Give Feedback

Wagner,Megan 1

Megan Wagner

March 24,2016

Abbott, Alison. "The Lowdown on Animal Testing for Cosmetics”. Nature (London),

11 Mar. 2009. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2206353/posts?page=7

Abbott gives a brief review on how European experiments are done on animals and the Cosmetics directive for their use. The main arguments she addresses is why the European Member States never approved the amendment. The main cause for this was apparently not having a second option to test the cosmetics. Abbott argues why the commission didn’t forbid the marketing of cosmetics tested on animals even without available alternatives. She goes on to talk about the procedure for getting new alternative tests approved and how the European Union compares with the rest of the world regarding this matter. Abbott goes on to talk about how money and politics are the main contributor to not being able to get the amendment passed quickly and effectively. Europe is a world leader in cosmetics which includes some of the world’s largest cosmetic manufacturers. She explains how it would have been difficult to get a political agreement to restrict such a profitable industry.

Abbott offers an in depth review of the European amendment against animal testing. She also explains what alternatives have been made for testing as well as deadlines for a possible total ban on animal testing in research facilities with cosmetics. I believe the main goal that Abbott was trying to get across was what goes on behind the scenes when trying to pass and approve an amendment of such standard when it comes to dealing with certain industries that bring in over a billion a year in revenue and the process that needs to happen to complete the goal.

Abbott has given insight on what is dealt with on how approving such an amendment takes its course. In many cases, especially when it comes to big box companies, we need to have alternatives before we completely stop another. This has taken on more of a political stance, and that is where Abbott has given some explanation on how it is done. Abbotts’s point of view throughout her article has given me the understanding I was looking for when regarding this debate and how it is looked at from the other views side.

Rowan, Andrew. (2011). Avoiding animal testing. The Scientist. 25 December 2011. ProQuest.

http://search.proquest.com.liblink.uncw.edu/docview/910872155?accountid=14606

In this article Rowan focuses on the development and adoption of alternatives to the use of animals in toxicology. He points out that advances in the development toxicology methods may allow us eventually to relax the regulations that require the use of animals in testing. Some of the topics that he covers is implying that such advances like improved cell-culture systems and micro analytic techniques could mean the end of animal use in laboratories by year 2050.

Rowan’s goal to this article was to bring informative insight to the topic regarding animal research. He explains how if we completely stop all research across the board without another alternative, then we would be ultimately disregarding what the research is used for. Such as the study of how cells in our bodies work, how they communicate, how they develop, and how they age and how they die. Rowan explains that without this knowledge there will be no hope to combat disease.

This article was helpful to see the scientific perspective and their approach on the term animal research. As difficult as it may seem to understand, scientists also believe we will see a day when we can eliminate the use of animals in all animal research. Rowan’s article has explained the progress and achievements of dedicated scientists, and not because of deception of those that want to oppose animal research at all cost.

 

Garrett, Jeremy R. The Ethics of Animal Research: Exploring the Controversy.

Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2012. Print.

In this book Garrett explores the ethical controversies that have arisen over animal research, examining closely the complex scientific, philosophical, moral, and legal issues involved. The book's careful blending of theoretical and practical considerations and its balanced arguments make it valuable for instructors as well as for scholars and practitioners.

This is a critically needed resource for students, professionals in science and ethics, and the general public. Garrett provides an exceptionally helpful framing of the issues and a rich selection of new work that will expand and elevate the debate. Garrett has shown that it is possible to move beyond polemics and have a productive exchange of ideas about the ethics of using animals in research.

Garrett’s book gives good exposure to other thoughts on this topic. I think the final chapter was the most insightful. However, the first half of chapter 15 was very interesting in terms of the FDA process and how this relates to the question of animal research.

Hester, R. E., and Roy M. Harrison. Alternatives to Animal Testing. Cambridge.

Royal Society of Chemistry, 2006. Print.

Hester and among many leading experts in the field discusses the issues involved and approaches that can be taken when it comes to animal testing and research. The topics that were talked about in this book were the safety evaluation of chemicals, international validation and barriers to the validation of alternative tests, in vitro testing for endocrine disruptors, intelligent approaches to safety evaluation of chemicals, alternative tests and the regulatory framework. The book provides an up-to-date discussion of the current state of development of alternatives to animal testing.

The chapters in this book are written by experts in the field who describe the progress made in applying the three R actions, which are reducing the use of animals, refinement of procedures that reduce pain and distress, and replacement of animals with alternative tests.

This book talks about an important topic that has been going on for a long time, especially within the media, as well as with broad humane, economic, legal, scientific, and political implications. This book will aid me in writing essay five and how it talks about the difficulties with international acceptance of validation regarding this topic.

Masterton, M., Renberg, T., & Kälvemark Sporrong, S. (2014).

Patients' attitudes towards animal testing: "to conduct research on animals is, I suppose, a necessary evil". BioSocieties. http://dx.doi.org.liblink.uncw.edu/10.1057/biosoc.2013.39

This book explained how animal research is used in the medical field to benefit and help patients by getting improved pain relief, and minimizing morbidity and mortality. The authors talked about studies that were conducted between patients and animals and how it showed the large statistical differences between patients and researchers regarding their attitudes towards testing animals commonly held as pets. It also explained how women were more critical than men when it came to which species were used for what purposes. The books goes on to explain how the moral basis for using animals in research needs to be further discussed by all stakeholders.

This book has evaluated the testing and research on animals in a different way by using towards patient care. Though many people are against animal research saying that it is considered cruelty to them as well as immoral and unethical, it also show how not using animals that are more commonly household pets seem to have more leniency. This kind of information is useful when it comes to patient care versus using animals in testing labs for cosmetics or for peoples own greed and self-gain.

The authors of this book have given insight to what animals can offer in the medical field for patients. It shows how patients should be considered as multi-stakeholders and whose views should be considered. The benefit to patients is often the main justification for subjecting non consenting beings to experiments and the opinion of patients on this kind of topic is very relevant.

Dolgin, E. (2010). Animal testing alternatives come alive in US. Nature Medicine.

http://dx.doi.org.liblink.uncw.edu/10.1038/nm1210-1348.

Dolgin expresses in this book how there is a broad push to develop alternative means for assessing the potential hazards of drugs towards animal testing. Dolgin explains since there has been several formations of new societies that are dedicated to finding nonanimal testing methods as well as government programs to assist in this, many experts see a change in the US policy.

While Dolgin goes on to explain how there is a significant drive to reduce animals in testing and research labs, there is equally a strong drive to get better information and to get it in an economically feasible fashion.

Dolgin has explained all the avenues when it comes to scientist finding specific genes to help with diseases which would then reduce the animals in testing labs. This is very important to the care to patients and to society.

Carroll, Marilyn E., and J. Bruce. Overmier. Animal Research and Human Health: Advancing

Human Welfare through Behavioral Science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001. Print.

In this book Carroll demonstrates how the interplay between human and animal research has led to significant advances in diverse areas of psychology. In her book she addresses the value of her research by several leading experts who describe the use of laboratory animal models for studying societal problems such as anxiety, stress, aggression, depression, drug abuse, and dementia.

This book will aid wanting to know information and complexities underlying the origins of people’s fears, phobias, and anxiety state through animal research. The book steers more towards observational learning when it comes to animal testing.

Carroll’s research does describe the scientific point of view on how humans can benefit from all the research they do on animals prior to making any thesis. I believe to be helpful to human beings, drugs or any other form of care should be tested using human tissues, cells and organs to give a better understanding.

Metzger, Mitchell M. “Attitudes Toward Animal Research: Revisiting .” 

Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education 12.2 (2014): A154–A158. Print.

In this book Metzger gives a revised review on a commentary done by Gallup and Beckstead’s version in 1988 involving college student’s attitudes towards animal research. It showed that the participants were generally concerned about the welfare of animals used in such research. Though the book tries to explain its value and importance of conducting animal research, the participants still demonstrated significant concern for animal welfare.

The book gives a broad explanation of the differences obtained in studies done on animals. Metzger verbally strives to increase the quantity of proanimal research messages in order to enlighten college students about the benefits to society gain from animal research.

I think this book has given insight to a different side then what we normally see in media. You hear and see about the horrible things done to animals, but there is also some gain to it as well. Metzger explains this by suggesting that we educate students and people about the benefits of animal research and in return it may help counter the trends reported here.