Animal testing has long been a controversial topic, with animal rights advocates fighting against it for decades. For some, the idea of placing animal lives above human lives is critical, while for others, it is irrelevant. One particularly contentious practice involves the use of live pigs to test body armor for military use, a method employed by both the UK and US militaries. This practice has sparked outrage among animal rights groups for years.
Why is This Happening?
The United States military has conducted experiments where live pigs are subjected to simulated blasts to test the effectiveness of body armor. In these experiments, anesthetized pigs are exposed to blows of varying speeds and force levels from a custom-designed device—a half-softball made from hard polymer with a built-in accelerometer, known as an “indenter.” While the pigs survived with only non-fatal liver injuries, they were ultimately euthanized so that military scientists could study their organs.
Proponents of these tests argue that they are essential for advancing the development of body armor that could save soldiers’ lives on the battlefield. However, this raises an important ethical question: Is the suffering of animals justified to obtain such information?
What do Animal Activists Think?
Animal rights activists, including Shalin Gala, Vice President of International Laboratory Methods at PETA, strongly disagree. “Subjecting pigs to live ammunition testing is pointless because pigs have drastically different anatomy to humans,” Gala explains. “There are numerous non-animal methods that can replace the use of animals in blast-related experiments.” He points to the work of Dr. Mainul Haque of the University of Portsmouth’s School of Mathematics and Physics and Royal Navy Surgeon Commander Timothy Scott, who have developed a groundbreaking simulator. This computerized system uses data from real war casualties, as well as existing human and animal datasets, to simulate complete body systems and their responses to injuries caused by shockwaves from explosions.
With such technological advancements, it seems increasingly clear that animal testing may no longer be necessary for body armor development. Despite decades of relying on these methods, there are now humane alternatives that could satisfy both military needs and ethical concerns. The question then becomes: why hasn’t the military fully transitioned to these new methods? Some speculate that budget constraints, entrenched practices, or a lack of pressure to change may be the reasons.
While pigs continue to be used for body armor testing today, there is a growing call for a future where both human and animal lives are valued. The military could leverage modern technology, such as advanced simulators, to innovate without resorting to animal testing. If enough pressure is applied, a shift toward more humane practices could become a reality.
Ultimately, this issue is a matter of balancing ethics with practicality. Is the potential benefit of using live pigs for testing worth the ethical costs? With ongoing technological advancements and increased public awareness, there is hope for a future where effective body armor is developed without causing harm to animals.
We would love to know your opinions on the matter. Do not hesitate to comment below with your thoughts!
