Maybelline, Axe, Dove, Colgate, Pampers, etc. These everyday products are the cause of the death of millions of animals around the world. Products that consumers casually rub into their hands and hair or wear to dress their babies were first used on animals. Simple trial and error over and over to get to exactly what people do to perfect their products. Animal rights have been a controversial topic for many years in the past and are still an issue today. There is debate as to whether it was humane enough for Greek physician-scientists like “Aristotle and Erasistratus to experiment on live animals.” Greek physicians experimented on animals to gain a greater understanding of “anatomy, physiology, pathology, and pharmacology.” Over 100 million animals have died from testing alone. Animals of all kinds are shocked, burned, blinded, and even starved just so scientists can test human products on them. Many believe that the benefits of animal testing outweigh the disadvantages because it means fewer human lives are at risk. Several countries such as “Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany have also banned the use of animals in cosmetic testing” to make the tests slightly more humane, but the issue still remains at hand. Animal testing should not be allowed; It's not accurate, it's cruel, and it's unnecessary. The big question is: Is animal testing really worth all these cruel and disheartening deaths? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay There is plenty of evidence to show that animal testing does not mean products are safe for use on humans. Animals are different both inside and out, and while they may be somewhat similar to humans, they are still ultimately different. The Food and Drug Administration reports that ninety-two percent of drugs approved for use in humans have failed testing to actually be used by people. The FDA's purpose is to protect public human health from harm. This includes potential hazards such as cosmetic products, medical devices, drugs and foods. It is proven that even if something is safe for a monkey or rabbit, it is not good for a person. Many would argue that animal testing should be allowed because it will reduce the risk of losing a human life and a human being is worth more than an animal. Animal research has contributed to the discovery of some solutions to diseases and new drugs, such as the discovery of insulin taken from the pancreas of dogs. However, even if people ignore the feelings of a laboratory rat, the results of laboratory experiments cannot be denied. In a test where ninety-three different reactions occurred related to forty-three drugs with different molecules, only 19% were shown when used on animals. It is too great a risk to allow humans to consume or use medicines that have not been fully discovered. Another argument is that some animals share a large percentage of the same DNA as humans. Studies show that genetically chimpanzees share ninety-nine percent of their DNA with humans and mice ninety-eight percent. The belief that all mammals descend from the same ancestor leads to the belief that the organs and body systems of these animals are the same as those present in the human body. The biggest risk they takeScientists are not using imperfect products on people, but believe they can replace a human with a small, furry mammal. If 81% of the side effects do not occur in animals but in people, the purpose of these experiments is completely defeated. A drug called thalidomide was used in the 1950s and 1960s as a sleeping pill and to treat morning sickness during pregnancy, however, it caused several thousand babies to be born with deformities, such as phocomelia, a congenital deformity in which the limbs are very underdeveloped. It was tested on animals before being released to pregnant women in many different countries and was even advertised as completely safe and how the makers had failed to find a dose high enough to kill a mouse. Even if this was decades ago, it doesn't change the fact that scientists still run the risk of assuming that something safe in animals is also safe for people. It would be equally cruel to harm a being who was not even born. There are several products that may not affect a pregnant animal, but will affect a pregnant woman and her unborn child. A standard test on pregnant rats can only identify about sixty percent of harmful or dangerous substances that can affect a developing baby. Cell tests have 100% accuracy in identifying any harmful substances. Even if hundreds of tests were done on a pregnant rat, cat or monkey, some things simply won't show up. If a scientist were so sure that all the effects on a rat were the same as they would on a child, they would be putting even more lives at risk than if it were tested on a human to begin with. The Earth has given so much, for us to repay it by killing creatures and testing them for no essential reason is simply cruel. Earth is home to many wonderful and unique organisms. Poaching of organisms for selfish reasons can result in the loss of biodiversity, which ultimately harms humans too. People rely on animals to survive, both for food and shelter. People should not rely on animals for their selfish desires. In 1959, Russell and Burch introduced the three Rs, and it's not about reduce, reuse and recycle; which is a commonly known phrase for reducing the amount of waste produced. They introduced substitution, reduction and refinement. Replacement means avoiding or replacing the use of animals. Complete replacement would mean completely avoiding the use of animals and relying solely on human volunteers, human cells and tissues, and computer models and simulations. Partial replacement involves the use of animals, but only animals that are not considered capable of feeling pain, such as invertebrates. The pharmaceutical industry uses the majority of drugs, constantly developing new and improved drugs without the use of animals. They use molecular biology, computer simulations and robotics to screen and choose any other potential drugs and medicines. Reduction means minimizing the number of animals used in each experiment. Scientists can share data and resources with other groups to reduce the number of animals used. They can also share the same animals so that everyone can study the effects of a drug they are using. Instead of using thousands of rats for different chemicals or drugs, only a few rats should be used to study the products scientists are working on. This method allows you to gather more information to maximize eachanimal. If the number of animals used were too low, the results would not be very reliable and more tests would need to be performed to gather complete information. On the other hand, if too many animals are used to repeatedly test the same product, resources and animal lives are wasted needlessly. The purpose of reduction is to do more with less. Refinement means “to minimize pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm that may be experienced by research animals.” Refinement is not only better for the animals, but it is also better for the scientists because the amount of stress the animals are subjected to can definitely change the results they provide. Animals and humans are given anesthetics before surgery and are given painkillers afterward. The same should be done for the tested animals to minimize suffering. The painkillers may not save them from all the pain they will have to endure, but at least they will die in a more humane way. “The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported in 2016 that 71,370 animals suffered pain during experiments without receiving any anesthesia for relief, including 1,272 nonhuman primates, 5,771 rabbits, 24,566 guinea pigs, and 33,280 hamsters.” . It is clear that the smaller the mammal, the more they are tested. Just because an animal is smaller does not mean its life is less valuable than that of another. They feel the same pain and suffer the same conditions. Improving their living conditions is called “environmental enrichment”. Dogs, rabbits, rats, etc. they are all very social animals. They should be kept in groups so that they have a chance to socialize. While they are not being used, they should be given toys to play with, comfortable homes to live in, and a healthy diet. All animals should have the right to live adequately to increase their enjoyment. In vitro tests use cells and tissues in Petri dishes to research how cells would react. This method could be used to test chemicals, drugs, skin products and toxicology. “The development and testing of vaccines – for rabies and polio, for example – have been radically changed and improved by the use of cell cultures instead of live animals.” Studying cells in Petri dishes would produce more relevant and accurate results because human cells can be used. If there is a faster and more efficient way to get things done, it should be used to save time and money. The microfluidic test uses chips that contain tissues from different parts of the body connected “via microchannels through which a blood substitute flows, mimicking pathways and processes in the body.” Many people have donated human tissue so that it can be experimented on. This way, it's at least voluntary instead of forced. It also does not cause pain to any living being because it is not on an actual human being. Companies like EpiDerm and ThinCert have created artificial human skin made from sheets of human skin cells grown in plastic tubes or wells. The results and information that would be provided through testing on human skin would be far better than on animal skin. After all, the products would only be used on humans. Another alternative method is microdosing, which means that a human can be tested but not harmed. Microdosing means giving someone small doses of a drug that are large enough to affect cells but not the entire body or the person themselves. Through this method, scientists can study how a cellhuman reacts to a new drug and/or chemical substance. This is definitely a better option because the point of testing on something living is to see what effects it will have. Of course, no rabbit will take cough medicine or use eyeliner, so it's best to test it on a person who will potentially use those things for "best results." Finally, the use of computer models and human simulations can replace the use of animals. This method uses “virtual human organs, metabolic programs, and other computer- and mathematics-based approaches to study the structure, functions, and reactions of the human body.” It can be used to study and test the effects and uses of new technologies and how “new drugs will react in the human body” without endangering anything or anyone. It can replace animals by making “sophisticated” estimates on the probability that a substance is dangerous. There are human simulations that are so realistic that they can “breathe, bleed, convulse, talk, and even “die.” Students are taught “physiology and pharmacology” through human simulations so that they don't have to hurt anything during an experiment but are still able to freely test their abilities and new products. If students can learn from its use, scientists will be able to use it to test a new drug to see what kind of reaction it would give. Using trial and error they can find out how much of each dose a person should take or how often should take these doses. We are unnecessarily cruel to these animals. These animals spend their entire lives deprived of love, happiness and joy. Although they are not human, people tend to forget that they too have feelings and emotions They feel pain like us and it's too much to forcefully drop poison into their eyes or burn their skin. They spend their entire lives behind a small cage, hungry, unloved and ignored. “US law allows animals to be burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, drowned, addicted to drugs, and brain damaged.” The use of painkillers of any kind during or after any experiments is not required. Although there are some scientists willing to use painkillers, many choose not to pay much attention. These animals are infected with diseases they would not normally contract, small mice develop tumors as large as their own bodies, kittens are deliberately blinded, rats are made to suffer seizures, and primate skulls are opened and electrodes are implanted. . Force-feeding is inhumane, cruel and degrading. The animals have food forced down their throats while being held down. Their heads are split so that wires can be attached to their brains, their bodies are mutilated and their spines crushed. Video footage has been taken from inside some of these laboratories, and in the videos the animals are shown cowering in unknown fear every time someone passes by. These animals cannot know if they will be dragged out of their tiny metal cages to be injected with another poison or if they will have their heads smashed. Even if it's not their turn to undergo surgery, they can definitely hear the painful cries of their animal companions. The fear that comes from squealing and crying for help instills more fear in other animals who are potentially next in line. Every time they are taken out of their cages means they will be injected, undergo a procedure, surgery and, ultimately, death. Every day is a battle between life and death. A 2017 study showed other flaws such as “misinterpretation of.