Some people claim that it is acceptable to use animals in medical research for the benefit of human beings, while others argue that it is wrong. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

'No pain, no gain', a classic saying proved right in various fields, including the medical industry where it is a norm to sacrifice

animals

for the medicines' applicability. While many people support exhaustive animal experimentations, I embrace

this

notion that they are morally wrong,

hence

not the only way to secure safety for humanity. The main reason why some value animal testing in conducting medical trials is its contribution to many life-saving cures and treatments. Practically, several breakthroughs in the

last

100 years had their roots in successful research on

animals

.

For instance

, experiments, where dogs had their pancreases removed, led to the discovery of insulin and

thus

the indirect cure for diabetes in humans.

Furthermore

, it is impossible to launch new drugs before ensuring their harmlessness through reactions of similar research subjects.

However

, I am on the same side as those who consider the involvement of

animals

in the makings of human medicines cruel and unacceptable. Should humans always regard their society as equal and lawful, they had better be aware of the respect that all creatures deserve. In that way,

such

authorities as governments should invest in developing alternative methods replacing the use of

animals

so that none of them will have to suffer, namely software modelling human organs... In conclusion,

although

it is undoubtedly true that animal testing has revolutionised medical supplies for humans, I opine that the benefits we earn do not justify the pains facing

animals

and that there will ,sooner or later, be other humane ways through which animal-free healthcare could be made available.