Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Esmeralda Toscano
Mr. Tempinski
Abstract
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 2
This research project examined the advantages and disadvantages of animal experimentation.
Aspects of experimentation includes the moral underpinnings, the treatment, and the reduction of
animals involved with animal research. Both qualitative and quantitative research strategies were
used to collect data from subjects that were involved in animal organization, somewhat involved,
not all involved. Data suggests the benefits and advantages gained in the scientific field are not
more important than the negative effects of experimentation on animals. The implications of this
Numerous studies have been conducted on animal experimentation. Data has shown that
scientists in the U.S. use approximately 14-25 million animals in research. While it may be
contradictory to common beliefs animal testing benefits our understanding of medicine, there is
data to challenge that notion. Thus, the significance of these findings reveal animals deserve
equal treatment because they too have ability to feel pain and suffer. This proposal will discuss
the ethics of animal testing. As I investigate this topic I hope to bring awareness to this topic,
which can then later in the future my work can encourage a person to form a group and regulate
the laws on animal testing. Additionally, I argue that animals should not be tested on because
they are moral beings. For this study, I surveyed and interviewed 19 people using the both
qualitative and quantitative approach and selected them based on their knowledge over the topic.
Fox (2007, p. 750) compares and contrasts the views of different philosophers such as
Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, and Aristotle on animal testing. He states that there is a
question that lies between the moral relationship with humans and animals. He then compares
human to animals to highlight human superiority over animals. He discusses Peter Singer's book,
as Singer argues that animals deserve equal treatment because they too have ability to feel pain
and suffer. Under the title, Utilitarianism; the author explains the definition of Utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism is a doctrine that the useful is good and that the determining consideration of right
conduct should be the usefulness of its consequences or in other words its core idea is that
whether actions are morally right or wrong depends on their effects. Peter Singer supports this
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 4
surgery, a cure for an incurable disease, and the justification on an experiment. To show a
contrast Fox uses the belief of Tom Regan to contradict the belief of Singer. The following
section of this article goes into depth on whether animals are moral beings or not. This argument
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2014) states the requirements for making products
safe. The FDA must ensure that products are safe and labelled correctly. The Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) support the use of animal experimentation until proven that
companies that used all alternatives. The FD&C Act does not require companies to use the
method of animal testing. Companies have the decision on whether or not to use animal testing.
It is not the government that enforces this method. If a company uses the method of animal
testing then the FDA supports them because testing is to be done in a way that is possible to
maintain the safety of products. It is allowed because of the Welfare Act and the Public Health
Service Policy of Humane Care. The Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of
Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) is 15 federal research and regulatory agencies working together
to advance the acceptance of scientifically valid alternative test methods. The FDA is an
advocate for the use of alternatives for animal testing. They have integrated the 3Rs in the
Kaufman is an ophthalmologist that does not support the Draize test for ocular irritancy
pharmaceutical irritates human tissues, in which a small amount of the substance is applied
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 5
directly in the eye of a rabbit, and the rabbit is then monitored. He claims that animal testing may
not be as accurate as most people say and believe. He applied his knowledge with his experience
to provide a well supported argument against animal testing. He compares the rabbit eye
structure to the human eye structure. He asserts " the rabbit epithelial (surface) layer is 10 times
more permeable to hydrophilic solutes than the human eye." After stating several differences
between the eyes, Dr. Kaufman restates the fact that the anatomical differences provide false and
possibly incorrect results with using the rabbit eye as a method of animal testing.
Galen, and Ibn Zuhr (2011) have used animal testing as a method in medicine. Early
dates have been supplied in this article and represent the approximate time that accounts for the
beginning of this method. It states that the pain animals go through should not be justified
because it benefits humans. The author supports her point when she states a past failed attempt to
not use an animal to test sulfanilamide this led to a huge amount of deaths. Hajar also discussed
the 3Rs campaign. She claims that if animal testing were to be completely eliminated that this
An online article (2013) provides a graph that displays different animals that were used in
laboratory experiments. The usage of other animals rather than rodents has decreased in the past
20 years. The years following 1985, animal testing has declined by approximately 50% in the
U.S. For example, dog testing has decreased from 200,000 to an estimated 65,000 from 1979 to
2013. While there is no accurate estimate on the number of vertebrates used in research, it is
The research done on animal testing lack the aspect of morality. Articles overlook this
aspect because they focus on the other aspects such as the scientific benefits, or cosmetic
advantages . This topic is dismissed which leaves me as the researcher to have unanswered
questions. Therefore, the question that is brought up is why dont people look at animal testing in
the sense of more on the lines of morality? This question has been brought up in previous
research but has not been fully researched in depth. I believe that this connects to my research
because morality is under the surface to which leads to one forming their own opinion about the
I want to know understand how and why people think that one side outweighs the other
or if they dont think that why there are neutral to this controversial topic. I believe that this will
widen my eyes as for other too to see why this issue is controversial. The purpose is to expand
the research in a way that can help others understand it in the way I see it. It will present the
underlying understanding of why people think of the topic in not just my view but as a whole of
individuals. The purpose for this research is for me as a researcher to understand if the benefits
outweigh the advantages. Therefore, my research question is: Are the benefits and advantages
gained in the scientific field of science more important than the negative effects of
experimentation on animals?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 7
Methodology
Participants
The participants were people who were involved in the field of work, animal testing.
These participants were either not involved in the subject, or had a direct connection to it, or in
the middle. The number of subjects that were either interviewed or surveyed was nineteen. The
three categories that divided the selection of the subjects were if they had an idea of topic, if they
had or were involved with animal rights or organizations, or if they had a set opinion due to their
choice of work.
Student A is the ceo of the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals
in Research & Testing (ANZCCART). Student B is a animal rights activist involved with an
organization called People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Student C is the
founder of Speaking of Research, a website in which he talks about animal testing. Student D is
International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (iclas). Student G is the Executive Director
of the Americans for Medical Progress (AMP). Student H is a college student who has had
Student I-Q are subjects who had little to no knowledge about animal testing. There was
no reward but I did motivate them by telling them that I needed their help with understanding my
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 8
topic. This then acted as an incentive to answer my questions this worked for most of my data
collection.
Materials
The materials that were used were paper, pen, email, and a computer. These were used for
Procedure
to be my mentor. A little over a week later, I decided to look at the data then I decided to email
the organization, Stop Animal Exploitation Now!(SAEN) to ask them about more information
involving their organization and how I could volunteer. I waited a few days for them to respond,
but on September 23, 2016, I emailed a different person of the same organization to see if they
would respond. I waited again for the organization to reply but if they didnt answer I would then
While I was researching the SEAN organization, I discovered that this certain
organization was located in Ohio which meant that I would not be able to observe through being
involved with the field work. That same day this incident happened I started to look on online for
alternative organizations. I found numerous organizations but most of them were not located in
California or not in the U.S. I came to conclusion that I can only do surveys online and
I proceeded by filling out contact forms and sending emails. At that moment, I had three
organizations I was focused on. On September 24, the two alternative groups responded to my
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 9
email. I asked both of organizations if I could interview them via email and asked them if their
I found four more organizations that were involved in my topic. I continued by asking
them if they could get in touch with me and do my survey or do an interview. From September
This delayed the official date of the global skype that I was planning for. The problem that
occurred was that I read the message wrong leaving her with not knowing the date. I sent her an
email right away stating how sorry I was for not emailing her back. That same day I emailed the
Los Angeles Times about how I could get in touch with a researcher who wrote a piece about
animal testing. The day after, I found more organizations that were located in LA allowing me to
have a chance at getting involved by doing field work. One of the organization responded, they
stated that there was an available spot for volunteering. Starting from January 7 to 19, I decided
to email numerous organizations every day to get a wide range of interviewees and surveyed
answered.
At this point, I was struggling because only two or three organizations would answer but
I decided to start doing something different. The following day, I noticed that an email that was
sent by the organization that had internships they let me know that they didnt think it was the
right approach for my project. Therefore, from January 19 and until the deadline I distributed
surveys. This was random; it wasnt targeting specific people I was doing the third selection of
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 10
how I split up my data which was surveying people randomly. This was the last step to gathering
data.
Results
My data is organized by charts, step by step answer of the questions for the survey on the pro
side, undecided, and con side. Participants that are on the pro side are those who approve the use
of animals for experimentation. Participants that are undecided are ones that dont an
straightforward one sided opinion about animal testing. Lastly, participants that are on the con
side are those who are strictly against animal testing. The following section focuses on specific
quotations that were said in the interviews and surveys. Some of the answers to the questions are
in a chart format. When a question is stated the number of participants who answered that
specific question will be stated as well. The charts will be labeled (figure 1, figure 2, ect) with a
Figure 1
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 11
Figure 1 is a chart dividing all the participants within a group such as pro, con, or undecided.
Question 1: What do you think about animal testing? Do you believe it is beneficial or
unbeneficial?
Second part of Question 4: Can you explain who or what made you choose a side?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 12
All the participants mentioned similar ideas for the second half of question 4 as seen below.
I found much of the information on the anti-research side to be factually false and there was a
because I have seen the benefits to humans and animal health first hand.
My professor helped me understand the research done in a medical setting without cruelty and
to advance science.
The answers varied due to the fact the question asks for the participants opinion.
Question 6: From 1 to 5 how much do you consider it (animal testing) being an advantage or
disadvantage?
advantage............neutral.............disadvantage
1 2 3 4 5
Question 7: Can you give an example of a disadvantage or an advantage that animal testing is
known for?
4 out of 5 people on the pro side mentioned approximately the same idea for question 7.
advantage: medications
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 13
asthma inhalers, meningitis vaccine, kidney transplant operations, breast cancer treatments, deep
Question 8: Explain your reasoning about how animal testing is advantage or disadvantage?
Answers varied.
Question 9: If your opinion is toward the end of either side of the spectrum, can you consider
Question 10: Do any of these facts sway you to your opposing view about animal testing? If the
The countries of the EU in 2011 reported that they 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.
Experiments in which dogs had their pancreases removed led directly to
Question 1: What do you think about animal testing? Do you believe it is beneficial or
unbeneficial?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 14
The subjects state that its beneficial or unbeneficial depending on how animal testing is used.
But for this question the majority (6 out 9) of the subjects state that animal testing is beneficial.
Figure 2
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 15
6 out of 9 people state that yes animal testing is important to them. 3 out of 9 state that it had no
importance to them.
Question 4: Are you pro or con for animal experimentation? Can you explain who or what made
Figure 3
Figure 3 represents the answers to this question by three colors. The blue is the color for the
answer neither. The color orange represents the answer advantage. The color grey represents that
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 16
animal testing is both a both a disadvantage and advantage. This chart demonstrates the answers
Figure 4
In figure 4, 67% of the participants chose 3 (neutral). 22% of the participants chose 2 (not a full
advantage but close to neutral). 11% of the participants chose 4 (not a full disadvantage but close
to neutral).
Figure 5
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 17
Question 8: Explain your reasoning about how animal testing is advantage or disadvantage?
Answers varied.
Question 9: If your opinion is toward the end of either side of the spectrum, can you consider
7 people out of 9 declare yes for question 9. The 8th subjects answer is no and the 9th subjects
Question 10: Do any of these facts sway you to your opposing view about animal testing? If the
The countries of the EU in 2011 reported that they 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.
Experiments in which dogs had their pancreases removed led directly to
Figure 6
Figure 6 divides the answers of the subjects into four categories for question 10. To refer back
to the question it is above the chart labeled Question 10. The categories depend on which fact
the subject chooses. Blue represents the fact that the subject chose both facts. Orange represents
the fact that the subject chose fact one because it swayed them. Grey represents the fact 2.
Yellow demonstrates that neither facts swayed the subject. Dark blue represents an answer as
other.
Question 1: What do you think about animal testing? Do you believe it is beneficial or
unbeneficial?
3 out of the 3 participants state that animal testing is important in our society today.
Question 4: Are you pro or con for animal experimentation? Can you explain who or what made
3 out of 3 people state that they are con or against animal experimentation.
The 3 participants that declared to be con all choose the same answer for question 5. The answer
Question 6: From 1 to 5 how much do you consider it (animal testing) being an advantage or
disadvantage?
advantage............neutral.............disadvantage
1 2 3 4 5
Question 7: Can you give an example of a disadvantage or an advantage that animal testing is
known for?
Participant con 1 (PC1) and participant con 2 (PC2) mentioned similar ideas about the
disadvantages of animal testing such as suffering and torture. PC1 and participant con 3s (PC3)
Question 8: Explain your reasoning about how animal testing is advantage or disadvantage?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 20
PC2 and PC3 both mention the idea of testing the product this links them to the same idea.
Question 9: If your opinion is toward the end of either side of the spectrum, can you consider
PC1s answer is yes but the two other subjects answer are no for this question.
Question 10: Do any of these facts sway you to your opposing view about animal testing? If the
The countries of the EU in 2011 reported that they 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.
Experiments in which dogs had their pancreases removed led directly to
All three participants state that neither facts sway them for this question.
To ignore the scientific value and benefits that have come from animal -
based studies would be nave, yet to ignore the ethical issues associated with the
it can be a very useful guide, but each case going forward must be justified and
considered on merit.
A test tube cant cough and a computer model doesnt get pregnant. All
instance, a dog has an interest in not getting beaten. Similarly, bunnies have an interest in
not having chemicals dripped into their eyes to find out if shampoo is OK for human use.
prescription drugs that are determined in tests to be safe and effective for animals, 92
percent are found to be either unsafe or ineffective in humans. Thats a 92 percent failure
rate!
More lives could be saved and more suffering stopped by educating
people on the importance of avoiding fat and cholesterol, quitting smoking, reducing the
consumption of alcohol and other drugs, exercising regularly, and cleaning up the
people on the importance of avoiding fat and cholesterol, quitting smoking, reducing the
consumption of alcohol and other drugs, exercising regularly, and cleaning up the
environment than from all the animal tests in the world. For example, aspirin is poisonous
to cats and does not alleviate fever in horses, benzene causes leukemia in humans but not
in mice, insulin produces birth defects in nonhuman animals but not in humans, and so
on.
Research animal users must, and do, accept stewardship of the animals
under their care. That the animals are unable to communicate is irrelevant.
Animals are living things that feel pain. We do not need to put them
through that suffering. They are causing us no harm, then why do we cause it to them?
We are absorbed by consumerism and believe that attaining physical material things will
bring us happiness, but at what cost? The world doesnt need another eyeliner, hand soap,
food ingredient, drug for erectile dysfunction, or pesticide so badly that it should come at
The three participants that declare to be against animal testing are emotionally attached to
the topic. The people which state to be neutral mostly have controversial opinions about animal
testing in general. The participants that declare that they were for it mostly support their opinions
with the past science and medical knowledge they had obtain. Most of the answers that alert me
as a researcher are the free response on the interview questions. These quotations are ones that
highlight significant information I have not heard about before. Significant Quotations:
Quote 1: To ignore the scientific value and benefits that have come from animal - based studies
would be nave, yet to ignore the ethical issues associated with the scientific use of animals
The first part of this quote is true because I think this applies to everyone no matter what side
one is on. The second part is true too which makes me understand both sides perfectly.
Quote 2: I think we need to be careful about using history to justify the future. Yes, it can be a
very useful guide, but each case going forward must be justified and considered on merit.
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 23
I think the first sentence is so unique because I havent hear this opinion before. I dont think that
we should rely on the past for the future either, it doesnt sound reasonable on our part. I dont
think we have followed traditional rules so why should we stick to this way of doing science or
testing.
Quote 3: A test tube cant cough and a computer model doesnt get pregnant. All methods
This person compared non-living things to animals which have life and are living creatures. I
dont think its the same thing to compare these two things are completely different from each
other.
Quote 4: Rinderpest killed tens of millions of cows worldwide, the disease has now been
This quotation strikes me because it is a fact that I didnt know about. This quotation gave me a
perspective on things and sides based on animal testing. This is one fact that has indicates that
Quote 5: Animals should have the right to have their interests kept in mind. For instance, a dog
has an interest in not getting beaten. Similarly, bunnies have an interest in not having chemicals
dripped into their eyes to find out if shampoo is OK for human use. We should keep these
This quotation states that animals should have some types of rights because they are alive and
they are part of the world too. This connects to my research because one of the articles I read
discusses this specific topic. This participant is saying something similar to this.
Quote 6: Even the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has admitted that of all prescription
drugs that are determined in tests to be safe and effective for animals, 92 percent are found to be
This quote surprises me because in my literature review I found an article about the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration too which made me connect these two things together. The difference is
that this participants is talking about how they were supporting the con side of animal testing
which made me think twice because I thought the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has done
Quote 7: More lives could be saved and more suffering stopped by educating
people on the importance of avoiding fat and cholesterol, quitting smoking, reducing the
consumption of alcohol and other drugs, exercising regularly, and cleaning up the
I completely agree with this quote because its true we wouldnt need to be testing animal for all
types of different prescriptions and medications if people got more educated and eat healthier. I
believe its a waste of a life to use an animal just for finding a new treatment for people are have
Quote 9: For example, aspirin is poisonous to cats and does not alleviate fever in horses,
benzene causes leukemia in humans but not in mice, insulin produces birth defects in nonhuman
I think this quotes explains clearly how animal testing can go wrong because of the anatomical
Quote 10: Research animal users must, and do, accept stewardship of the animals under their
Therefore this quote helps me conclude that the scientists do not care for the way animals
communicate. It states that the way their expressing any pain is irrelevant but its only useful if it
Animals are living things that feel pain. We do not need to put them through that suffering.
They are causing us no harm, then why do we cause it to them? We are absorbed by and believe
that attaining physical material things will bring us happiness, but at what cost? The world
doesnt need another eyeliner, hand soap, food ingredient, drug for erectile dysfunction, or
This quotation explains the idea of morality which is a key topic in my research. I agree that we
are doing all this because consumerism. I dont think an animal live should be wasted on trying
to save a person who couldve saved himself by taking good care of himself.
As Dr. Bernard A Fox (n.d.) compares and contrasts the views and opinion of different
philosophers in The Ethics of Animal Testing, I did the same when I had to analyze the the
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 26
answers of the subjects who were neutral. Most of their opinions are similar and slightly
different. One of the subjects who is neutral re emphasizes the idea of how the FDA or a
government committee has to go through a process to let companies use animal testing as a
method of experimentation. Another subject uses a persuasive fact linking the FDA, and the
involvement of animal testing to explain the importance of the unreliable results for humans. The
response of one participant directly links to the conclusions found in the article Problems with
Draize test.
A limitation for me was time because it was hard to make people hurry and answer
questions when they werent going to get anything in return. Analyzing the data I had collected
took me hour to determine what was relevant, important, and significant. I think most researchers
need to manage time wisely because managing time at the last minute will become extremely
difficult.
overall question, and project. Most participants had similar opinions for each opinion the point of
view was always slightly different. Yet, I always discovered new opinions that were logically
different. Almost all opinions were adding to the previous information I had gathered before. I
believe that this opinions have helped me expand my ideas of morality on animal testing.
The results directed me merely to a different angle in how I use to see things involving
animal testing. The results of my data collecting suggested that animal testing is controversial in
the eyes of many people including me. The main findings of my project implied that it all
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 27
depends on the limitations of animal testing. There is an extent to where participants stated was
wrong and right. This invisible scale was built on the ideals of having animal rights but also not
letting that get in the way of furthering science and medical advances. These results emphasized
that the outcomes of animal testing neither outweigh nor undermined the idea of morality.
All the research which had been produced for this project will eventually be able to help
others mold their own opinions of this topic. The data has made major connections to different
aspects of the project. This project has made me think about the rights and wrongs of this issues.
This project has and will open up the eyes of people who are one sided in this topic. This project
has provided the idea of seeing grey not only black and white. This idea of having limitations
Reflections
project. One thing that I couldve done was work harder on the whole outline of the project for
Ms. Jones last year. I did work really hard in certain parts other parts needed to be revised. What
I couldve done to help me get less stress is doing the data collection during summer break. I
didnt think it was as important as focusing on pre-calculus, but now Im realizing that this
assumption was completely wrong. I didnt manage my time wisely during summer break, and
this ended up delaying my whole project as a whole. I dont think that my priorities were
numbered in the right order when summer break happened. When school started, I believed that I
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 28
would be able to gather all my data before the deadline. As hard as I worked to get results, I
surveyed and interviewed subjects. I would ask them to do my survey, but then I would leave
them to it and let them come to me when they were finished. I learned that it made people feel
uncomfortable and rushed when I would wait near by. I decided to stop this by letting them take
their time. When I sent emails out to several organizations, I thought that it was good on my part
to introduce my project and myself. I got a few responses that informed me that my approach for
gathering data was too black and white. I tried to not put opinion when the participants wanted to
know more about the project, because I didnt want to push them toward a certain direction. In
cases like this, I tried to be objective because I wanted them to form their own opinions about
animal testing.
As a researcher, I had an ideal goal of having more subjects against animal testing but the
data shifted my point of view on the subject. I dealt with this by having an open mind about
animal testing. While analyzing the data, I noticed that some information that is always said
about animal testing didnt appeal to me. I wanted to see more people develop new opinions that
way it can give me and others a different perspective. In this way I believe that I was being
biased but I think more of it as gathering new information or opinions for my project.
Appendix
unbeneficial?
4. Are you pro or con for animal experimentation? Can you explain who or
your view ?
disadvantage?
advantage............neutral.............disadvantage
1 2 3 4 5
1. Can you give an example of a disadvantage or an advantage that animal testing is known
for?
1. If your opinion is toward the end of either side of the spectrum, can you consider being in
1. Do any of these facts sway you to your opposing view about animal testing? If the facts
The countries of the EU in 2011 reported that they 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.
Interview Questions:
1. Are you pro or con for animal experimentation? Can you explain who or what
2. Did you have experience with animal rights before? From a 1 to 5, How involved
were you? 1-Not involved at all 2-Occasionally involved 3-Semi involved 4-Involved but not
3. When you finally choose a side what organizations or supporters did you get
involved with?
4. Once you got involved was it just a hobby at first and then did it suddenly become
5. Do you believe that one side has more of a disadvantage or advantage than the
6. Because of the amount of advantages that animal testing has provided over the
years, is it justified?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 31
body system?
9. Do you believe that the negative outcomes and side effects on animals morally
right when it comes down to its advantages? In other words, Do the advantages justify the
10. Some people argue that animals themselves benefit from the results of animal
testing. For example, if vaccines were not tested on animals, millions of animals would have died
from rabies. Is this a valid justified statement or does it seem like an acceptable excuse?
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION 32
References
Fox, B. A. (n.d.). The ethics of animal experimentation. Retrieved May 12, 2016, from
http://emj.bmj.com/content/24/11/750.short
"U.S. Food and Drug Administration." Animal Testing & Cosmetics. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 May
2016. <http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ScienceResearch/ProductTesting/ucm072268.htm>.
Kaufman, S. R., M.D. (n.d.). Safer Medicines Campaign. Retrieved May 12, 2016, from
Hajar, R. (2011). Animal Testing and Medicine. Heart Views: The Official Journal of the Gulf
U.S. Statistics. (2008). Speaking of Research. Retrieved from Speaking of Research. <
http://speakingofresearch.com/facts/statistics/>