# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A model essay for students to use as a resource to help organize essays.

# data[].attributes.headline
this video shows someone testing some kind of spray on a hamster before buying it

# data[].attributes.subject
this video shows someone testing some kind of spray on a hamster before buying it

# data[].attributes.body
this video represents what happens to animals when they are tested

# data[].attributes.body
i chose this picture so people get a glimpse of what happens to animals in labs.

# data[].attributes.body
this shows why we should stop animal testing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What's wrong with animal testing? Poisoning, shocking, burning, and killing animals is all in a day's work for vivisectors. If these atrocious acts were committed outside laboratories, they would be felonies. But animals suffer and die every day in laboratories with little or no protection from cruelty.

Here are the top five reasons why it needs to stop:

It's unethical to sentence 100 million thinking, feeling animals to life in a laboratory cage and intentionally cause them pain, loneliness, and fear.

The National Institutes of Health reports that 95 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail in humans.

Animal experiments prolong the suffering of humans waiting for effective cures because the results mislead experimenters and squander precious money, time, and other resources that could be spent on human-relevant research. Animal experiments are so worthless that up to half of them are never even published.

Forward-thinking scientists have developed humane, modern, and effective non-animal research methods-including organs-on-chips, organoids, human-based microdosing, in vitro technology, human-patient simulators, and sophisticated computer modeling-that are cheaper, faster, and more accurate than animal tests.

5. It's unnecessary.

The world doesn't need another ridiculous, taxpayer-funded test on animals so that a university experimenter can keep riding the grant gravy train.

For everyday ways to keep animals out of cruel experiments, see PETA's list of surprising ways to help animals in laboratories.

" Without Consent," PETA's interactive timeline, features almost 200 stories of animals used in twisted experiments from the past century, including ones in which dogs were forced to inhale cigarette smoke for months, mice were cut up while still conscious, and cats were deafened, paralyzed, and drowned. Visit " Without Consent " to learn about more harrowing animal experiments throughout history and how you can help create a better future for living, feeling beings.
Learn more about vivisection on The PETA Podcast: Listen to more episodes on iTunes, Stitcher, and Spotify! Subscribe for new episodes.
Help Animals Via Text-Join PETA's First Responders!

All fields in bold are mandatory.

FormBuilder Form - 2415

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top Five Reasons to Stop Animal Testing | PETA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What's wrong with animal testing? Poisoning, shocking, burning, and killing animals is all in a day's work for vivisectors. If these atrocious acts were committed outside laboratories, they would be felonies. But animals suffer and die every day in laboratories with little or no protection from cruelty.

# data[].attributes.body
this article is about an animal lover wanting to ban animal testing

# data[].attributes.headline
this article is about using humans as testing rats instead of animals

# data[].attributes.subject
this article is about using humans as testing rats instead of animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The choice isn't between animals and people. There's no guarantee that drugs are safe just because they've been tested on animals. Because of the physiological differences between humans and other animals, results from animal tests cannot be accurately extrapolated to humans, leaving us vulnerable to exposure to drugs that can cause serious side effects. Drugs that sicken or kill animals don't always prevent a drug from being marketed. So much evidence has accumulated about differences in the effects that chemicals have on animals and humans that government officials often do not act on findings from animal studies. In the last two decades, many drugs, including phenacitin, Eferol, Oraflex, Suprol, and Selacryn, were taken off the market after causing hundreds of deaths and/or injuries. In fact, more than half the drugs that the Food and Drug Administration approved between 1976 and 1985 were either removed from the market or relabeled because of serious side effects. If the pharmaceutical industry switched from animal experiments to sophisticated non-animal tests, we would have greater protection, not less.

In addition to saving the lives of countless animals, alternatives to animal tests are efficient and reliable. Non-animal methods usually take less time to complete, can be conducted at a fraction of the cost of the animal experiments that they replace, and are not plagued with species differences that make extrapolation difficult or impossible. Effective, affordable, and humane research methods include studies of human populations, volunteers, and patients as well as sophisticated in vitro, genomic, and computer-modeling techniques.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
If we don't use animals, wouldn't we have to test new drugs on people? | PETA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The choice isn't between animals and people. There's no guarantee that drugs are safe just because they've been tested on animals. Because of the physiological differences between humans and other animals, results from animal tests cannot be accurately extrapolated to humans, leaving us vulnerable to exposure to drugs that can cause serious side effects.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Animal Testing for Products

Toxicity tests to estimate the safety of products and chemicals were developed in the early 20th century. These include experiments that subjectively measure the irritation of chemicals in the eyes or on the skin of rabbits (the infamous Draize test), and lethal dose (LD50) experiments that determine toxicity by the dosage of a chemical that kills half of the animals forced to consume, breathe or be injected with that chemical. These primitive animal testing methods are, regrettably, still in use today.

Many scientists continue to rely on animal testing, and regulatory agencies still mandate data collected from animal experiments, in large part because that is what tradition and current laws dictate. Toxicologists often mention feeling more comfortable basing their judgments on methods with historical context and data than on data from new and emerging methods. However, this maintaining of the status quo ignores the failure of animal tests to predict what is safe or effective in people while failing to recognize the advances made in non-animal testing methodologies. As a consequence, the lives of millions of our fellow creatures continue to be sacrificed, and our own safety compromised.

What Products Are Tested and Regulated?

Many items purchased and used by consumers every day, such as household cleansers, cosmetics, drugs and pesticides, are subjected to government regulations requiring that they be "safe" for humans, animals and the environment. Manufacturers are responsible for submitting safety test data to agencies, and this often involves conducting toxicity tests on the products and/or their ingredients before they enter the marketplace. Regulatory agencies determine whether the data are sufficient for labeling and marketing the product. The toxicity testing for many types of products still involves animal testing.

Described in Table 1 below are some of the U.S. regulatory agencies that have regulations requiring data to support product labeling and safety, largely based on animal toxicity test data, before certain types of products can be put on the market.

Other U.S. agencies may conduct a substantial amount of toxicity testing on animals as research to support their own missions or as part of an agreement with a regulatory agency.

Why Animal Testing is Used

Products are tested on animals for three reasons: safety (this includes correct product labeling), efficacy and liability. Many products undergo animal testing for safety to meet legal requirements to identify potential hazards to humans, animals and the environment. Even non-regulated products, such as cosmetics, are commonly animal-tested for safety for the purpose of liability. (Companies do not want to market a product that could result in legal claims.) Drugs intended for human or animal use are additionally tested for efficacy (i.e., effectiveness in treating a condition or disease). This testing typically involves animal models as well. For drugs, agency approval to conduct human testing in clinical trials typically requires a company to submit the results from animal testing data and toxicity data.

Current Tests

Most animal testing for toxicity is conducted using mice, rats and rabbits. Some tests required by the FDA or EPA also use dogs, primates and other species. Multiple toxicity tests are required to evaluate potential hazards for each product or chemical. The exact tests required can differ according to regulatory agency, product type and intended use/potential exposure.

Each test is based on a human health endpoint that is to be evaluated in the animal model. For example, human health endpoints evaluated in different types of toxicity tests include eye irritation, skin irritation, skin sensitization, carcinogenicity, genetic toxicity, neurotoxicity, reproductive toxicity and acute oral systemic toxicity.

Perhaps the most commonly known method of animal testing for toxicity is the Draize rabbit eye test, intended to predict whether a product or chemical would cause injury to the human eye. A reversible effect to the eye from a chemical is called eye irritation (or ocular irritation), and an irreversible effect that would result in permanent eye injury is called eye corrosion (or ocular corrosion). The Draize test involves placing a small volume of the substance into one eye of each rabbit in a small group of animals (typically three to six), and then recording specific effects observed in that eye over time (typically up to 21 days). The gross nature of this test and the likelihood of pain to the animals have evoked widespread public outcry against it. Scientifically, the test has been poorly reproducible, and not always predictive of the human response. The results are subjective and variable due to human scoring of the rabbit eye injuries, variations in the test method and other factors. Progress toward replacing this animal test with alternative non-animal test methods has been slow, disorganized and subject to political influences. However, a number of in vitro ocular test methods are now available, each with specific limitations, but the strategic testing lab can usually find a combination to address most testing needs.

The Draize test for skin irritancy, which was first introduced in 1944, has been used to measure the inflammatory response produced when a test substance is applied to the shaved and abraded skin of a group of rabbits, and can cause intense pain, burning and itching. (Skin is abraded by firmly pressing adhesive tape onto the animal's body and quickly stripping it off, and is repeated until several layers of skin have been removed.) The good news is that the use of this animal testing method has been largely replaced with validated alternative methods. The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Pesticide Programs, for example, relies on data from the Local Lymph Node Assay. Additionally, in 2015, several new in vitro methods were approved by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development for in vitro skin sensitization testing. Combinations of the in vitro methods using integrated testing approaches will be needed to substitute for the animal testing.

Another traditional animal toxicity test is the LD50 test, which stands for the lethal dose of a given test substance in 50% of the test's animal population. The test, performed mainly on mice and rats, is commonly used to evaluate the human health endpoint of acute oral systemic toxicity where animal subjects are force-fed oral doses of the chemical being tested. This oral systemic test is used as a general indicator of the overall relative toxicity of a substance. Many scientists claim that the oral LD50 test has little relevance to evaluating the human safety of a substance, and some agencies and international organizations have withdrawn their requirement for this type of test data. Progress toward replacing the LD50 test with alternative non-animal methods has been ongoing, but the test involves toxicity to the whole organism, and is therefore biologically complex (and difficult to replace with alternative methods).

Problems with Animal Tests

The toxicity tests that are currently accepted by regulatory agencies (most being animal tests) were developed decades ago and are based on what was considered to be the best science at that time. Many regulations were developed around these methods of animal testing, and toxicologists in both industry and the regulatory agencies have become comfortable with using the animal data for decision-making purposes. This comfort and policy complexity has contributed to foot-dragging when it comes to efforts in replacing them.

In addition to the ethical concerns and growing public opposition to the pain and suffering inflicted on animals, alternatives to these animal-based toxicity tests are now being sought for additional reasons, not the least of which include:

Better tests are needed: Animal testing is not always predictive of human health effects. The best tests for human toxicity would be conducted using humans, which is unethical. However, science has greatly advanced since the development of the methods of animal testing that are still in use today. Cell culture, molecular and computation methods ( in silico methods) are now well-developed scientific tools. In vitro methods based on human cells and tissues are now being developed and evaluated for assessing toxicity. Toxicity testing, however, has not had the urgency and support of government funding programs that disease-based research has enjoyed, although this seems to have improved over the past several years.

Progress has been slow, because scientists pursue work in areas where funding is available. However, as new human-based in vitro test methods become available for regulatory testing, and the results provide better protection of human health when implemented, additional funding should be allocated for the development, validation and implementation of more human-based testing methodologies.

Faster and cheaper tests are needed: Many chemicals used in products today have not been tested, so their safety is largely unknown, and new chemicals and products are entering the marketplace at an ever-increasing pace. In fact, it is estimated that there is a backlog of more than 80,000 chemicals for which potential toxicity is largely unknown. The animal testing methods are slow and expensive, and safety testing using existing methods cannot keep up with the demand. The in vitro and computational methods being developed have the potential to provide faster testing.

New test methods may not be cheaper initially, but should be less expensive over the long term. And as in vitro toxicity tests advance, they should show greater predictivity than the animal testing that is currently used.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Animal Testing | National Anti-Vivisection Society

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Toxicity tests to estimate the safety of products and chemicals were developed in the early 20th century. These include experiments that subjectively measure the irritation of chemicals in the eyes or on the skin of rabbits (the infamous Draize test), and lethal dose (LD50) experiments that determine toxicity by the dosage of a chemical that kills half of the animals forced to consume, breathe or be injected with that chemical.

# data[].attributes.body
cruelty to animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An introduction to animal experiments

What are animal experiments?

An animal test is any scientific experiment or test in which a live animal is forced to undergo something that is likely to cause them pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm.

Animal experiments are not the same as taking your companion animal to the vet. Animals used in laboratories are deliberately harmed, not for their own good, and are usually killed at the end of the experiment.

Animal experiments include:

injecting or force feeding animals with potentially harmful substances

surgically removing animals' organs or tissues to deliberately cause damage

forcing animals to inhale toxic gases

subjecting animals to frightening situations to create anxiety and depression.

Some experiments require the animal to die as part of the test. For example, regulatory tests for botox, vaccines and some tests for chemical safety are essentially variations of the cruel Lethal Dose 50 test in which 50% of the animals die or are killed very close to death.

Which animals are used?

A surprisingly, large range of animal species are regularly used in experiments, including wild animals.

Only vertebrate animals (mammals, birds, fish and amphibians) and some invertebrates such as octopuses are defined as 'animals' by European legislation governing animal experiments. Shockingly, in the USA rats, mice, fish, amphibians and birds are not defined as animals under animal experiment regulations. That means no legal permission to experiment on them is needed and they are not included in any statistics.

Animals used in experiments are usually bred for this purpose by the laboratory or in breeding facilities. It's a cruel, multi-million dollar industry. We believe that all animals are equally important. A dog bred for research is still a dog who could otherwise live a happy life in a loving home.

Some monkeys are still trapped in the wild in Africa, Asia and South America to be used in experiments or imprisoned in breeding facilities. Their children are exported to laboratories around the world. The use of wild-caught monkeys in experiments is generally banned in Europe but is allowed elsewhere.

Horses and other animals such as cows, sheep and pigs are often supplied by dealers and may originate from racing stables or farms for use in animal experiments. The rules preventing the use of stray companion animals like dogs and cats vary from country to country.

Wild animals are sometimes used, either in trapping and monitoring experiments in the wild, or they may be captured and brought into a laboratory setting for more invasive research, sometimes in the name of conservation.

What are laboratories like?

Laboratories are no place for any animal. They are typically sterile, indoor environments in which the animals are forced to live in cages, pens or Perspex boxes - denied complete freedom of movement and control over their lives. Some animals in laboratories are confined on their own, without the companionship of others.

Our investigations show time and time again, that despite claims by the animal research community, life inside a laboratory is no life at all.

The science relating to animal experiments can be extremely complicated and views often differ. What appears on this website represents Cruelty Free International expert opinion, based on a thorough assessment of the evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An introduction to animal experiments An animal test is any scientific experiment or test in which a live animal is forced to undergo something that is likely to cause them pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm. Animal experiments are not the same as taking your companion animal to the vet.

# data[].attributes.body
the truth about animal testing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Right now, millions of mice, rats, rabbits, primates, cats, dogs, and other animals are locked inside barren cages in laboratories across the country. They languish in pain, suffer from extreme frustration, ache with loneliness, and long to be free.

Instead, all they can do is sit and wait in fear of the next terrifying and painful procedure that will be performed on them. The complete lack of environmental enrichment and the stress of their living situation cause some animals to develop neurotic types of behavior such as incessantly spinning in circles, rocking back and forth, pulling out their own fur, and even biting themselves. After enduring a life of pain, loneliness, and terror, almost all of them will be killed.

There are many non-animal test methods that can be used in place of animal testing. Not only are these non-animal tests more humane, they also have the potential to be cheaper, faster, and more relevant to humans.

While some of the experimentation conducted on animals today is required by law, most of it isn't. In fact, a number of countries have implemented bans on the testing of certain types of consumer goods on animals, such as the cosmetics-testing bans in the European Union, India, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, and elsewhere.

Millions of Animals Suffer and Die in Testing, Training, and Other Experiments

More than 100 million animals suffer and die in the U.S. every year in cruel chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics tests as well as in medical training exercisesand curiosity-driven medical experiments at universities. Animals also suffer and die in classroom biology experiments and dissection, even though modern non-animal tests have repeatedly been shown to have more educational value, save teachers time, and save schools money. Exact numbers aren't available because mice, rats, birds, and cold-blooded animals-who make up more than 99 percent of animals used in experiments-are not covered by even the minimal protections of the Animal Welfare Act and therefore go uncounted.

Examples of animal tests include forcing mice and rats to inhale toxic fumes, force-feeding dogs pesticides, and dripping corrosive chemicals into rabbits' sensitive eyes. Even if a product harms animals, it can still be marketed to consumers. Conversely, just because a product was shown to be safe in animals does not guarantee that it will be safe to use in humans.

Taxpayer and Health Charities' Dollars Fund Experiments on Animals

Animals are also used in toxicity tests conducted as part of massive regulatory testing programs that are often funded by U.S. taxpayers' money. The Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Toxicology Program, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture are just a few of the government agencies that subject animals to crude, painful tests.

The federal government and many health charities waste precious dollars from taxpayers and well-meaning donors on animal experiments at universities and private laboratories, instead of supporting promising clinical, in vitro, epidemiological, and other non-animal studies that could actually benefit humans.

A Century of Suffering

Experimenters have tortured animals in laboratories throughout history. " Without Consent," PETA's interactive timeline, features almost 200 stories of twisted experiments, including ones in which dogs were forced to inhale cigarette smoke for months, mice were cut up while still conscious, and cats were deafened, paralyzed, and drowned. Visit " Without Consent " to learn about more harrowing animal experiments throughout history and how you can help create a better future for living, feeling beings.

What You Can Do

Each of us can help prevent animal suffering and deaths by buying cruelty-free products, donating only to charities that don't experiment on animals, requesting alternatives to animal dissection, demanding the immediate implementation of humane, effective non-animal tests by government agencies and corporations, and calling on our alma maters to stop experimenting on animals.

With the help of our members and supporters, PETA campaigns globally to expose and end the use of animals in experiments. Some of our efforts include the following:

This multifaceted approach yields scores of victories for animals imprisoned in laboratories every year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Right now, millions of animals are locked inside cages in laboratories across the country. They languish in pain, suffer from frustration, ache with loneliness, and long to be free.