Where to Draw the Line: Human vs. Animal Testing
A unique topic that I have come across is the comparison between human and animal testing. There have not been many surveys that analyze the ethical discrepancies between the two. What is ok to test and develop on animals? What is ok to test and develop on humans? Is it acceptable to use animals to test for human medicine?
Think about the possibility for a ground breaking cancer therapy drug. Imagine there has been some sort of new discovery in the lab regarding this. But, to further bring it to the market it must be tested on humans. This could either result in a success, one in which the drug does as intended and has significant impacts on hindering the growth of cancer cells. Yet, on the other hand, it could make the patients it is tested on severely ill, or even cause death. Would this be something that you would promote? Now, replace every bolded word in the previous sentences with “animal”. Did your answer change? For a lot of people, the answer is yes.
The differences in answers could be from a number of reasons. Some people have different responses are because of race, class, religion, or level of education. Perhaps, someone with a greater knowledge of science would be more adamant about this testing. On the other hand, someone’s religion may inhibit them from promoting such a test. Maybe the region you grew up in, one with a strongly conservative background, raised you to have certain morals that make you extremely opposed to this.
Ultimately, there is some line that is drawn, but where does this exist? Why is that some people are more compassionate for the lives of humans rather than animals. The genetic makeup of a chimpanzee and human are rather similar. Yet, people remain to have totally opposing opinions about the development of drugs with each as test subjects. Animals have the ability to reproduce, feel compassion, pain, happiness and communicate with one another. Similarly, we as humans, have all of those same characteristics. Two important differences are communication and brain development. It is obvious, we are not able to communicate in English with an animal and hear an intelligent response in the same language. But, is this the defining barrier between using animals as test subjects vs. humans? In addition, we are the most advanced organism on the planet. But, do our capabilities allow us to strip other species that aren’t as developed from their basic rights?
There are many ways to digest these questions. Personally, I have yet to identify with one side or the other. The more try to understand one side, I convince myself the alternative is a better option. I understand that as humans we can be ignorant and blind to the destruction that we are able to cause. In this case, I do have sympathy for these animals. Yet, I also understand the importance of preserving our own species, and sometimes taking extreme measures may be the best way to do this. I am curious to hear how some people feel about this, and their argument to support either side. There is not one right answer, making these discussions extremely difficult.