Animals! Not Lab Experiments
The importance of prohibition of animal testing and how it can save thousands of lives of innocent animals.
The use of animals for animal testing has created a diverse range of attitudes wherein some individuals support the use of animals in research and others are against it. Either way, the debate over animal testing has gained much popularity in recent decades. Ross Andersen successfully illustrates the arguments of animal testing through the use of strong evidence and logical appeal- animal consciousness; whereas, Swetha Srinivas Murali fails to convince her point due to her lack of credibility.
In Ross Andersen (2019) “A Journey into the Animal Mind” published in The Atlantic, talks about consciousness specifically, animal consciousness. Ross Andersen states that consciousness is that mysterious interior state of awareness one feels during every waking moment. He argues regarding the state of awareness that exist among animals in the quote “For many scientists, the resonant mystery is no longer which animals are conscious, but which are not” (Andersen, 2019, para. 8) where he says animals were seen as unfeeling automatons. Andersen continues by stating- many just assumed consciousness evolved recently and scientists are finding evidence of an inner life in many kinds of animals and not just the obvious but alien-seeming creatures that evolved on distant limbs of life’s tree.
The evolution of consciousness was a cosmic event that opened up possibilities not previously contained in nature and this may have happened more than a half billion years ago as the result of some sea-floor arms race between predator and prey.
The author feels scientists deserve a lot of credit for illuminating this new dimension of our reality but they can’t tell us how to do it right because we appear to share the Earth’s surface- that’s a philosophical problem. On the other hand, Ross concludes by explaining how Indian Jain’s had taken animal consciousness seriously as a moral matter for nearly 3,000 years and were the first culture to extend mercy to animals. Ross also gives examples of his visit to India to see their animal hospitals and places of worship and to think through animal consciousness in their midst.
Ross Andersen (2019) successfully asserts that this article is as much about humans as animals and through science and travel he explores the different ways people understand our place in the world and how little we truly know. I agree to this article that animal consciousness is undoubtedly a prominent issue in the modern world. Ross Andersen’s careful study of Jains, saying “Jains move through the world in this gentle way because they believe animals are conscious beings that experience, in varying degrees, emotions analogous to human desire, fear, pain, sorrow, and joy” (Andersen, 2019, para. 8) shows that Jainism’s highest commandment forbids violence not only against humans, but also against animals which the author stresses throughout the article. However, this particular reference to Jain’s has lead me to consider that maybe we need to move beyond our human desires to find the answer to this question ‘Animal consciousness -does it truly matter?’ instead, perhaps we should focus our energies into investigating policies that will ensure that all animals, conscious or not, are treated with the care and respect they deserve as cohabitants of our planet.
The article “Animal- based research is still relevant and necessary” by Swetha Srinivas Murali (2012) published in The Conversation, is about animal research being necessary for tackling the major health, environmental and economic issues of our times. Murali states that “But, what most scientists study are evolutionarily conserved physiological processes, that is, processes that are similar across different species.” (Murali,2012) making a point about effectiveness vs ethics being very important. She feels that animal rights campaigners always come up with the argument that animal research is at best unnecessary and at worst misleading, but is simply untrue.
Murali’s emphasis on these examples might be considered useless, misleading studies by cherry-picking the evidence, but she feels that there is an enormous amount of research beneficial to humankind that would not have been possible without animal studies.
I do not agree with this article of Murali as I feel that a whole lot of research is carried out where the benefits no way justify the treatment of the animals involved. “Researchers are very aware that animals aren’t people. Obviously animal responses aren’t the best possible predictor of treatment effects or side-effects in individual humans” (Murali, 2012) clearly states that scientists are ethically deluded when it comes to animal testing, if they think because there is something they want to find out, and they can only find it out by experimenting on animals, it is morally unjustified, it is just a monstrous idea when you think about it. Unfortunately, the Code of Practice expresses this delusion of research on animals when the activity is essential to obtain and establish significant information relevant to understanding of humans and/or animals. I also submit that this is the perspective of most animal experimenters and it is that animals are for our use, and as long as you don’t cause them pain and suffering, you can do whatever you like to them — chop them up, modify their bodies, break them, burn them, inject them with diseases and toxins and ultimately terminate their lives. This is the mindset that has to change. This video by VICE News shows rare access to Europe’s largest primate testing facility, the Biomedical Primate Research Center (BPRC) in the Netherlands
Final Opinions
In conclusion, Swetha Srinivas Murali fails to contradict arguments of animal testing due to her lack of credibility; however, Ross Andersen effectively persuade that with animal consciousness the benefits do not outweigh the disadvantages, and testing on animals should not continue. Although it may improve the lives of humans, it is not fair that animals should suffer in order to achieve this. The significance of this analysis was to show how important prohibition of animal testing is and how it can save thousands of lives of innocent animals.
