Should Criminals of Heinous Crimes be Tested On?

Archeological evidence suggests that scientists have experimented on animals since 258 BCE. Although modern day animal experimentation has contributed towards the discovery and development of vaccines against previously fatal diseases like polio, tuberculosis, measles, mumps, and rubella, development of life saving medical breakthroughs has come to a halt. The primary objective of testing pharmaceuticals and other types of medical ideas on animals is to determine the physical and mental reaction of a human being. In some major clinical subjects such as pharmaceutical and cancer research, testing on animals is irrelevant because the results can be dangerously opposite when compared to the reaction from a human being. Direct human studies would provide more accurate medical testing results and possibly cure the world’s current most problematic and incurable diseases such as cancer and AIDS. Though this may sound completely inhumane, to qualify as a candidate for scientific study and experimentation; the test subject will fall under the category of war criminal, death row inmate, murderer, rapist, and child molester.

The primary reason for human medical studies is to acquire accurate information from all elements of testing. The human studies will comprise of re-testing and re-evaluating previous animal experiments that had submitted defective information. Once the primary testing for pharmaceuticals have been finalized on lab animals, they will be then tested on human subjects in order to gauge accuracy. This will prevent many future deaths, injuries, lawsuits, and errors in the science and medical field. As a consistent trend of faulty animal experimentation results, past studies have inaccurately tested pharmaceuticals and naively deemed numerous medical products suitable for human consumption. The growing number of misleading medical information brought to the public’s attention has caused a large amount of consumers and patients to be either critically injured or killed as a result of mislead testing results. Currently, 9 out of 10 experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies (Mike Levitt, U.S. Department of HH, Food & Drug Admin).

Although the use of animals in medical testing and experimentation have created many current methods of surgery and medicines, the science field remains lacking in strength to eliminate complex and mutating viruses like cancer and AIDS. Mice, rats, birds, fish, and frogs will continue to be used to conduct minor biological testing and observation such as breeding and genetic experiments. But for the major and top studies that demand direct and imperative results, humans who have committed heinous acts under the category of murder, rape, genocide, abuse or molestation will be subject to experimentation.

Why would the human subjects consist of war criminals, death row inmates, murderers, rapists, or child molesters? As a civilized society, the majority of Americans will agree that the following types of people above are extremely dangerous and cruel people who not only inhumanly destroy lives but negatively affect the world. These violent, malicious human beings are lightly punished for their crimes. For example, after a criminal is proved guilty of committing heinous acts of serial killing, forced sodomy, torcher, decapitation, and necrophilia; they are subject to life in prison or a loose possibility of death row. This means that the American people's tax money will fund this criminal's imprisonment, food, and clothing and possibly the poison for the criminal's lethal injection. The money paying for this deviant criminal's life or death could be directed towards something more productive and positive like educational, scientific, and medical funding. The obviously defective human being should be given up to science and medical studies in consequence for his or her extreme crimes. This solution would provide a major advancement in the quality of life in American society. The science and medical fields would flourish in funding and astonishing technical information. This punishment would also become a primary crime deterrent and reduce major bulk in prison populations. On the other hand, a major protest to this idea would be groups consisting of people who support pure technical human rights. Meaning these groups believe that capital punishment or killing another human being in the name of justice is still a sinister act and should not be committed. The general public may also think this idealism is far more inhumane than capital punishment. There also people who do not support capital punishment or harsh prison sentences because of the possibility of false imprisonment.