How Does Animal Testing Tell Us Rhetorical Analysis
867 Words4 Pages
Haylie Galvan
Professor Wu
ENGL 102
26 February 2015
Is Animal Testing Really Helping Us?
Blue, Laura. "How Much Does Animal Testing Tell Us?" Time. Time Inc., 17 June 2008. Web.
22 Feb. 2015.
In the article, “How Much Does Animal Testing Tell Us,” published in the June 2008 issue of Time magazine, Laura Blue interviews Frankie Trull to address the ongoing issue of how much benefit really comes from testing human products on animals. Over the years, animal testing has become the key method for testing harsh chemicals for human use. Frankie Trull made the interesting point that testing on animals may not be useful considering how irrelevant the results tend to be. In this article Blue states of the products that do “make it to animal trials,…show more content… When conducting any kind of experimentation for human products, “Safety and efficiency” are the two main components that must pass in each test (2). Trull uses pathos throughout the article helping make her article more effective. She is able to prove that the results are not only for that one specific use, but the overall big picture. She states that when testing, “you need to know how it would affect all the organs” in animal and human systems (2). When presenting that information, she is able to relate the subject to the readers with her use of understanding language and logic. The audience gets to see her point of view with the use of common language and valid research. The article makes this idea more understandable when the audience can relate to a personal…show more content… She adds how other alternatives would help speed up the “drug approval process,” especially during the clinical trial period. More value is added to this article when she includes an alternative method that can eventually take the place of animal research. She uses “computer modeling” as an example that can be used to test one day in the future (6). Even though she admits that it would take several years before animal testing becomes completely nonexistent, she provides alternatives that are currently being used in replacement. Her diction portrays a researcher who deeply cares about finding alternatives experiments, making this article even more reliable and intriguing. Trull states it is her “hope that one day we could replace animal trials entirely” with other non-animal methods (6). The diction used also persuades that animal testing is not the only way scientist can test the efficiency of a product of human