Jcinkovich.weebly.com



Top of FormMedical Testing on Animals Argumentative TaskIntroductionA local animal rights group made headlines recently by breaking into a laboratory and freeing all of the animals housed there for medical research. At a peaceful meeting that followed, the group apologized for breaking and entering, but argued that the lab should be shut down and animal testing criminalized in the state.Scientists from the lab were also present. They countered that the research being done on those animals was essential to medical innovation. Both sides have approached the state senator to petition for legislation helping their respective positions.As aid to the senator, it's your job to research and file a report on the issue so that she can make an informed statement. In this performance task, you'll look at both sides of this issue and eventually draft an argumentative essay.Directions for BeginningYou will use five sources in this performance task. You may refer back to them at any time.Research QuestionsOnce you've looked over the sources, answer the three research questions that follow. Your answers to these questions will be scored. They will also prepare you to more readily use the sources in writing your argumentative essay.The sources and scratch paper will be available as you answer these questions, so feel free to use them.Sources for the Performance TaskSource 1This chart is from the website of the?Journal of Animal News.Source 2This article is from the news and activism magazine?Advocacy Today?in rebuttal to a previously published article criticizing animal testing. The information in it is drawn from the following sources: and Myths About Animal Medical TestingBy the Association of Medicine and ScienceWhy are animals used for testing medical products?Introduction by the Food and Drug AdministrationAnimals are sometimes used in the testing of drugs, vaccines and other biologics, and medical devices, mainly to determine the safety of the medical product.For drugs and biologics, the focus of animal testing is on the drug's nature, chemistry, and effects (pharmacology) and on its potential damage to the body (toxicology). Animal testing is used to measurehow much of a drug or biologic is absorbed into the blood;how a medical product is broken down chemically in the body;the toxicity of the product and its breakdown components (metabolites);how quickly the product and its metabolites are excreted from the body.For medical devices, the focus of animal testing is on the device's ability to function with living tissue without harming the tissue (biocompatibility). Most devices use materials, such as stainless steel or ceramic, that we know are biocompatible with human tissues. In these cases, no animal testing is required. However, some devices with new materials require biocompatibility testing in animals.There are still many areas where animal testing is necessary and non-animal testing is not yet a scientifically valid and available option. However, FDA has supported efforts to reduce animal testing. In addition, FDA has research and development efforts underway to reduce the need for animal testing and to work toward replacement of animal testing.?Myth 1: Medical testing on animals hasn't produced anything worthwhile.Medical testing on animals has produced a host of life-saving innovations. There have been 104 Nobel Prizes awarded in Physiology or Medicine, and 88 of those were dependent on animal research. Particular innovations stemming from animal research includethe meningitis vaccine;the smallpox vaccine;the pacemaker;artificial heart valves;anti-rejection drugs for organ transplant patients;asthma treatments;cancer drugs that have increased the?overall?life expectancy in the U.S. by 10.7 percent;many other major research breakthroughs in diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson's, HIV/AIDS, epilepsy, and more.Myth 2: Medical testing only benefits humans.Though the majority of medical animal testing is geared toward humans, animals often benefit, too. According to the UK-based Understanding Animal Research organization, medical research on animals has resulted in new treatments for diabetes in animals and the development of a vaccine that prevents a deadly disease in cows. Animal testing is also responsible for the development of other common animal vaccines like those for rabies, parvo, and distemper.?Myth 3: Scientists don't look for alternative methods before doing animal testing.Before any study can incorporate the use of animal research, scientists must first show that they abide by "the Three Rs" of animal testing:Replace the use of animals with viable alternatives where possible;Reduce the numbers of animals tested on to the bare minimum;Refine tests to provide the most humane conditions to animals possible.Myth 4: Medical testing on animals isn't necessary.Every major medical association in the United States, including the American Medical Association and the American Veterinary Medical Association, affirms that medical testing on animals is essential to medical innovations that will save the lives of both humans and animals. Although some suggest testing on humans as an alternative to testing on animals, that would violate the Geneva Convention on human rights and, as such, is illegal.Myth 5: Medical testing on animals is inhumane.Not so. Medical testing conducted on animals is strictly regulated by the Animal Welfare Act, which dictates specific requirements for the care of animals, including the size of their enclosures and method of handling, as well as the administration of anesthesia to minimize discomfort.Source 3This article is from the New Animal Rights Organization blog. The information in it comes from the following sources:"Two Questions, One Answer"By Jessica Ghantan, New Animal Rights OrganizationIn 1957, an innovative new morning sickness drug, tested on animals, was sent to market. Thalidomide was a godsend for countless pregnant women suffering from severe morning sickness—until their children were born.I'm referring, of course, to the Thalidomide baby disaster. As it turns out, even though Thalidomide had been successfully tested for safety in animals, it was far from safe for use in humans. The horrific birth defects it caused in growing fetuses is well documented:(Source)(Source)The Thalidomide disaster is an extreme case, perhaps, but consider what Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt states in a 2006 press release: "Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies." Nine out of ten? Then what are we testing for?The simple fact is, medical testing on animals is not effective. If we need to test for how a drug affects humans, an animal is not a relevant substitute. Many proponents of animal testing would insert here that we test on rats and chimpanzees precisely because they are so similar to humans. Their DNA is remarkably close to that of humans (98 percent for rats, 99 for chimpanzees), after all, but as the Thalidomide experiment tells us, "close" isn't close enough.All of this is beside the fact that animal testing is inhumane. It's so inhumane, actually, that most people don't want to know what's being done to animals in the name of scientific progress. The admittedly radical animal rights group PETA splashes around disturbing photos all the time, and no one really pays attention to them because PETA, as an organization, is not very credible. The photos didn't come out of nowhere, however.Documented records of experiments include the Draize Eye test, in which rabbits are restrained with their eyelids forcibly held open and administered potential consumer products to test for eye irritancy. In the Lethal Dose 50 test, animals are administered what scientists believe to be a lethal dose of a consumer product until 50 percent of them die. It's used to determine how much of a product would be lethal if ingested by humans. These are only two tests in a long list of tests. Go ahead and picture a bunny rabbit in a clamp with its eyelids held open, one eye painfully red and oozing. That's a real picture. PETA didn't have to make it up. In fact, here's one now.(Source)Proponents of animal testing would add, "But the Animal Welfare Act ensures humane treatment of animals." It doesn't. The Act, which outlines specific requirements for the care and treatment of many animals, does not include rats, mice, fish, or birds. That means that 95 percent of animals undergoing medical experimentation are not subject to even the most basic considerations, like the administration of anesthesia. Additionally, laws are broken all the time, and this one is no exception: multiple investigations have uncovered cases of extreme physical and psychological animal cruelty violating the Animal Welfare Act. A 2009 investigation by the Humane Society of the United States found 338 violations in one facility alone.At heart, the question of medical testing on animals is really one of two questions, depending on the person. For the science-minded, the question is, "Does it work?" but for animal lovers, the question tends to be rather, "Is it humane?" The answer to both is a resounding "no." It's time to end animal testing, for both science and humanity.Source 4This is a postcard published by the British National Anti-Vivisection* Society in 1906.(Source)*Vivisection: term used to describe experimentation on animals, usually by those who oppose it.Question 1 of 4Activity 1Check the boxes that agree with which paraphrased arguments or pieces of information are addressed in which sources. Some arguments/information will have more than one source selected. Do?not?include arguments that a source is rebutting with a counter-argument.Activity 2Which one of the given sources would?most likely?be considered the?most?credible to someone seeking to inform themselves about both sides of the argument surrounding animal medical testing? Support your response with?two?details from the source. Justify your answer and support it with details and information from the source.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Activity 3Source #2 describes common facts and myths about animal testing. Explain how the information in Source #3 adds to the reader’s understanding of animal testing. Give?two?details from Source #3 to support your explanation.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Question 4 of 4Part 2 Now you will write an argumentative essay on the subject of animal testing, using the information from the given sources and the opinion you have formed on the issue.Make sure to plan your structure carefully, use a variety of vocabulary and sentence structures, provide an introduction and conclusion, back up your claims with evidence from the sources, and predict and address any counter-arguments to your own. When quoting or referring to sources, refer to them by their names or source numbers.Your AssignmentBecause you are her best research aid and she trusts your ability and judgment, the state senator has asked you to submit both your findings and your written recommendation on the animal testing issue.?Should the senator draft legislation supporting or opposing medical testing on animals??After submitting the sources you've found, you start work on your formal recommendation.Write an argumentative essay that takes a carefully supported position either for or against medical testing on animals. Support your claim with information from the sources you've read. You aren't required to use all of the sources, just the ones that effectively and credibly support your position and your counterarguments to the opposing viewpoints.Argumentative Scoring GuidelinesThe argumentative essay is scored on these areas:1.?Statement of claim and organization:?How clearly are the introduction and conclusion stated? Do the transitions effectively organize the movement of thoughts from one sentence or paragraph to the next? Most importantly, is the claim clearly stated, while addressing opposing views with logical progression and clarity?2.?Elaboration/evidence:?Are the claims explained in a detailed way? Is language and tone appropriate for the audience? Does evidence from the sources back up the claims?3.?Conventions:?Are spelling, punctuation, grammar, and syntax correct? ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download