Animal Medical Testing
Animals are often used in the testing of medicines and medical procedures prior to trials involving
humans. Scientists test the efficacy and safety of treatments using animals to simulate the possible
effects on humans. This method of testing treatments has been employed for over two thousand years,
with the earliest known references to animal testing dating back to the 4th century BCE. Even
Aristotle, the famous Greek philosopher and scientist, wrote about his experiments involving medical
procedures on living animals. Since then, animals have been used extensively in testing various
medical treatments throughout the world. One of the most dramatic instances of animal medical
testing was Dr. Jonas's discovery of a vaccine for polio in the early 1950s. At the time,
polio was one of the most feared diseases, killing thousands every year and infecting many times
more, with those lucky enough to survive often left with severe disabilities. Before testing his
vaccine on humans, Jonas experimented on rhesus monkeys, purposefully exposing them to the virus in
order to determine if they had been made immune by the vaccine. Once available to the public,
Jonas's vaccine was a massive success and has been credited with saving countless lives.
Despite the benefits of the medicines and procedures that have been tested on animals, some have
argued that the means do not justify the ends. Opponents of animal medical testing condemn the pain
and torment inflicted on test subjects, which are often purposefully infected with diseases, given
massive doses of toxic chemicals, or exposed to harmful conditions. Additionally, laboratory animals
are often put down after the completion of the studies in which they were involved. For generations,
figures both inside and outside the medical community have argued that these procedures are
unethical, and that regulations must be put in place, or, if they are already extant, made more
rigorous.
It was in 1876 that the first law specifically regulating experimentation on animals was enacted in
the UK, the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876. Under the Cruelty to Animals Act, researchers could only
perform painful procedures on animals if the experiments were absolutely necessary in order to "save
or prolong human life." However, opponents of vivisection saw this early law as weak in its
regulatory force, as it established no restrictions on the licensing of those qualified to carry out
animal experimentation. Consequently, medical students continued to campaign for legislation better
mandating humane treatment of laboratory animals, although the act was not replaced or significantly
modified until over a century later, when the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 was passed.
However, animal experimentation in certain forms has continued, as has its opposition.
The reason for its persistence is clear. When done on animals, medical tests are often at the stage
where toxicity and other side effects are still unknown. Proponents of animal testing in research
argue that using people at these early stages could endanger human lives. Additionally, animal
testing allows researchers to tightly control the subjects' environments and monitor all conditions
to which they are exposed. The animals are often watched around the clock and given daily
examinations. This level of control ensures that researchers are able to isolate the effects of the
studied treatment independent of unknown environmental factors, which would not be possible in tests
involving humans. Perhaps the strongest contention from those in favor of animal medical testing is
that the technique has saved countless lives, as in the case of the polio vaccine. Albert Sabin,
one of the researchers working with Dr. Jonas in the 1950s, has said that "without animal research,
polio would still be claiming thousands of lives each year." Another commonly cited example lies
in the work of Dr. Albert, who succeeded in replacing faulty human heart valves after
experimenting on dog hearts in the 1960s. This procedure was far too risky to have been performed on
humans before the technique was perfected. Currently, around 300,000 people receive heart valve
replacement surgery each year, allowing them to live longer and healthier lives. As alternative
testing techniques have yet to rival the efficacy shown by animal testing in such historical medical
milestones, the practice has persisted despite continued controversy.