“The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them.That’s the essence of inhumanity.”

-George Bernard Show

The virologist came into the laboratory of biohazard level IV. He is an expert who works with the most dangerous viruses and he is aware of the risk of being infected by some of the deadliest pathogens ever.However,  he doesn’t give up to deal with the invisible killers and to try to stop them. For days. For months. For decades.Humans vs. nature, life vs. death. People are looking for an eternal life on the Earth, nature proves us wrong each time when sends some new disease or reminds us how powerless we are to protect ourselves from its anger.


Our scientist works on Ebola virus and he is  searching for a cure. Every morning when John comes  into laboratory, he is hoping to see that his patients are getting better. Unfortunately, the number of   rhesus macaques monkeys is reduced. Some survive but majority die.This is a typical image of daily routine in many global laboratories, especially in the  USAMRIID and the National Microbiology Laboratory of the Public Health Agency of Canada in Winnipeg which are experimenting on triple monoclonal antibody called ZMapp that could possibly defeat Ebola virus. The problem is not the attempts of science to win the biological threats to human race but the absence of any ethic when it comes to the laboratory testing and experiment projects on other living beings. The cruelty behind the controversial animal testing:“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, medical training exercises, and 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.”


It seems that the most problematic is the cosmetic industry in which are abused the millions of innocent animals just to prove that some lipstick is safe for women or some perfume is not harmful. At the end of the day, animals don’t smoke and don’t take drugs, do not use make up and do not drink alcohol, but they are exploited for those who do that and their lives mean nothing on he table of human calculation. The disturbing fact about the animal testing is not only the high expenses of research but also the long timeline and the potential failure on the humans because the humans and nonhumans definitely do not share the same genetic code and the same level of resistance or ability to adopt or to refuse something which should be considered as medicament. The world is fighting the big battle about this issue and the positive thing is that Europe, known as the  world’s largest cosmetic market,Israel and India have already banned all animal testing for cosmetics as well as the sale, distribution or import of animal-tested beauty products. I would say this is a victory of pet-friendly associations and I am sure they are doing a great job in the U.S. too but where is a big profit interest, there is usually a big ignorance about the damage they make or they will cause in the future.


If we open the statistics books of animal testing, we will be shocked about the high number of animals sacrificed for nothing. It is a truth that science can not make steps forward without testing and experimenting, but there are so many debates about the quality of animal testing for purpose of human benefits. Even the scientists claim that the research of animals is failing in 90% of human case studies. The logic says: 115 millions of animals are killed every year just  for 10% of progress in science. That is not only  morally unjust but that has about 450 alternatives and non-animal testing options, which wont cost taxpayers so much and which will offer more success when it comes to the area of homo sapiens problems. The top 10 animal testing countries in the world are the following:the USA, Japan, China, Australia, France, Canada, the UK, Germany, Taiwan and Brazil.


The most irritating situation is currently in the US because the state and the private laboratories are racing about leading the researches and to invent the final drug which will be highly effective and properly praised with dollars. The efforts must include the animal testing because they are not so familiar with non-harmful methods:“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 generous donors on animal experiments at universities and private laboratories instead of on promising clinical, in vitro, epidemiological, and other non-animal studies that are actually relevant to humans.”


On the other side, the EU is decreasing the level of animal testing but according to data from 2011, France, Germany and the UK are still the top 3 users of animals in medical experiments. The report from the same year informed that in testing were used 17,896 dogs, 3,713 cats, 358,213 rabbits, 6,686 horses, 6,095 monkeys, 675,065 birds, 77,280 pigs, 28,892 sheep, 30,914 cattle, over 1,000,000 fish and over 8,500,000 rodents. The scale is going down in last years, at least because of banning of animal testing for the purpose of cosmetic industry but clinical researches do not think of excluding the living animals from the testing platforms.



The ironic is that most of the drug’s researches show the inability of animals to perform the features of human immune system and the justification that killing monkeys for the sake of human’s survival of Ebola is nothing but  masquerade.  First, not all primates are the same and second, there are non-animal studies which are supposed to be relevant to human beings with their promising clinical attributes. They show more success in the long term research program and they must be taken as the priority when we talk about the experiments.


We all know that majority of laboratory animals are those taken from shelters and captivity sectors, but the ethical background of the whole process is everything but not ethic. Someone would suggest serial killers, mass murderers and  child rapists for this research program. They are the pests of the society and they will never be rehabilitated but they do have the characteristics of humans, at least in organic way. That is also not an ethical choice and we are not here to judge anyone about anything but to save our souls and to stand up for voiceless. Animals are not the slaves of humans, they have the equal rights to be on this Planet and to live their lives. What if some predators from the space come here and adopt our pattern of thinking? Who is the strongest is one who is killing all. We would be erased in one day as humans. That would be karma. Nothing more, nothing less. Animal testing in 21st century is proof that science is lazy to search and implement other techniques. It teaches us that we have nothing to teach our children, especially not about humanity and morals. We will maybe find cures against Ebola or cancer but we will be anyway dead, as thinking animals that have never understood the reason of life.



  1. Thank you so much, Sarah, for being the voice of the voiceless! You are an ambassador for those poor and defenseless animals!

    You are making a very good point as to why the usage of experimentation on animals should be abandoned. First, experimenting on animals for makeup testing is totally unjustifiable not to mention cruel. Second, and most importantly, you are bringing to light the existence of other methods of testing without the need to resort to animal testing and all the cruelty attached thereto.

    It is time our society became more humane and totally stopped testing on animals. I love the “alien” example you used to explain your point. I have used the same example over the years to explain why people should become vegetarian or vegan. I don’t believe that “humans ” would find it just if aliens, with better technology, came to planet earth, conquered it and started eating humans because they taste good. Nor would “humans” find it fair if those aliens started testing on them because they are inferior!

    Should this happen one day, it would be karma at its best! I hope that humans will learn before it’s too late !

    Thank you again for this very well-written and enriching article!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. In the context of human nature, it was inevitable that the worst aspects of the human psyche (e.g. noxious ignorance, primitive violent impulse and detrimental self-preservation) would be applied to the history of humans trying to predominate and control Nature. Again and again, scientists have come forward to declare their ‘error’ in committing themselves to this course of attempted management (e.g. Professor Oppenheimer), but if one scientist becomes conscientious, one thousand and more are ready to replace him/her… As long as Commerce dictates to how and why Science evolves, there can be no reformation, and animals will continue to be in the front line of this merciless and meaningless slaughter (i.e. humans are not really worth preserving as they are – the animals die to preserve a worthless species).

    The history of animal testing reaches back to the writings of the ancient Greeks in the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE, with Aristotle (384–322 BCE) and Erasistratus (304–258 BCE) among the first to perform experiments on living animals. Galen, a physician in 2nd-century CE Rome, dissected pigs and goats, and is known as the Father of Vivisection. Avenzoar, an Arabian physician in 12th-century Moorish Spain who also practiced dissection, introduced animal testing as an experimental method of testing surgical procedures before applying them to human patients.

    In the 1660s, the physicist Robert Boyle conducted many experiments with a pump to investigate the effects of rarefied air. He listed two experiments on living animals: Experiment 40, which tested the ability of insects to fly under reduced air pressure, and the dramatic Experiment 41, which demonstrated the reliance of living creatures on the air for their survival. Boyle conducted numerous trials during which he placed a large variety of different animals, including birds, mice, eels, snails and flies, in the vessel of the pump and studied their reactions as the air was removed.

    In the 18th century, Antoine Lavoisier decided to use a guinea pig in a calorimeter because he wanted to prove that respiration was a form of combustion.

    In 1921, Otto Loewi provided the first substantial evidence that neuronal communication with target cells occurred via chemical synapses. He extracted two hearts from frogs and left them beating in an ionic bath.

    In the 1960s, David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel demonstrated the macro columnar organization of visual areas in cats and monkeys, and provided physiological evidence for the critical period for the development of disparity sensitivity in vision (i.e.: the main cue for depth perception), and were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work.

    During the 1950s and 1960s, the USSR used dogs for sub-orbital and orbital space flights to determine whether human spaceflight was feasible. In this period, the Soviet Union launched missions with passenger slots for at least 57 dogs. The number of dogs in space is smaller, as some dogs flew more than once. Most survived; the few that died were lost mostly through technical failures, according to the parameters of the test. A notable exception is Laika, the first dog to be sent into orbit, whose death was expected from the outset.

    Before humans went into space, several other animals were launched into space, including numerous other primates, so that scientists could investigate the biological effects of space travel. The US-government launched flights containing primate cargo primarily between 1948-1961 with one flight in 1969 and one in 1985. France launched two monkey-carrying flights in 1967. The Soviet Union and Russia launched monkeys between 1983 and 1996. Most primates were anesthetized before lift-off. Overall thirty-two monkeys flew in the space program; none flew more than once.

    Sarah’s article is one that should be included in the course curriculum of all medical undergraduates (i.e. The Hippocratic Oath should include animals – First No Harm) and in the journals of scientific research (R&D institutes) across the world: either humans stop living life on Earth without logic and common sense, or they continue on the path of imminent self-destruction. The question is, if this occurs, can Nature reclaim itself and regenerate life on Earth, as it did after the asteroid impact of 65 million years ago? The Earth does not heed humans, but humans need the Earth…

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s