Animal Testing Synthesis Promptttt Essay

Submitted By kayleepressley
Words: 5316
Pages: 22

Animal Testing
Synthesis Prompt
Madison Beaver
Sydney Buchanan
Olivia Drake
Kaylee Pressley


Internationally, animal testing is used for everything from
drugs to cosmetics. Over 100 million animals are tested in US
labs every year. Some people believe that animal testing is
cruel. Others, however, believe that animal testing is
necessary in order to advance medically and test products.
Carefully read the following six sources, then synthesize
information from at least three of the sources and
incorporate it into a coherent, well-developed essay that takes
a position on whether animal testing is or is not necessary in
the United States today.
Your argument should be the focus of your essay. Use the
sources to develop your argument and explain the reasoning
for it. Avoid merely summarizing the sources. Indicate clearly
which sources you are drawing from, whether through direct
quotation, paraphrase, or summary. You may site the sources
as Source A, Source B, etc.

Source A

Orlans, F. Barbara. In the Name of Science: Issues in Responsible Animal Experimentation. New
York: Oxford UP, 1993.

Using animals in research and to test the safety of products has been a topic of heated debate for
decades. According to data collected by F. Barbara Orlans for her book, In the Name of Science:
Issues in Responsible Animal Experimentation, sixty percent of all animals used in testing are used
in biomedical research and product-safety testing (62). People have different feelings for animals;
many look upon animals as companions while others view animals as a means for advancing
medical techniques or furthering experimental research. However individuals perceive animals, the
fact remains that animals are being exploited by research facilities and cosmetics companies all
across the country and all around the world. Although humans often benefit from successful
animal research, the pain, the suffering, and the deaths of animals are not worth the possible
human benefits. Therefore, animals should not be used in research or to test the safety of
First, animals' rights are violated when they are used in research. Tom Regan, a philosophy
professor at North Carolina State University, states: "Animals have a basic moral right to respectful
treatment. . . .This inherent value is not respected when animals are reduced to being mere tools in
a scientific experiment" (qtd. in Orlans 26). Animals and people are alike in many ways; they both
feel, think, behave, and experience pain. Thus, animals should be treated with the same respect as
humans. Yet animals' rights are violated when they are used in research because they are not given
a choice. Animals are subjected to tests that are often painful or cause permanent damage or
death, and they are never given the option of not participating in the experiment. Regan further
says, for example, that "animal [experimentation] is morally wrong no matter how much humans
may benefit because the animal's basic right has been infringed. Risks are not morally transferable
to those who do not choose to take them" (qtd. in Orlans 26). Animals do not willingly sacrifice
themselves for the advancement of human welfare and new technology. Their decisions are made
for them because they cannot vocalize their own preferences and choices. When humans decide
the fate of animals in research environments, the animals' rights are taken away without any
thought of their well-being or the quality of their lives. Therefore, animal experimentation should
be stopped because it violates the rights of animals. Next, the pain and suffering that experimental
animals are subject to is not worth any possible benefits to humans. "The American Veterinary
Medial Association defines animal pain as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience
perceived as arising from a specific region of the body and associated with actual or potential
tissue damage" (Orlans 129). Animals