Speech
Distinguished guests, ladies, and gentlemen, I appreciate your presence today.
Today, I stand before you to discuss an issue that has been the subject of heated and moral
debate: Should animal testing be allowed? I believe we must stand up and speak out against this
archaic and unethical practice.
First, we can't ignore the moral and ethical aspects of animal testing. Like humans, animals can
feel pain and be scared. Putting them through invasive procedures, being kept in cages, or even
going so far as to cause death just for humans' benefit isn't right. These practices call into
question the responsibility we have as humans ethically toward the protection of other living
being. Just like we say "no" to human testing without consent, we should say "no" to animal
testing too.
One of the world's largest industries, the cosmetic industry, uses animals as test methods. We
are supporters of the industry because we are consumers of the industry. So, how can we say we
want to protect animals if we support an industry that uses them as test prototypes? The
industries evaluate with them how feasible the products are on the skin. Animals such as rabbits,
hamsters, or rats are used for skin irritation and toxicity test. They are subjected to harmful tests,
which leave irreparable damage to the animals.
Animal testing is not only unethical, but also its scientifically flawed. Even though animals are
like us, they have different genetic and physical traits that limit how they react to human
biology. Studies have shown that results from animal tests often don't accurately predict how
people will react. A clear example is thalidomide, which was successfully tested on animals and
deemed safe for use. However, in humans, it caused serious birth defects. Let us be aware that
using outdated and unreliable methods not only impedes scientific progress but also presents
risks to human health.
Fortunately, we are living in an era of extraordinary scientific advancements, and there are
alternatives to animal testing on the horizon.
"In Vitro" testing involves examining human cells and tissues under controlled laboratory
conditions, which promises to provide more precise and human-relevant information.
"In Silico" methods are sophisticated computer models that simulate human biology and disease
progression. Studies have shown that these models can be used to accurately predict how new
drugs will interact with the human body.
Studies with human volunteers have avoided cross-species problems. Micro dosing is a method
that can provide important information about the safety of a drug being tested. This method
involves administering a very small, one-time dose to volunteers and using advanced imaging
techniques to observe how the drug works in the human body. Brain imaging and recording
technologies can replace the old-school methods of damaging the brains of rats, cats, and
monkeys.
These alternative methods offer a humane and scientifically valid path forward, one that can
revolutionize our research approach and ensure safer and more effective outcomes.
It has been argued by critics that animal testing is necessary for medical progress and regulatory
requirements. While we recognize that animal testing has contributed to some medical advances
in the past, we must also acknowledge its limits and the potential of alternatives. Investing in
research and development to validate and incorporate both animal and human health and to
advance a more humane and compassionate society.
In addition, public opinion and changing societal values about animals can't be overstated. More
and more people are becoming aware of animal suffering in labs, and demand for alternatives
and products that are cruelty-free. As responsible citizens, we have a responsibility to bring our
research practices into line with our society's changing values. We have a chance to create a
culture of compassion, empathy, and respect.
In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, the ethical concerns, the scientific limitations, and the
alternative methods present compelling arguments to reject animal testing. We are at a turning
point in history where we can choose to prioritize progress based on empathy and scientific
integrity. Let's take advantage of this moment to advocate for humane and innovative research
processes that respect the natural rights and well-being of animals. We can build a future where
scientific advancement goes hand in hand with empathy and respect for all forms of life. Let us
say "no" to animal testing and lead the way for a better and more ethical tomorrow.
Thank you.
Bibliography:
Akthar, A. (2015). The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation. Cambridge
Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24(4), 407-419.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180115000079
Fundamentals: Research Animals. (s. f.). Faunalytics. Recuperado 18 de julio de 2023, de
https://faunalytics.org/fundamentals-research-animals/
Lobe Star College. (2020, mayo 3). Save the Animals: Stop Animal Testing |.
https://www.lonestar.edu/stopanimaltesting.htm
McArthur, J.-A. (s. f.). Taking Suffering Out of Science. The Humane Society of the United
States. Recuperado 18 de julio de 2023, de https://www.humanesociety.org/all-our-
fights/taking-suffering-out-science
Meredith, J. (2022, febrero 16). Is animal research ethical? Understanding Animal Research.
https://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/news/ethics-of-animal-research
Moran, E. (2014, julio 23). Alternatives to Animal Testing. Bite Size Vegan.
https://bitesizevegan.org/alternatives-to-animal-testing/
Science Museum. (2019, diciembre 11). Thalidomide.
https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/medicine/thalidomide
yourgenome. (s. f.). Should animals be used in research? Recuperado 18 de julio de 2023, de
https://www.yourgenome.org/debates/should-animals-be-used-in-research/
