Now, many scientific institutions conduct research on animals. Some people regard it as cruel and unnecessary, while others believe it is justified in the interest of human welfare. Discuss the two views and give your opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. You should write at least 250 words.

Animal testing is a common methodology among scientists to verify their hypotheses before introducing them to the public.

Nevertheless

, the practice has been condemned as inhumane and extra due to its torture and pain inflicted on animals. Others claim that experiments on live creatures are crucial and inevitable to the welfare of humankind.

This

passage will discuss both views and depict the author’s opinion. On one hand, rights activists oppose research performed on live animals as it contradicts their belief in animal rights. To proponents, animals possess certain dignity and inalienable rights, including their right to refuse maltreatment. By allowing humans to conduct trials on living animals against their will and regarding them as inferior creatures, animal testing is delivering a dehumanizing message that anyone can take advantage of animals without considering their emotions and interests.

Secondly

, it is scientifically proven that results obtained from animal testing have little application to real-life situations. As the animals’ biological process is distinct from humans’, a drug that functions well on animals may be counterproductive for humans. According to the Singaporean Ministry of Health, only 3% of treatments successfully applied to rats can cure illnesses in patients.

On the other hand

, many opine that animal testing is an unavoidable stage prior to market introduction. Before officially producing vaccines or medicines, inventors have to confirm the effectiveness and harmless usage on living bodies, which is only acquired by testing on animals.

Additionally

, there are species

such

as chimpanzee that shares 97% of genes with human bodies that may help adapt drugs experimented on them to each person. The

next

benefit is that animal subjects are more easily handled under controlled conditions than human ones, which facilitates medical breakthroughs. Animals are justified to have short-lived cycles and significantly fewer social networks, all of which subjects them to risk and unstable tests that may break ground in medical fields. In summary, I believe that animal testing is vital for the welfare of both humans and animals themselves, but research should be conducted with minimal suffering and maximum concern with creatures’ interests. As experiments on live animals are associated with negative and positive features, it is ideal to impose restrictions

such

as limiting the use of animals to well-founded theories only.