EPQ- will be mainly using books and

 

EPQ- should humans use
animals for their own needs?

 

Introduction

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

This dissertation will be evaluating whether or not it’s justified for humans to use
animals for their own needs. Using animals for human needs is a controversial
topic and therefore it will have to be addressed in a delicate manner. Animals are used by humans in various ways, as companies- pet form, for transport, food,
medicines, and for education purposes.

The term animal rights
is usually referred to the view that animals
should be respected and treated in the same way as human beings (Mrc.ac.uk,
2018)

There
are many advantages as well as disadvantages for the use of animals. For example the advantages of using animals would
be using animals for drugs, animal experiments, cloning, pets, food etc. As
well as advantages there are many disadvantages for using animals some of which
would be using animals for dietary, perfumes, cosmetics, clothing, furniture,
souvenirs etc.

Over the years we can
see how the use of animals has evolved, for example now people are using animals
for their own reasons, for example for zoos and their own personal
entertainment, however, the question is
should animals be used for humans? My EPQ will be digging and researching into
this and exploring the ethics and people’s opinions.

 A range of sources will be used for example I
will be mainly using books and articles, a few websites will also be used. Different perspectives, religions,and cultures
will be taken into account ­and assessed. Research shows that religion has a
major influence on the decisions made for the use of animals-this will also be
considered.

 

Humans using animals for
scientific testing:

Animals are used for medical
experiments to gain an understanding of
cell structures and physiological and pathological processes. Many of the developments achieved
through the use of animals for medical experiments have benefitted animals
themselves, for example, domestic and
wild animals, live longer and healthier lives due to animal testing. (Mrc.ac.uk, 2018)

 (The Royal Society,
2004)
accept the use of animals for medical testing, providing that the animals are
treated inhumane conditions and they do
not experience any unnecessary suffering, the research must also be carried out
for serious medical or life-saving situations only.  A recent poll was also carried out and the
findings were that 90% of the public accepted the need to use animals for
medical experiments. This suggests that the majority of the public understand
the importance of using animals for medical testing. However,

The British medical
journal, 1973 state
that monkeys are used mainly for biomedical research and vaccines. They are
against the use of animals (monkeys) for medical testing because these monkeys
are captured from their habitats, each year it is estimated that more than
100,000 monkeys imported into the US and UK. Many of these monkeys are imported
whilst being infected, 20% of these monkeys die during the first 12 weeks
because of the stress they undergo during the capture and transportation (The
British Medical Journal, 1973). This emphasizes
why animals should not be used for scientific experiments as they undergo
immense amounts of stress and torture during the process.  Having said that, (Royal Society,
2004), states
that humans have benefited greatly by using animals for medical testing and
whenever there was a medical achievement in the past, the experiment or
procedure had relied mainly on animals. For example Treatments such as heart
surgery transplants were achieved by using animals for heart surgery
transplants, which results in many people can have a heart surgery transplant
today. Therefore using animals for science is justified only in specific
circumstances. Then again (Stephen, 1993) argues that using animals for medical research
is not justified under any circumstance as animals undergo a lot of suffering,
he also argues that the bad outweighs the good and there are many ethical
issues that are involved in using animals for science.

 

Animals for food:

Against:

(Newkey-Burden, 2017), discusses caged and free-range hens in his article, he clearly disagrees with the use
of hens for free range and caged hens. He states that “frontline workers slaughter 22
million animals each day in the UK alone”. He also tells us
that nearly all young hens have their beaks burned off-without any anesthetic.
This happens to stop the hens from pecking other hens in their cramped
conditions. He also states that there is no such thing as free range eggs as free-range sheds actually contain up to nine
birds per square meter- which is equivalent to 14 adults living in a one-room
flat. He then goes on and states that “Some multi-tier sheds (still “free
range”) contain 16,000 hens”, just by looking at the statistic we can imagine the amount of discomfort
the animals undergo. He, therefore, disagrees with the use of free ranged or
caged hens being used to produce eggs as they undergo a great amount of
distress and discomfort.

 

(Baxter, 1994) emphasizes why hens shouldn’t be caged
as it caused them a great amount of
suffering in many different ways. He established that when hens are caged they
suffer from an increased level of
frustration which led to feather pecking, chronic stress and due
to lack of exercise, the hens were unable to maintain their bone strength.

 

FOR:

(Duncan, I. 2001) discusses that despite the
disadvantages, there are many advantages of battery cages, for example there is
an increase of hygiene which results in a lower rate of disease which would
usually be caused by the bacteria spreading, there is a smaller size which
reduces ‘social friction’ which also makes it easier to manage the area.