Scientific research and testing has been performed on animals for hundreds of years.  The general public believes this sacrifice is needed for the welfare of the human race.  Animals used in experimental procedures are subjected to inhumane eugenics for the entire duration of their short and miserable lives.  This controversial issue is extremely relevant to those entering the healthcare field.  Will you be comfortable taking a life when the research demands it?  Most researchers who have experience with this issue will tell you “Eventually you get used to it” or “After a while you stop feeling the remorse”.  Ignoring the problem will not solve it, in fact it only makes it worse.  But what if there was an alternative?  (This page may contain disturbing images.  If you believe they are too troubling to view…imagine how they feel).

Quick List of the Alternatives to Animal Testing [1]

  • in vitro
  • computerized patients/models/simulations
  • stem cell/genetic testing methods
  • microdosing humans
  • non-invasive imaging techniques

Benefits of non-animal testing [2]

  1. Reliability: for example, according to, experiments on animals revealed false assumptions about the links between fiberglass and cancer.  Only after studying human subjects did the Occupational Safety and Health Administration label fibers as cancerous.
  2. Cost-effective:  testing pharmaceutical drugs and their effects using animal subjects can take up to five years per substance as well as cost millions of dollars.  Non-animal alternatives, such as in vitro, are able to test hundreds of substances in a week for a fraction of the cost.  It is a huge misconception that developing non-animal alternatives prices are through the roof.
  3. It is the Right Thing to Do:  the most obvious benefit to non-animal alternatives, that unfortunately continues to be overlooked.  The general public does not know the extent of animal cruelty that occurs daily.  The over-breeding, the force feeding, the infliction of pain, burns, physical restraint, inhumane side effects, the ignorance of basic rights, the disrespect for life, the ignorance of their blatant suffering is a disgrace to our human intelligence.

“Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals. He sets them to work, he gives back to them the bare minimum that will prevent them from starving, and the rest he keeps for himself.”
-George Orwell, Animal Farm [3]


  1. “In Testing | Alternatives to Animal Testing and Research.” In Testing | Alternatives to Animal Testing and Research. New England Anti-Vivisection Society, 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
  2. “Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commerical Testing?” Explore Pros and Cons of Controverisal Issues., 2015. Web. 18 Sept. 2015.
  3. Orwell, George. Animal Farm. N.p.: n.p., 1945. Print.

3 thoughts on “Chapter 1: An Introduction to Animal Testing Alternatives

  1. Hello Sam,

    I really like your introduction because it hurts to imagine an animal’s life getting their life taken away because research demands it. I also believe that non-animal testing is the right thing to do because not only is it cost effective, but also because of reliability reasons. I feel like those who are doing the animal testing aren’t exactly thinking and feeling how the animals are feeling because they are the ones getting their life taken away. That’s cruel!! Everyone should be treated equally! My only question I have is, what made you interested in this topic?


  2. Hey Sam,
    Your subject is really interesting and unique. I agree we have done horrible things in the name of science to animals. Yet it is not necessary and we have effective alternative methods to testing our scientific result. However, if there is an extremely need to test on animals that otherwise would result in human disease or death, I think it should be allowed.


  3. Really interesting topic. I was one of those people who thought we have do torture animals to understand biology more. Your article just proved me wrong, and I am glad it did. My only concern is if it would be safe for new drugs not to get tested on animals. I know a new drug is tested in vitro and then vivo before testing it on humans. Would skipping the vitro part be Ok?
    Great intro, and looking to read you next post!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s