Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer, while others are in favour of them because of their benefits to humanity. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

It is true that medicines and other products are routinely tested on animals before they are cleared for human

use

. While I tend towards that animal testing is morally wrong, I would have to support a limited amount of animal testing for the development of medicines. On the one hand, there are clear ethical arguments against animal experimentation. To

use

a common example of

this

practice, laboratory mice may be given an illness so that the effectiveness of a new drug can be measured. Opponents of

such

research

argue that a human is not right to subject animals to

this

kind of trauma and that the lives of all creatures should be respected. They believe that the benefits to humans do not justify suffering caused and that scientists should have alternative methods of

research

.

On the other hand

, reliable alternatives to animal experimentation may not be always available. Supporters of the

use

of animals in medical

research

believe that a certain amount of suffering of the part of mice or rats can be justified if the human lives are saved. They argue that opponents of

such

research

could feel differently if a member of their own families needed a medical treatment that had been developed through the

use

of animal experimentation. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal tests for non-medical products, but I feel that it may be a necessary evil where new drugs and medical procedures are concerned. In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be wrong to ban testing on animals for vital medical

research

until equally effective alternatives have been developed.