Pros and Cons of Using Animals for Commercial and Scientific Testing

Pros and Cons of Using Animals for Commercial and Scientific Testing ProCon.Org. Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing? 18 3 2020. .
The article explores in detail the pros and cons of using animals for commercial and scientific testing. It shows that the issue has split the world down the middle; some support it, and others are viciously opposed to it. The article seeks to identify which side outweighs the other, and to achieve this; it features the views of different individuals. The article seems inclined toward the idea that the practice is wrong. However, it does not conclusively outline what actions should be instituted to regulate or ban it altogether. The article is not in vain, though, because its findings could be used in the future to formulate guidelines on how to navigate the practice.
Doke, Sonali K. and Shashikant C. Dhawale. "Alternatives to animal testing: A review." Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal 23.3 (2015): 223-229.
The authors get underway by outlining the drawbacks associated with using animals for scientific experiments. Some of them, according to the authors, are ethical problems, the requirement of skilled manpower, and the element of time consumed in the experiments. As such, the article focuses on alternative methods that can effectively replace animal testing. In this view, the authors highlight the advantages accrued to the alternative methods, including time efficiency and cost-effectiveness. If the alternative approaches outlined in the article were to be implemented, they would significantly defuse the tension existing between proponents and opponents of animal testing.
Cheluvappa, Rajkumar, Paul Scowen and Rajaraman Eri. "Ethics of animal research in human disease remediation, its institutional teaching; and alternatives to animal experimentation." PRP 5.4 (2017).
In this article, the authors seem to implicitly suggest that the importance of animal testing in scientific experiments is profound. As such, it cannot be dispensed with. However, they hold that certain ethical standards must be observed while practicing it. These ethical standards are what the authors analyze extensively in this article. In this regard, the authors seek to show the importance of upholding ethical principles while using animals for testing. The article is a bit wanting because the authors have only restricted their research to developed countries. It would have been prudent to incorporate developing countries as well. Importantly, the article outlines the moral obligations that people have towards animals. In addition, it highlights the mandatory ethical principles that researchers must adhere to.
Martin, Angela K. "Animal Research that Respects Animal Rights: Extending Requirements for Research with Humans to Animals." Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31.1 (2022): 59-72.
The author of this article holds the opinion that animal rights do not, in any way, contradict the use of animal research. She actually contends that abolishing animal research would effectively deprive animals of their potential benefits, which would inevitably create an ethical problem. In light of the inevitability of animal research, the author contends that the ethical requirements guiding research using human beings should also be extended to animals. The article focuses extensively on how ethical requirements can be fully and effectively implemented. The recommendations entailed in the article would be useful in significantly reducing the stress and unnecessary deaths that animals undergo during testing. In essence, the implementation of the requirements would lessen the burden on animals.
Frasch, Pamela D. "Gaps in US Animal Welfare Law for Laboratory Animals: Perspectives From an Animal Law Attorney." ILAR journal 57.3 (2017): 285-292.
In this article, the author outlines the gaps in US animal welfare laws. Her endeavor has been necessitated by claims made by animal attorneys who feel that US animal laws are not only weak but also...