Samantha Jordan

English 1101-144
30 November 2016
Beasts of Burden
You know them all well because they are your best friends. You tell them everything and
even though theyve never said a word back you feel better. Theres something simple about their
nature, the way they see the world for what it is and not what they can make it. After all, theyre
mans best friend, a term that applies to more than just dogs. In the United States alone 35% of
all pets are non-traditional animals. So where exactly do people draw the line and lose
sympathy? I find it outrageous that anyone could turn a blind eye to an animal that doesnt have
the same luxuries as people do. Just like humans any living creature deserves rights whether this
means on the farms, in the labs, or at the zoos. If it has a heart it deserves a voice. Its our burden
to protect these beasts.
I grew up in a house that could have doubled as a zoo. To this day I have never had less
than twenty pets in the house whether they were dogs, cats, birds, rodents, reptiles, or fish they
were family. Despite having all those pets our family will never be done growing, if there is an
animal in need it will have a safe place with us. Growing up in such a unique environment has
opened my mind to the wonderful world we could live in if we looked at it through the eyes of an
animal.
Sure its easy to pretend that animals dont mind what happens to them because theyve
never told anyone otherwise. The fact of the matter is that humans have been violating animals
rights for centuries and it is time for that to change. According to Alasadair Cochrane in his
research about animals interest in their own liberty he argues that most animals do not have an
intrinsic interest in liberty. In his paper he boldly explains that because non-human animals lack
the mental competence of humans they dont care whether or not they are free because they dont
know the difference. I completely disagree. Even if non-human animals can be considered nonautonomous agents and lack the ability to self-determining individuals does not mean that they
dont have emotions. It does not mean that they dont know the difference between right and
wrong. Animals are intelligent beings that do not deserve the harsh conditions they are subjected
to simply because humans want something from them and people often perceive them as inferior.
An animals life on a farm is where it all begins. Many animals are born into captivity
and the luck of the draw will determine how their life will be. Some animals will be subjected to
semi-cruel conditions: forced to produce milk, put on a bad diet, or killed semi-humanely.
However, other animals face a far more detrimental fate. They are beaten, starved or over-fed,
and deprived of water and other basic necessities. No animal, whether it be a human, dog, cow,
or fish, should be subjected to such torture. A well known animal rights activist Anita Krajnc
leads the group Toronto Pig Save. She was recently arrested for providing captive pigs with fresh
water as they were locked in a metal cage on the way to a slaughter house. Let me reiterate, she
was arrested for giving captive pigs fresh water on the way to a slaughter house.
The reason for animals on farms in the first place is because humans had a need that had
to be met. Fast crop harvesting, fresh ingredients, or meat production are the so called problems
solved by innocent animals. Since the beginning of life on the farm machines have taken the

place of many animals on the farm but they cant produce fresh milk or be used to supply meat to
the country. Therefore, there is still a fight to be had.
According to the court hearing of the Animal Legal Defense Fund V. Otter, regarding
meat production, animal abuse can be disregarded to protect business privacy rights. The claims
against Otter were dismissed under protection of the first amendment. Meaning the video
evidence of cruel torture of animals in a meat distribution plant was not enough to incite a
change.
It it unreasonable to assume that all people can simply become vegans and the demand
for animals on the farm will disappear. What we can demand is an alternative. There are many
supplements to meat that often go unnoticed or untouched because of a stigma against them. A
new type of meat, however, is revolutionizing what it means to be a vegan. There is a meat
substitute that looks, tastes, and even bleeds like real meat but is made entirely from plants.
Imagine that. It is well known that all dairy products can be substituted for plant alternatives as
well, such as almond milk and vegan cheese. There is even a vegan chocolate that tastes exactly
like the beloved Hersheys chocolate. So whats stopping us. We have all the alternatives and no
excuse to be dependent on innocent animals living on farms. So until we come to our senses
and make the much needed switch let me make a proposition: cut back. We can all indulge a little
less to benefit the animals a little more. Slowly transition to alternative choices and in the
meantime make sure that any and all animals living on farms are given happy, healthy, and
dignified lives. After all it is their lives being sacrificed for us.
The farms are just the tip of the ice burg as far as animal rights goes. A great deal of
protection that animals are being deprived of happens in laboratories as a result of medical
research. According to recent statistics from PETA over 100 million animals are subjected to
animal testing. Over 13 million of which were typical domestic animals. Over 20 million of
which were killed in animal testing. To conclude their research PETA discovered that 31 percent
of the animals killed in testing every year were euthanized to avoid prolonged pain that they
were already enduring.
Director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis S. Collins, explains that animals
are used for testing in biology lessons, medical training, chemical tests, drug tests, food tests,
cosmetics tests, and curiosity. He also explains some of the harsh conditions he has witnessed
during his training, citing incidents of animals being forced to inhale toxic fumes, immobilized in
restraints, having their skin burned off or holes drilled into their skulls. He explains that these
animals are deprived of everything natural and important as theyre forced to live in barren cages
because science can tell you these creatures are disposable lab equipment.
According to Dr. Elias Zerhouni with the National Institutes of Health, we have moved
away from studying human disease in humans. We all drank the cool-aid on that one. The
problem is that it hasnt worked, and its time we stopped dancing around the problem. We need
to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans to understand disease biology in
humans.
Director of the National Cancer Institute, Dr. Richard Klauisner, re-emphasizes that claim
be saying that they have been curing cancer in mice for decades but it simply doesnt work in
humans because the biology is too different. Similarly testing with chimpanzees regarding AIDS
and HIV led to 85 vaccines that completely cured the subject of the disease but not one single
vaccine worked in a human subject.
The Journal of the American Medical Association even forewarns people about the
dangers of this misleading research. Author Keaton J. Micheals explains, patients and

physicians should remain cautious about extrapolating the findings of prominent animal research
to the care of human diseasepoor replication of even high-quality animal studies should be
expected by those who conduct clinical research. This simply means that no matter how much
research is done testing on animals there is a very slim chance the findings will properly transfer
unto human subjects. So what exactly is the point of using the animal middle-man when
theyre a unnecessary buffer in important research?
It doesnt make sense to use them in research when that research cant tell how it will
affect humans. Since humans are the ones in need of these medications and lavish products it is
vital to know how it will affect them from the beginning. Not to mention the moral standings of
it all. If people truly want these new products, whether its for medical or purposes or for beauty,
some of them will be willing to test them. Why should innocent animals be forced to be tested on
for something they dont want or need. If no people are willing to be tested on for a product than
it cant possibly be that vital to our existence.
How can someone look at an animal and not feel a connection? We are all animals, living
beings, yet somehow they live so simply. They do not harm, corrupt, steal, or destroy like us yet
they get a fraction of the rights and privileges as us. If that isnt enough to convince you look to
one of our closest relatives in the evolutionary path: the chimpanzee.
We share more than 98 percent of DNA with these animals and until the research of Jane
Goodall, we regarded them same as any other creature. They were the number one subject in
animal testing because of the similar biology and in Goodalls research she found that the
similarities were more than just genetic. She learned they they exhibit similar behavior, family
structures, and can make and use tools. Goodall made a plea to redefine what we consider human
because the treatment of chimpanzees in medical testing were cruel. At least they would be
considered cruel if tested on a human. The result of Goodalls plea meant that chimpanzees were
recognized as humans under U.S. Law and are no longer subjected to testing. So I ask how long
until the research comes out about how it affects other animals, no matter how genealogically
compatible to humans, and reveals the extent of testings cruel nature.
Now I bring the animal rights act where it hits the hardest, closest to home. Most of us
can remember going to the zoo with our families and experiencing the naive wonderments of
childhood. We grew up to realize that nothing from our childhood was as it seemed and the very
zoo you loved to visit was now under allegations of animal abuse. To your astonishment you
begin to realize that as much of a privilege it was to see such majestic animals so close to you it
may not be to their liking. Why would they decide to live in small enclosures with no freedom as
children, like yourself, gaze in amusement? They wouldnt. Of course you try to look at the
bright side and justify it by saying some of the animals were injured and couldnt survive in the
wild or that the zoo does bring in a lot of money for the town. Well there is an alternative there,
too.
The animals in zoos right now more than likely would not adapt to wild life as they have
become dependent on their enclosures. Not to mention their forced to provide offspring to
maintain the zoos population and popularity. Why not stop when we can and let the animal
population in the zoo decrease on its own? Stop the breeding of animals in zoos and nonendangered animals all together. The remaining animals could be released to sanctuaries where
they could be safe, free, and wild.
To solve the economic crisis that might occur after losing a popular attraction like a zoo
the plot of land could be salvaged and turned into something helpful. It could be turned into an
animal sanctuary so animals undergoing endangerment or in rehabilitation could live a safe and

healthy life. If the conditions of the environment arent suitable for a sanctuary it could also be
turned into a number of things to benefit the community and draw in money. By doing these few
steps we could distance ourselves from the unnecessary confinement of beautiful creatures.
If the emotional connections to another living being arent enough incentive to get rid of
zoos maybe the stories of animal abuse will. There are cases from all over the world that show
evidence of animals being starved, beaten, and deprived of basic necessities. According to Alex
Derry, author of Little Zoo of Horrors, he recounts details of the Kiev Zoo in Ukraine, one of the
most disgraced zoos in all of the world that is facing countless accusations of animal abuse. This
just goes to show that it is a national issue not just domestic. So whether its going to a local
petting zoo and feeling an animals ribs and spine protrude from its skin or going to a zoo on
vacation in another country and seeing animals unprotected by the Animal Rights Act its plain to
see that people need to have a change of heart.
Sure its easier to believe we are doing no harm if we arent directly involved or that it
doesnt matter because if they cant speak they cant think, but this perception is dangerous. We
have an obligation to protect animals that cant speak for themselves because when you boil it
down to biology we are all one in the same. Humans just happen to be an animal that has
opposable thumbs and can talk, but does that really make us so different? Does it give us the
right to take what we want from another animal? Does it gives us the right to be safe and
protected while other animals are forced into our dirty work? Does it give us the right to confine
other animals for our entertainment? I cant say that it does nor do I believe that another human
being could believe it. When you break it down thats what animal rights are set up to protect
them from, plain and simple. We are animals, we are all alike. We all live, we all breath, and we
all think just the same. We hurt, we love, we know the difference from right and wrong. We are
all animals and as the animals of the dominant culture, we human beings have a responsibility. It
is our burden to protect such lovely beasts whether its on the farm, in the lab, or at the zoo. They
are our beasts of burden.