History of Animal Testing: A Critical Analysis

Case Study
History of Animal Testing by ProCon.org (2020)
1

INTRODUCTION
Critical analyses refer to the process in which an investigator examines and analyses
sides and arguments which are about the topic. Studies refer to the process in which an
individual break downs the whole situation into many parts, and then it tries to analyse all the
arguments, purposes, and true meaning out of it. Critical analyses are used to get detailed
information about the ideas or the topic. It helps in gaining in-depth knowledge and learning
about the subject. The article which is provided is about “the animal testing” that gives the
favour opinions along with the arguments related to the this concept.
This report has provided critical analyses about a case study of the topic "history of
animal testing" by ProCon.org. This report discusses the evaluation of the arguments which has
been presented in the story. It also includes the examination of the sources where the information
has got retrieve along with their merits and demits. Apart from that, the report also consists of a
proper exam about the reviews which has been provided by the author in the article.
An understanding of logical reasoning to analyse the arguments presented in the given case
study.
The presented article is about "The History of Animal Testing". In that article, various
arguments have been introduced. The activity of testing animals for developing the proper
medicines was started in the year 500 BC. This activity is this old. Several animals get killed
every year by the researcher to perform study upon them.
Argument: The topic for killing the animals for the development of medicines for human
has both the favour and against audiences. Some people are in favour of this concept as they
believe that this is necessary for developing the treatments for humans if the medicines need to
work correctly upon human (Abdelhakim and Machado, 2019). Suppose can create not a lot of
side effect and harmfulness for humans.
Critical Analysis: These testing are necessary as they lead to the development of various life-
saving treatments for both animals and humans. Apart from this, the researcher says that there is
no other alternative which can be possible because to develop the medications and treatments
fundamental analyses about the life of living animals and human are necessaries. Also, there are
2

various rules and standards present, which could be lead to the prevention of the mistreatments
done with the animals. According to the information provided, the view point about the people
are in favour of the practice of animal testing is well putted as it is the only way to introduce the
treatments and medications to the humans. For the betterment of human lives the testing upon the
animals are necessary.
The other party of people who are in against animal testing activity consider it an
inhumane to kill the animals for the benefits of humans and takes this activity as a cruel thing to
perform. These people suggested that it has to be other methods also, which can replace the
action of the killing of animals for the development of medications and treatments. Through the
information the writer shows that there are percentage of people who are not in favour of the
practice of animal testing. They have the opinion that this practice is very cruel to the animals
and as humans it is our responsibility to take care to these animals also.
Argument: The United States had earlier passed a law in the year 1966, which also were
amended in 1970, 1976 and 1985. It states the actions and code of conduct that are needed to
take under consideration while performing the test upon animals. The law mentioned the animals
which can be used for research purpose. These may include dog, cat, guinea pig, rabbit, hamster
and other animals belong to the category of warm-blooded (Cox and Tam, 2018).
Critical analysis: Although the research organisation has set the proper standards, still
there are reports of more animal killing for investigation purpose. The words were also of killing
the animals which do not come into the category for research which may include the animals like
rats, mice, animals which are used as food, birds and so on. Many reports have been filed against
the killing of such animals, and it does come in the category of wrong killings of animals. The
information provided by the writer is very authentic and the standard set towards the testing upon
animals can be performed under the predefined law which regulates the activities. These rules
and regulations are a good way to regulates the activities performed for animal testing.
Argument: A survey was conducted for the topic of animal killing for testing. In that
survey, it has been found that around 56% of people consider animal testing a moral activity to
perform. At the same time, approximately 39% of people think it immorally wrong about the
movement of testing and killing of animals.
3