Why do scientest choose animal testing?

Question

i need to know! its driving me crazy. i cant find the answer anywhere
like money reasons or something?
and please provide a source
thank you!

Answer 1

from a web site I have based some of my own presentations on:

Ethical Issues – Animals in Scientific Research

Scientists have strong ethical, economic and legal obligations to use animals in research only when absolutely necessary. A lot of effort goes into trying to reduce the numbers of animals used, and trying to develop new methods to replace animals.

Non-animal methods - tissue culture, computer modelling, studies of patients and populations - are very widely used. The word alternatives, often used to describe these non-animal methods, can lead to confusion because these methods are generally used alongside animal studies, not instead of them. All these techniques have their place, and it is rarely possible to substitute one for another.

Why is the use of animals necessary?

There are stages in any research programme when it is not enough to know how individual molecules, cells or tissues behave. The living body is much more than just a collection of these parts, and the need to understand how they interact or how they are controlled is essential. There are ethical limits to the experiments that we can perform in people, so the only alternative is to use the most suitable animal to study a particular disease or biological function.
****
I will give you a real life axample. I was working on a project to create a better kind of flu vaccine- one that would be effective against all strains of flu, not just the ones that arise every year. In order to do this, we needed to study the body's immune response at a molecular level, and also study the migration of the virus and immune cells through the course of infection. You cannot do this type of research without looking at a living system. Computer models, cell cultures, etc.- these will not tell you about the interaction with the respiratory system, or tell you at what time the virus is located in the bronchial tubes. Thus, we used mice innoculated with the flu, and experimental vaccines, to determine what the systemic response was, and what dose was effective.

Another real life example is a project to introduce a malaria vaccine into milk goats, for the developing world. It should be obvious why this kind of work must be done using animals!

Answer 2

It is a sad fact that animal testing and vivisection are still needed for certain medical procedures and research.

Dr. F. John Lewis (head surgeon, performed the first open heart surgery in 1952, Lillehei assisted) experimented on hundreds of dogs before his pioneering open heart surgical (using hypothermia) techniques on a human child. Dr. Lewis was very careful not to allow suffering in the dogs he used.

I can only hope that this type of research also benefits the animal kingdom as a whole. Advanced veterinary medicine at the Colorado State University uses human medical techniques on animals -- obviously adapted for the various species. But it couldn't happen in the first place without the death of many animals in many experiments.

Over all, I don't like vivisection, but it's a necessary evil. Great care should be exercised to prevent suffering.

In many experiments it is cheaper not to use animals, for instance in the testing of cosmetics. Using lab-grown tissue takes fewer resources.
.

Answer 3

mostly to do with cost and genetic variability. drugs are initially tested on animals because they are in a much more mass quantity than humans and cheaper to work with. animals at the end of a drug test are always sacrificed to analyze the drug effects on body tissues, blood, etc. also, mice or rats are initially used to test on because they come from a known genetic strain that can be linked to other labs. this is important because one lab can run a test on the "same" animal as another lab and can consider the results the same because there is virtually no genetic variability.

Answer 4

In my opinion, certain products require some proofs that they are safe before testing on humans ( clinical trials ). Since there's no way to test on human first, the closest anatomically & physiologically equivalent would be mammals. There are also products such as insecticides & pesticides that cannot succeed without testing on insects ( also part of animal kingdom in bio. ) Practically speaking, if you have a product that shows it works in lab, but unknown in human & there were no animal study, would you try it?

Answer 5

They usually dont test animals they really dont need too. Most things are tested on bacteria now a days cause they can row it and theres an numerous amount applicale to them. If the animals to get tested they are highly pampered, with bacteria you dont have to pamper them. And then again, were not allowed to test on humans.

Answer 6

Ani,mals can't talk or scream thus they make good creatures to experiment on. Usually the researches cut the vocal cords of the animals prior to cuttin the animal anyway.

Like the japanese did to the Koreans in WW11.

Answer 7

Because its unethical to do chemical tests on disabled people - you monster.

Answer 8

There are many reasons.
http://www.gsk.com/research/about/about_animals.html

http://www.uky.edu/~cperring/animals.htm

http://www.indiana.edu/~p1013447/dictionary/anireset.htm

http://www.aalas.org/association/animal_research_faqs.asp

http://www.the-aps.org/pa/animals/quest1.html

Answer 9

didnt you ever stick a firecracker in a frog's ***?

Answer 10

They should use each other....what a waste that would be....