which kill millions of people every year. So, They can make poor data because animal testing cannot reflect human condition perfectly. The best-known example is thalidomide, used in the 1950s as a sedative and prescribed to treat morning sickness in pregnant women. Thalidomide was safe when tested in animals, but when used by mothers-to-be, led to birth defects in over 10,000 children. Moreover, Animal testing showed that penicillin was ineffective at treating infected rabbits (and was actually toxic to guinea pigs), yet later it proved safe and effective for treating bacterial infections in most humans. The animal experiments often show unreliable and unaccurate results. If use of animals on experiment continues, It can be a disaster to human because unreliable and unaccurate data can hurt a lot of people. So If real purpose of experiments is finding treatment for many disease and curing the human, we should not test on animals because animal experiment doesn't work.
Finally, There are various alternatives to animal testing. Nowadays, Many experts have stated to find alternatives that are appropriate to human because animal testing is cruel and unreliable. The alternatives that experts find are now more effective and accurate rather than animal testing. Also, they have a lot of good points. These alternatives to animal testing include that complicated experiments using human cells and tissues, advanced computer-modeling techniques and studies with human volunteers. For example, Harvard’s Wyss Institute has created “organs-on-chips” that contain human cells grown in a state-of-the-art system to mimic the structure and function of human organs and organ systems. The chips can be used instead of animals in disease research, drug testing, and toxicity testing and have been shown to replicate human physiology, diseases, and drug responses more accurately than crude animal experiments do. These alternatives makes results that are actually relevant to human bodies. Also, non-animal testing has a lot of benefits. For examples, Non-animal tests are more cost-effective and practical. 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. In sum, non-animal testing is more cost-effective and reliable while, animal experiments are unreliable and cruel. If we have more effective method, we don't have to experiment on animals.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기