Eric Sandgren: Cat research, after all the drama" and "USDA finds animal treatment violation in UW-Madison lab"

Animal testing has been a topic of debate for many years.  For me, I am stuck in the middle when deciding where I stand on the issue.  I understand the downsides of it; it limits animal’s rights and can potentially harm several animals.  But I also see the benefits; it advances our knowledge in medical cures and potentially puts us further ahead than if we didn’t conduct these research labs.  Rhetorically, I believe the two articles did a fine job at persuading me that what they are doing is correct.  The first article, “Eric Sandgren: Cat research, after all the drama” makes the convincing argument by making PETA almost look like the “bad guy.”  By having Eric Sandgren, the director of the Reasearch Animal Resources Center at Madison, write the article, we get the information pro animal testing.  By explaining what they are doing their research on, we gain the knowledge on how it is providing a positive advancement in cochlear implants.  He also does a good job in refuting PETA accusations.  My favorite line was the closing sentence, talking about PETA he remarks, “I just with they would take the time to learn the whole story.”  This is the truth in more than this situation.  It is so easy to look at the negative and flaws in an operation and drawing them to the eyes of the public; its another to draw the negative and then offer an alternative way to fix it, which I think would help me understand and agree with PETA. 

            The second article “USDA finds animal treatment violation in UW-Madison lab” once again give information regarding the possible citations, but in more of an objective way compared to the previous article.  Here the article appeals to ethos through the credibility of the USDA.  In the article the USDA reveals the different citations Madison was given and the explanation to why.  UW-Madison also gained ethos and my support when admitting to their mistakes.  They are able to be the bigger people, they don’t attempt to hide it and pretend it never happened, but rather confess to it and get better because of it.  To me that gains my respect and trust.  I think this article did a good job at showing how animal testing can be negative, but I also gained the perspective that not everyone who experiences is going to be right the first time.  Although, it is disheartening what these animals go through, I don’t disregard animal testing, because I do understand that the main purpose is for a better tomorrow, I just hope that they do as limited amount as they have to with the safety of animals in mind.