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 need.

While

I tend towards the viewpoint 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

exploration argue that humans have no right to subject animals to

this

kind of trauma

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

and that the lives of all creatures should be respected. They believe that the benefits to humans do not justify the suffering caused

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

and that scientists should

use

alternative methods of investigation.

On the other hand

, reliable alternatives to animal

experiment

Fix the agreement mistake

experiments

show examples

may not always be available. Supporters of the

use

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

such

probe might feel differently if a member of their own family needed a medical treatment that had been developed through the

use

of animal experimentation. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal testing 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