Aristotle is one of the first known people to study nature and considered animals to be a key factor in order to understand nature properly. Aristotle's studies led to experimentation on human and animal corpses (Lennox). This practice then evolved into the modern day idea of animal experimentation that has now become more of a tradition than a scientific necessity. In the research facilities animals are exposed to different types of toxins and drugs, and are also used for genetic and psychological experiments. These types of experiments are often painful, stressful and result in killing most animals in the first round of trials. These medical experiments kill millions of animals annually, however, despite the amount of death and abuse that occurs there are not enough regulations to oversee the animal experimentation process in the United Sates ("Using Animals"). There are alternative methods that researchers can use in biomedical research facilities for example, advanced cell-culture systems and sophisticated models that help better understand the human anatomy (Rowan). The unethical treatment of these animals, the lack of any significant medical advancements, with little to no regulations and several alternative methods available that could be used in place of these animals in experimentations. Helps better understand why the United States government should improve regulations and make a better effort to reduce and stop the use of animals in biomedical research. 

  In the late 16th century and into the 17th century a French philosopher Rene Descartes, known to the western world as the father of rationalism, believed that truths can only be discovered through reason. Through this reasoning Descartes came to the conclusion that "animals cannot reason and do not feel pain; animals are living organic creatures, but they are automata, like mechanical robots" (Isacat). According to this philosophy hurting animals can never be a wrongful act, since animals cannot reason they can't feel and therefore do not understand or physically feel pain or emotions. Unfortunately, this stigma on animals was adopted by the scientific world and is still around today in 21st century. As mentioned earlier researchers practice the method of animal experimentation more so as a tradition, rather than a need for scientific accuracy. Although, the "Biomedical research community" fallaciously presents the use of animal testing as a black and white issue, stating that if one individual is against animals in biomedical research than they must be against scientific advancement ("Results from Research"). Hello friends what 'show is everyone dong tonight 

Animal experimentation is defined as the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, especially for purposes of determining the safety of substances such as food or drugs (Oxford English dictionary).  Researchers primarily work with animals that have similar anatomy and metabolic systems to a human. For example, mice share 94% of its DNA with humans, chimps 98.7% and Zebrafish share 80%. Many believe that because swine have similar skin and cardiovascular systems as humans, it allows researchers to develop new drugs and technology that work on humans as a result of the swine experiments (Americans for Medical Progress). Researchers believe that many of the questions they have can only be resolved by harvesting organs and examining the organ at the molecular level. Researchers study whole living systems in order to understand the effectiveness of treatments, and potential dangers. This method of research results in animal euthanasia (Americans for Medical Progress). More than 100 million animals are killed every year in U.S. laboratories alone for chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing; biology lessons; medical training; and curiosity-driven experimentation (American Anti-Vivisection Society). The justification for this type of research is quite simple, a living cell is way more sophisticated than any modern-day technology available. No technology developed has been able to correctly and completely mimic a living human cell. In a human body there are about 50-100 trillion cells, that communicate using a complicated biochemical language (Americans for Medical progress). Many researchers believe that medical progress for human health, requires lab animal research because there is no complete replacement for the whole living system. I don't know how to add more words 

However, this justification is completely false. Medical advances are the reason Americans, for the most part, now live very long healthy lives without any major setbacks. Yet, the majority of the modern medical advances had nothing to do with animal experimentation. Humans and animals, although similar in some cases, are completely different. The way that human bodies are structured and metabolize is completely different to that of any animal. This is the direct result of the thousands of different animal species there are in they world. A great example is that of the 108 medicines released in between the years of 1976 and 1985, 102 of them were taken off the shelves do to side effects that came to be in humans, that were never discovered in any animal trials. Experiments using rats and mice showed absolutely no link between lung, mouth, and skin cancer, to smoking cigarettes. Twenty compounds in a cigarette not known to cause cancer in humans 19 caused it in the animals; of nineteen compounds that caused oral cancer in humans only seven caused cancers in mice (Greek). The discrepancy in this experiment allowed for false information to be publicized. Because of this information, smoking cigarettes was never published as a dangerous affect on human health.  However, cigarette smoking is now the main cause of oral and lung cancer in older Americans due to the results of this faulty experiment, allowing doctors to go so far as to prescribe smoking as a stress reliever out of pure ignorance. AIDS has also been affecting not on the United States but the whole world in its entirety more and more as research based primarily of monkeys has failed over and over again allowing the virus to spread over time. The first medication used to slow or treat the AIDS virus was discovered in a test tube and had absolutely no correlation to the experiments used on monkeys. Because experimenters rarely publish results of failed animal studies, other scientists and the public do not have ready access to information on the ineffectiveness of animal experimentation and therefore lead to more death and suffering for these animals. In order to reduce this type of miscommunication regulations should be put in place stating, that all experiments involving living creatures, even the failed ones, must be reported and be public information to all. I still don't know what to add to make this paper longer 

In most countries there are little to no known regulations to oversee animal experimentation "Despite the countless animals killed each year in laboratories worldwide, most countries have grossly inadequate regulatory measures in place to protect animals from suffering" ("Using Animals"). The only law in place to oversee animal experimentation in the United States is The Animal Welfare Act this.  The Animal Welfare Act was put into the books in 1966, it regulates the care and use of animals in research, testing, teaching, exhibition, transport, and by dealers. However, this Act is very faulty because it only provides minimal protection for certain species and excludes 90%-95% of these animals; for example, rats, mice, and birds. This law also excludes cold-blooded animals and farm animals raised for food consumption or fiber. The Animal Welfare Act inspects housing, feeding, medical care, and handling only for the 10% of animals covered by the law that include, (dogs, cats, guinea pigs, hamsters, rabbits, and other warm-blooded animals) and for the primates their psychological health as well ("Laws and Regulations | Animal Use in Research"). Despite the fact that if researchers show a scientific need for the animals to be exempted from these regulations, The Animal Welfare Act allows the regulations to be lifted.  The Animal Welfare Act also does not require any records of how many animals are being used in the experiments, if they are excluded in the original law. Estimates indicate that as many as 800 U.S. laboratories are not subject to federal laws and inspections because they experiment exclusively on mice, rats, and other animals whose use is unregulated.

Under The Animal Welfare Act, is the USDA otherwise known as The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the USDA is enforced to maintain and enforce the Animal Welfare Act. The USDA directly effects the lack of regulation in the Animal Welfare Act itself. The USDA only have about 115 inspectors and a huge mass of animal testing that is now 7,750 different laboratories. Physically it is impossible to get one of those 115 inspectors into every different laboratory to ensure that the Animal Welfare Act is being enforced in each of the 7,750 facilities ("Laws and Regulations | Animal Use in Research").  The shortage of people able to enforce the law leads to the law being ignored in many research facilities, however, the constant records that the USDA releases regarding the violation to uphold The Animal Welfare Act, demonstrates how faulty this law really is. Even animals who are covered by the law can be burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, forcibly restrained, addicted to drugs, and brain-damaged -- no procedures or experiments, regardless of how trivial or painful they may be, are prohibited by law. It is clear to see that The Animal Welfare Act is ineffective and does reduce or protect the animals used for animal experimentation. Because of this The Animal Welfare Act should be put under review and revised to ensure that all facilities will be regulated on a regular basis and that all animals including those cold-blooded, rodents, invertebrates and farm animals. 

 Along with regulation reform, researchers should be searching for new technologies to replace animals in many medical experiments. Knowing the rapid advancement of technology and the lack of medical advancements that animal testing provides, the use of alternative methods should be put in place to decrease the number of animals being harmed.  This push for alternative methods of research has already been the main focus of many people for several decades now. Since the mid-seventies animals used in experimentation dropped around 50%. Animals held in universities and research institutes declined dramatically until about the mid 1990s when the study of genetics became a popular field to study (Rowan). Since then many great technological advances have been made that has lead people to believe that animal use in order to study diseases and human tissues will be dramatically reduced and no longer needed by the year 2050. A new technology that has turned many heads in the medical world is called "Organs-on-chips". What it is, is just a tiny memory stick that can ultimately act as a working organ without ever coming in contact with an actual organ. The chip can "mimic on the micro scale the functions of human organs such as the heart, lungs, and intestines, which would allow scientists to test drugs and cosmetics at less cost, less time, and without the use of animals" (Jessica Mendoza). The project is still underway of being completely effective but according to the article the goal for these chips is to put them together and have them function as a human body, revealing effects different drugs and toxins have on the entirety of a human body.

Some of the other technological advancements that make this hopeful thinking possible include cell culture models and in vitro technology.  The "Lethal Dose 50" test forces animals to ingest toxic substances, the result of this experiment is that 50% of the animals die and those who don't are later killed anyways. However, a scientist by the name Dr. Bjorn Ekwall who had a Cytoxicology Lab in Sweden developed a way to replace the animals in the "Lethal Dose 50" experiment. The alternative method uses human tissue that has been generously donated. "The test can then target toxic effects on specific human organs, whether or not the toxic substance permeates the blood barrier, and other highly sophisticated and precise information that the agonizing death of an animal of a different species would not reveal" (In Testing | Alternatives to Animal Testing and Research). What is impressive of this alternative method is the accuracy rate, the LD50 rate was in between 61 and 65 percent while the human tissue test was an 85 percent accurate. Although 85 percent isn't perfect it goes to show that even if animals biology is similar to that of humans the results of most experiments will say otherwise. Cell culture advancement is new technology allows for the cultivation of cells and tissues in vitro otherwise known as (in glass). This method of experimentation is one that is cruelty and harm free and never affects the health or well being of any animal including humans. There are many other test methods available that I did not mention. Although there are so many different alternatives the only way these methods will have an impact on animal experimentation is to be widely implemented. Research companies have to assure that government agencies will accept the data that is produced from alternative methods as valid, otherwise no company will ever consider these alternative methods. A way to ensure that research companies and the government come to an agreement, there must be official incorporation of alternative methods into different regulations and guidelines already standing. In 2006 and 2010 in vitro methods and the use of pain relieving medications became accepted alternatives for eye irritation testing, but the 1998 Environmental Protection Agency health effects test guideline for eye irritation testing was never updated (stokes). This is a great example because since the guidelines were not updated this alternative was not able to be used, and in the end shut down, just as many alternative methods are.   A step that must be taken to implement these methods is to educate and train regulatory staff about the available alternative methods and their limitations. This will in turn cause the educated staff in regulatory agencies to discuss and suggest possible alternative methods (Stokes).

 Even with all the ridicule  that animal experimentation receives it is still very popular in the scientific world. About fifty to one-hundred million animals are used in animal experimentation throughout the world and kept in unethical conditions (PETA). With all the advancement of modern technology increasing the amount of alternative options on the table for researchers, the methods are put off and dismissed because of a stigma that alternative methods are not effective. This stigma affects the public knowledge and the general opinion on animal experimentation in general. Therefore, more and more animals suffer and die horrible deaths each year. By reforming the laws already in place to regulate animal experimentation, adding new laws and regulations that would effectively oversee all facilities and protect those animals that are currently not under protection: rodents, cold-blooded animals, and birds would ensure ethical and safe environments for all animals forced into a life of experiments. The correct use of alternative methods will also help reduce the number of animals used each year in different research facilities.  By initiating all these changes into the United States government the number of animals living in suffering conditions, would greatly decrease and hopefully ultimately change the overall attitude when it comes to Animal experimentation. 

