As public safety is of the highest importance, it is often necessary to test new products on animals. It is better for a few animals to suffer from for human life to be placed at risk by untested products. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Many people argue that with the increase in human’s demands and the development of technologies, it is necessary for manufacturing new products after being tested on animals. I partly agree with previously mentioned perspective. To start with, there are two main reasons that make people agree with

this

opinion. There’s no doubt that realistic tests are essential for people to understand how animals react toward the product.

This

could probably help them to have some certain adjustments

such

as

cure

Suggestion

a cure

or medical breakthroughs to reduce the negative effects on human beings.

In addition

, human’s safety is obviously prioritized.

For

Suggestion

Four

thousand years, men have contributed to the world’s development in many ways. So animals should sacrifice for

this

sake of a greater creature, which

also

help in the world’s innovation.

However

, in the digital era, I personally think that computer simulations are a possible alternative of animal tests. With the exact data, computer now can predict the reaction of human toward products with high accuracy, especially in transportation.

Moreover

, in the moral aspect, animals are not to be experienced to dead In some ways, animals should have rights as they help to keep biodiversity which can make the world become better in technological and modern ways.

Therefore

, they shouldn’t be treated like that. In conclusion,

this

perspective is still a controversial problem. Some people believe that animals should be tested for human’s safety while others does not. In my opinion, if

technology

Suggestion

the technology

is available, products should not be tested on animals but on modern devices.