- 1 Conclusion
- 2 The Four F’s of Animal Personalities
- 3 F i g h t i n g
- 4 F l e e i n g
- 5 F e e d i n g
- 6 S e x
- 7 Animal rights protests
- 8 Trivia
- 9 Animal Testing Statistics Worldwide
- 10 The Top 10 Most Important Animal Testing Statistics You Must Know
- 11 General Facts About Animal Testing
- 12 Shopping
- 13 Animal Testing Cost: Facts and Statistics
- 14 Games
- 15 FAQ
- 16 Den
- 17 Sciencific opinion
- 18 Potential Alternatives to Animal Testing
- 19 Interactions
- 20 Animal Avatars
- 21 Regulation
- 22 Animal Testing Facts: Pros and Cons
Although there’ve been many positive things that came out of animal testing, today, more and more people, companies, and governments are seeing that most testing may be obsolete. Many available alternatives can quickly reduce animal testing statistics to a minimum and stop animal cruelty in labs.
Regardless of how one looks at animal testing, it’s easy to see that there’s room for improvement. As a whole, we need to find more alternative options to reduce the suffering of these animals drastically.
- About Animal Testing
- Cruelty Free International
- Cruelty Free International
- Cruelty Free International
- Doctors Against Animal Experiments
- Foundation for Biomedical Research
- Green Garage Blog
- Humane Society
- Inside Sources
- Ipsos MORI
- Lone Star College
- NY Times
- Penny Saviour
- Pharma Times
- Sidney Morning Herald
The Four F’s of Animal Personalities
F i g h t i n g
Fighting is equivalent to the way in which we try and control our environment. Carnivorous personalities are assertive and aggressive, while herbivore personalities tend to be passive and cautious.
F l e e i n g
Fleeing is how people protect themselves from each other. Herd animal personalities find refuge in the company of friends and family, wolves prefer tightly knit social groups, and mice personalities prefer to keep a low profile.
F e e d i n g
Feeding techniques translate into the careers that corresponding human personalities would choose. Bird personalities, for example, prefer jobs that provide a great deal of freedom, while sheep might flourish under the direction of a strong dog personality. Canine personalities like the wolf, dog and fox instinctively understand hierarchy, while bear personas chafe under the direction of authority.
S e x
Sex describes the ways we seek mates. From the brutal strength posture of the zebra to the seductive display of peacocks, all creatures strive to exert control over their reproductive choices. Some animal species — like the beaver and many birds — mate for life while others, like the tiger, are solitary and rarely monogamous. Every animal personality uses a distinctive set of subtle body language to stake its claim.
Animal rights protests
Main article: Animal rights
Despite the many potential benefits of animal experimentation, many animal rights activists are actively opposed to it and protest any use of animals in research, claiming it is a form of speciesism and therefore morally unjustifiable. They argue that the claims that animal testing has significant benefits for humans and animals are not justification enough for animal testing to take place. Their argument is that since humans are not used for “the greater good” in these tests, equally sentient animals should not be either, emphasizing the similar abilities to feel pain and emotions. The argument from marginal cases is often put forward in cases like this. The difference in intelligence between animals and humans they view as irrelevant, as in certain cases, some young babies or severely cognitively disabled people may be less intelligent than the animals that are being used in experiments, but nobody would argue that they should be used for scientific research instead of the animals because they are less intelligent.
A number of animal activists, however, will resort to extremist measures to achieve their goal of ending animal experimentation and, as a result, end up becoming their own worst enemy. Extreme acts of opposition range from sabotage of research facilities, physical attacks on individual researchers and their families, and even murder and arson. This makes it very easy for pro-vivisectionists to persuade the public that animal activists are too crazy and violent for any sane person to take seriously. Marketing efforts by animals rights activists are often accused by vivisection supporters of using appeal to emotion by showing pictures of cruelty to animals in labs (claiming the most shocking pictures are horribly out of date) and that they are focusing especially on «cute» ones most associated with being pets, such as dogs, cats, and rabbits, though largely ignoring that rats and mice (which don’t have as good of PR managers) are the more commonly studied. They will also claim activists of ignoring the fact that scientists make great efforts to keep research animals in humane conditions and to minimize suffering. Violent activism requires additional security measures for scientists and their animals, as well as researchers refusing to speak about what they do and where they do it for fear of attacks.
It should be noted that if PETA and the ALF get their way and animal testing is banned, it will only be banned in the places where they have strong influence, such as the US and Europe, where regulations already prevent unnecessary suffering of animals, though of course ALF would argue any suffering, especially for cosmetics, is unnecessary. As animal testing is essential, if banned in one place, it would just move to another; specifically a place without such regulations. Evidence for this can be seen in child labor being employed in countries other than where it is banned. Places that have banned child labor no longer have much in the way of textile industries, but child labor still exists, therefore it shouldn’t be banned (according to this «logic»).
However, successful legislative change has occurred in Europe where in 2013 it was made illegal to sell cosmetic products tested on animals within the European Union, even if testing was undertaken outside of the European Union.
This is an example of a nonmember beta player wearing an item that is now members-only.
During the Beta Testing, it was possible to have «mate» as the animal’s third name. This was later removed for potentially inappropriate content.
- All of the original animals (except for the wolf) had large googly eyes in their original default appearance.
- During the early stages of the Beta Testing, animals performing the «sleep» action would keep their eyes open instead of closing them.
- Beta accounts may still wear beta clothing that is now members-only. For example, a nonmember beta player can still wear their Wings or Spartan Helmet if they bought them during the beta testing, but if the player takes those items off, they cannot put it back on unless they buy a Membership.
- At the end of the Beta Testing, all active participants received one free month of Membership.
Animal Testing Statistics Worldwide
On a global scale, animal testing is challenging to control and track since many countries have different requirements as to the allowed number of animals in labs, animal protection laws, and principles. One thing’s for sure, the numbers aren’t going down. In fact, they’re increasing, even with the many available alternatives that can make testing on animals obsolete. With a worldwide ban on testing on animals for cosmetics in the works by the EU and more companies becoming concerned with animal rights, there’s hope yet.
(Cruelty Free International)
Although many alternatives have been found, and many tests are proven to be useless, animal testing has not declined. In China, the use of animals for experimentation has increased. And in Europe, the numbers are nearly the same as they were during the 1980s and 1990s.
25. In 2011, 2,785 dogs and 1,306 monkeys were used for dose toxicity tests in Europe.
(Cruelty Free International)
The animals are given doses of drugs that cause many ongoing side effects for anywhere from two weeks to nine months. Nevertheless, it’s been proven these tests are ineffective in showing drug toxicity levels in humans.
(Cruelty Free International)
There are many experiments for toxicological testing that have approved non-animal alternatives. However, these animal-based tests were still being conducted in the UK in 2018, along with 40 eye irritation tests, 10,275 acute lethal toxicity tests, and 638 pyrogenicity experiments on live rabbits. This proves that governments and companies overlook the available alternatives and still opt for the harmful and inhumane testing on animals.
(Cruelty Free International)
Of the 1.8 million experiments using animals in the UK, approximately one million were for basic research. University researchers and their curiosity drove the majority of these. As more than 50% of all the tests were done in universities, the majority of the funding came from taxpayers. As per these statistics, only 13% of the experiments done on animals were actually required by regulators.
28. 85% of the monkeys used for experiments in the EU were imported from outside the region.
(Cruelty Free International)
Specifically, the majority of the primates used for experimentation in 2018 were imported from Africa and Southeast Asia.
(About Animal Testing)
The leading animal testing company, Huntingdon Life Sciences, kills the most animals annually. Of the animals killed, approximately 87% are rodents.
30. 80% of the primates used for experiments in the US are brought in from China.
The new 15% levy that the Trump administration imposed on all Chinese imports will significantly affect current animal experimentation on primates. While many US researchers claim their research is impossible without primates, there are significant advancements in non-animal testing that they’ll be forced to use.
These numbers are similar to those in 2015 and 2016 and put Germany in a close second to the UK. Regardless, the numbers are slightly lower than they were in 2014, when Germany used 3.3 million animals. As with most other countries, Germany primarily used rodents for testing, but there were also 718 cats and 3,300 dogs. The country has also increased the number of experiments using monkeys from 2,462 to 3,472.
(About Animal Testing)
As it’s difficult to determine the exact numbers due to lack of transparency and not all animals being accounted for, Britain is considered to be the leader with nearly 3 million experiments on animals yearly. In close second comes France with the cosmetics company L’Oréal still testing its cosmetics on animals. France also presents the most significant opposition to the expected ban on cosmetics testing.
(Cruelty Free International)
Many countries still have laws and regulations requiring animal testing before clinical trials can begin on humans for medication. The number of animals used in Britain is just the tip of the iceberg—it doesn’t include the millions more animals used to conduct medical research that’s more basic in nature. Approximately 81% of experiments on monkeys and 60% of trials on dogs in 2018 were to test human medication.
The numbers that the US Department of Agriculture published in 2015 may seem extreme. Still, they’re only a small fraction of the real number of animals used because approximately 95% of the actual total isn’t covered by the AWA. There will never be a way to really see the depth of the animal abuse nor the number of animal deaths due to the lack of transparency and restrictions in counting.
The Top 10 Most Important Animal Testing Statistics You Must Know
- 90% of the new drugs tested on animals don’t ever make it to patients.
- Almost 560,000 experiments in 2018 were verified to have brought on moderate to severe suffering in the animals they were tested on.
- More than $420 million has been invested in developing non-animal testing methods.
- 42% of people in the UK think that animal testing organizations are secretive.
- If it’s used in medical research, 65% of people are not necessarily against animal experimentation, the facts and statistics show.
- Every year worldwide, 115 million animals are used in experiments.
- 71,370 animals suffered pain from experimentation in 2016.
- The Animal Welfare Act doesn’t protect 95% of the animals used for testing.
- In 2016, more than $7.3 million in taxpayers’ money was wasted on research that involved animals.
- 191,766 guinea pigs were used for animal research in the US in 2017.
General Facts About Animal Testing
It’s easy to overlook what happens behind the closed doors of laboratories and enjoy the products, medication, and cosmetics that come from this research. Unfortunately, there’s plenty we don’t know due to the lack of transparency and the inaccurate counts of the animals used in laboratories. Even the small proportion of animals being tested on is more than enough to make us stop in our tracks and think about the products we use daily.
1. Animal testing facts from 2018 reveal that 90% of new drugs don’t even make it to patients.
The unfortunate truth is that regardless of the numerous tests done on animals for new drugs and medicines, less than 10% are actually considered effective and safe because the results from animal trials fail to deliver quality results in people. The reason for these failed trials is that 55% aren’t effective in treating the condition, while 30% have shown signs that they’re toxic to humans, which couldn’t be confirmed in the animal tests.
In the UK, the Home Office describes mild suffering as experiencing short-term distress or moderate pain. Severe suffering is defined as experiencing long-lasting distress or pain. In many cases, these animals experience this type of pain or distress throughout the duration of the trial, which can last anywhere from several days to several months or until the animal dies.
(Cruelty Free International)
Different countries have different laws regarding the animals that are counted for animal research. For example, in many countries, rodents and rabbits aren’t counted toward the final numbers. Thus, recent research by Cruelty Free International and the Dr. Hadwen Trust can only estimate the number of animals used for experimentation each year.
Over the course of 40 years, Procter & Gamble has made significant investments in finding alternatives to animal testing. Their main competitor, Unilever, has also started pushing for a global ban on animal testing. P&G is the first in the beauty sector’s top 10 to actively support legislative reform that prohibits animal testing for cosmetics. The European Parliament voted in May to adopt a resolution that will call for the global ban of animal testing by 2023, with the practice already banned in the EU since 2013.
The required animal studies for registration with the US Environmental Protection Agency results in the torture of animals for a prolonged period. It also entails the testing on and subsequent deaths of approximately 10,000 animals. Among them are mice, rabbits, rats, guinea pigs, and even dogs. Unfortunately, even after such extensive testing, many of the research doesn’t reach approval, and the deaths of these animals reap no results.
Although this doesn’t prohibit all animal testing for cosmetics, it bans any results from data gathered via animal testing after July 1, 2018. This may not mean that testing on animals for cosmetics will ultimately end. However, the act will limit and reduce it dramatically.
Items from Beta Times
During the Beta Testing, there were only two shops, Jam Mart Clothing and Jam Mart Furniture. Items sold in these shops at the time have been nicknamed «beta» since they were released during the Beta Testing. These items could be purchased by any players provided that they had enough Gems to buy them. All of the clothing items had multiple color varieties for sale, but the den items each had only one color variety. There were a total of 100 items available in all.
Jam Mart Clothing
|Mech Angel Helmet|
|Rare Fox Hat|
Jam Mart Furniture — Den Items
|Sword and Shield|
|Vanity And Mirror|
Jam Mart Furniture — Flooring
|Blue Shag Carpet|
|Yellow Diner Tiles|
Jam Mart Furniture — Wallpaper
|Blue Star Walls|
|Dust Striped Walls|
|Pink Argyle Walls|
|Pink Forest Walls|
|Pink Striped Walls|
|Wavy Pink Walls|
Animal Testing Cost: Facts and Statistics
The amount of money that goes toward animal testing and experiments is jaw-dropping, to say the least. Unfortunately, most of the money invested doesn’t lead to many new results, as most of the time the final product doesn’t get approved. What most people don’t know is that the majority of animal testing done for educational purposes is paid for by taxpayers.
14. Animal testing stats reveal that the cost of registering one pesticide is $3 million.
Not only does it take nearly a decade and thousands of animals’ deaths, but the cost of registering a single pesticide with the US Environmental Protection Agency costs millions of dollars. In many cases, the money and animals’ lives lost while attempting to register a single pesticide are fruitless—a minimal number pass the necessary requirements and get registered.
Games were introduced sometime before July 8, 2010, as their controller icons can be seen in the earliest screenshots before the Jamaa Journal was introduced. These were basically short activities that players could do alone or with other Jammers, depending on the game, for fun and/or to earn Gems. Some games did not reward Gems for playing them, such as The Claw, which rewarded various den items and actually cost Gems, as well as the Smoothie Machine and the Popcorn Machine, which rewarded temporary Holdable Icons of smoothies and popcorn respectively. To play these games, Jammers had to travel to the correct area and then find the floating game icon. Initially, there were very few games to choose from, but more games were introduced towards the end of Beta Testing.
|Temple of Trivia|
1. What is animal testing?
(Cruelty Free International)
Testing on an animal usually consists of an experiment where an animal undergoes injections, forced feeding, the inhalation or consumption of toxic chemicals, and many other procedures that are likely to cause them distress, pain, suffering, long-lasting harm, and ultimately, death. All this is done for research on medicines, cosmetics, and other products in hopes of determining their toxicity, effectiveness, and potential danger to humans.
2. What percentage of animals survive animal testing?
Recent statistics from Israel reveal that only 3% of the animals used for testing survive the lab experiments. Unfortunately, animals that survive are either used for new trials or are killed when the research is over. Once scientists get what they need, they have no use for the animals. Percentages are similar in other countries as well.
3. What percentage of animal tests fail?
The National Institutes of Health recognize that approximately 95% of all drug safety experiments on animals fail in human trials. Furthermore, 90% of all basic research, of which most includes animal testing, doesn’t lead to any effective therapies for humans.
4. How many animals die from animal testing in the world?
It’s near impossible to give an exact number of how many animals die yearly around the globe due to animal testing and experimentation. It’s estimated that more than 100 million die annually in the United States alone.
5. Why should we not use animals for testing?
(Lone Star College)
Although there’ve been many advances in medicine with the help of animal testing in the past, today, there are many non-animal experimentation alternatives for most of the current research done today. These alternatives are practical, proven, and less expensive, and they don’t harm animals.
6. How do animals benefit from animal testing?
With the help of animal experimentation, there have been many advances in veterinary medicine as well. There’s been significant advancement in a variety of life-extending treatments for pets, wildlife, and many endangered species.
7. Why is animal testing important?
As unfortunate as the outcomes are for the animals themselves, there are essential benefits in using them for research. Where alternatives aren’t available, animals are used for the advancement of scientific understanding, as models for the study of diseases, for the development of drugs and treatments for many conditions, and to protect people, other animals, and the environment.
8. When did animal testing start?
Animal testing started as early as the 3rd and 4th centuries BCE by the Greeks, with the first scientists known to perform experiments on animals being Erasistratus and Aristotle.
9. Which countries test cosmetics on animals?
Currently, 40 countries around the globe have banned cosmetics testing on animals, and the EU Parliament is urging for a complete worldwide ban on cosmetics testing. Although the US passed a ban on cosmetics testing in 2015, it still hasn’t been implemented. Japan and China still allow animal testing for cosmetics, while France is the most prominent opponent to the expected world ban.
During Beta Testing, there was only one den available to all players. The den opened with a large bridge that connected to a two-story den and had a ladder connecting to the upper floor. It also had a basement, which was connected to the main floor by a stone staircase. The bridge outside would lead back to Jamaa Township. Players could position their purchased den items around the den as well as optionally activate a purchased flooring and a purchased wallpaper that would change the pattern for all of the floors and walls respectively. Players could own only up to 100 den items and there were only 38 den items to choose from along with 10 flooring choices and 10 wallpaper options.
Despite difficult ethical questions bound up in changing definitions of personhood, the common consensus of the scientific community is that animal research is an effective and necessary method of scientific inquiry. It is an important step in determining the safety and efficacy of medical treatments before they are tested on humans. Proponents claim animal testing saves many human lives. For example, animals were the first recipients of open heart surgeries as the procedure was perfected; they suffered a near-100% fatality rate. That rate decreased over the course of two more rounds of experiments until by the fourth group it was zero.
Another thing that makes animal testing more efficient than human testing is that the former are much more controllable — the scientists are able to know their genetic predispositions, their eating habits, and basically everything about them — along with the animals being genetically identical in some cases. A common criticism is that the animals suffer. However, suffering alters the animal’s hormone levels, which can severely damage the research, so they are usually handled in the best way possible so that they are calm, comfortable, and healthy.
Notwithstanding consensus on the usefulness of animal testing, scientists endeavor to reduce the number of animals used and, where possible, replace the use of living animals altogether. A growing industry in computer modeling is attempting to create digital systems that can be an effective alternative, but this research has many decades to go until it can take the place of conventional animal models.
Historically, most pharmaceuticals were not tested on female lab rats, (or, for that matter, on female humans, for reasons that had varying degrees of legitimacy), however, as of 2013 the NIH began developing programes to encourage a better sex balance in test animals and cells.
Animal testing can help preserve endangered species. Baylor College of Medicine used mice and rabbits to study a virus that was killing young elephants to develop a possible vaccine. Scientists in the US, created a successful Ebola vaccine for wild chimpanzees by experimenting on captive chimps.
Drawbacks to testingedit
The main drawback to animal testing is whether conclusions drawn apply equally or to some degree to humans. Drug companies with vested interests may happily over-extrapolate animal studies, while PETA and other groups play this point to death, often severely underestimating the efficacy of animal testing and ignoring the examples where it works well. The reality is somewhere in the middle where animal testing is extremely useful, but the results should be treated with some caution. Animal experimentation never guarantees the safety of human medicines, but the models often give very big hints and are suitable as a starting point; if it doesn’t kill a rat, dog or chimp after a massive over-dose, it is very likely that it is safe to give a pill to a human, for example.
Potential Alternatives to Animal Testing
Alternatives to animal testing have attempted to better match human physiology and typical environment humans inhabit. These technologies are continuing to be developed and may, in future, be a viable alternative to animal testing.
The growth of human tissue in an in-vitro environment has been achieved. This has been useful in many cosmetic tests by using cultivated skin cells to test the reaction its reaction to certain chemicals.
Use of Computer Modelling has also been put forward as an alternative to animal testing. Many computer models are very accurate though it is likely that many researchers and consumers would be unwilling to trust findings based on assumption rather than experience.
Use of Volunteersedit
Testing on a being that is able to consent does appear to have a more ethical basis for experimentation. However, there have been catastrophic failures in human drugs tests in the past when not properly undertaken. Ingesting a ‘microdose’ of a chemical followed by very close observation of changes in a volunteer’s metabolic rate or brain function has been suggested as a possible precursor to large scale human trials that could replace animal testing.
Many simulators can mimic living, injured or dying humans. This would largely be applied in education, potentially as an alternative to dissection in some cases. The use of ‘Traumaman’ is an example of a simulator which is used for emergency medical training.
Jammers could travel around the lands by clicking where the animal should try to go. Jammers could also perform certain actions such as hopping, dancing, playing, and sleeping, which would cause their animal to continuously perform the said action in an endless loop. Jammers could interact with other players by clicking on their Names to reveal their Player Cards.
Player Cards were the primary way of interacting with other players during the Beta Testing. They could be viewed by clicking another player’s avatar name or by clicking one of their Buddies’ names in their Buddy List. The player card during this time could be used to send a buddy request, visit the other player’s den, send Jam-A-Grams to the other player, block a player, report a player, or view a player’s animals.
The only available animals were the Tiger, Wolf, Bunny, Monkey, Koala, and Panda. These animals could be customized with primary and secondary colors, eye shapes and colors, and pattern styles and colors; however, the color palettes each consisted of only a five wide, four tall grid of twenty colors. The animals could also be decorated with clothing accessories that were purchased separately. There were only twenty-six head items, five neck items, seven body items, four leg items, and one tail item to choose from. However, the tail item was removed from the game towards the end of Beta Testing.
In the United States, the «Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals,» a protocol at least adopted in part by most academic institutions, recommends conditions for the humane keeping, feeding, and euthanasia of animals used in experiments.
Some countries require a license to experiment on animals, including the United Kingdom, which requires the submission and approval of a protocol and justification that no other reasonable test can be performed.
Licensure is then strictly supervised in the UK.
After Brexit, animal welfare groups are highly concerned that the UK will loosen its animal welfare laws. Animal testing has sharply increased after Brexit. In 2017, animal testing in the UK has fallen by 5%.
The image of scientists just coming along and torturing animals for shits and giggles is just NOT how it happens. That being said however, the standing regulations intended to legally ensure the well-being of test animals may come across as surprisingly condensed.
The Animal Welfare Act was signed into law in 1966. It is the only Federal law in the United States that regulates the treatment of animals in research. . Conveniently for scientists, mice and rats (the most used animals in medical research) are excluded from this law, among others.. Thus, there are no protections in place for these animals, meaning scientists involved legally can «do whatever they want to them».
Required animal testingedit
In the United States, before a new experimental drug can be tested on human subjects, it must first be tested on animal subjects to ensure its safety. Any human that was going to use the drug is also an animal testing it, so an animal test is inherent and unavoidable anyways.
By legislating for systematic and controlled laboratory animal testing, the legislation is practically also against random and uncontrolled human experimentation.
Animal Testing Facts: Pros and Cons
As much as we would like to say that animal testing is all bad, there are clear functional aspects of it. In the past, it’s proven to be very beneficial for humans, the environment, and animals as well. Through animal testing, scientists have found cures and treatments to major diseases and illnesses that otherwise would not have been possible.
This, however, was at a time when no possible alternatives were available. Today many experiments do not necessarily require animals, and many other tests on animals have proven to be useless due to their inaccuracy.
However, these individuals feel this way only if there’s no alternative to animal testing for medical research. The numbers were similar (68%) when individuals were asked the same question in 2014, regardless of the numerous alternatives to animal testing available. For the most part, people aren’t aware of precisely what happens behind the closed doors in the labs, and most likely they prefer it that way.
The average lifespan of a human can be anywhere between 70 and 80 years of age. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for researchers to study and experiment how a drug or chemical will affect a human’s life cycle. This is why the use of mice is very effective—their shorter lives provide the opportunity to do long-term research across a full life cycle.
As painful as the numbers are to read about the treatment and death of animals during animal testing, some unarguable results couldn’t be achieved without it. Many scientists confirm that without animal testing there wouldn’t be vaccines, medications for heart disease, cancer treatment, and even life-saving transplants. Approximately 70% of the Nobel Prize winners for medicine and physiology made their discoveries through animal research.
Through animal testing, scientists were able to develop this life-saving vaccine. There were approximately 350,000 occurrences of polio in 1988. With the help of the vaccine, this number was reduced to just 27 cases of polio for 2016. The cases continue to go down with every passing year.
One such experiment, the LD50 test, consists of giving increasing doses of a chemical to animals. The results are successful when they reach a dose that kills 50% of the animals in the experiment. This leads to animals experiencing high levels of pain and discomfort, often shortly before dying. However, no law requires anesthesia to be given to these animals for relief. Of these animals, 1,272 were nonhuman primates, approximately 33,000 were hamsters, 25,000 were guinea pigs, and 6,000 were rabbits.