Annotated Bibliography

Tatchell, Peter. (2004, August 4). Why animal research is bad science. EBSCOhost, 18-19. Retrieved November 1, 2007,
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=14027536&site=ehost-live.

The main reason for this research paper is to question the moral and ethical considerations of animal testing and to what extent do animals really have rights. This article is attacking the government in its allowance of animal testing. Certain products and drugs being put out on the market for human use are not at all suitable for humans even after showing no side effects on animals. Just because specific animals do not show any signs of reaction does not mean the same for humans. If animal testing doesn't even prove to be accurate, why must companies continue on with the animal cruelty? "A majority of the diseases we suffer are unique to our species. Cures are most likely to be found by studying the physiology of human beings, not other animals."
This article was written within the past five years so it is rather relevant and its author is from a credible company. This source will help me in my paper to build a stronger argument against animal testing and create a firm anti-testing side.



Pocha, Jehangir S. (2006, November 13). Comparative Advantage. EBSCOhost, 76-78. Retrieved November 1, 2007,
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=22979015&site=ehost-live .

In regards to my research topic, this article fits right in. In the United States, there are several regulations and guidelines that must be followed when companies are attempting animal testing. In this day and age, it is not as easy for companies to get away with testing products on animals due to protestors and and organizations influencing the government. In this article, the author is suggesting to transfer all tests to China, where they are freely able to test on animals because in China, there will not be people in the way of it. This rises up the issue about morality. If it is such a great problem here and we know it is morally wrong, then why should we send it some place else when the poor animals will still be treated in a harmful manner? Although US agents will monitor what happens to the animals in Chinese labs, it is still happening.
This article was written just last year so the information provided is rather credible and relevant. It was written by a pharmaceuticals company. It pertains to my topic in that it will create contrast between the different boundaries of right and wrong and help support different sides of the argument.