💥 TRENDING: Id/Kogeth - High Quality

In conclusion, I am strongly against the use of animal testing because research methods and science now offer viable alternatives. In the past animal testing was seen as sometimes the only way to gain viable results. We now as a society have access to multiple different testing programmes using breakthroughs in laboratory science. Humane methods are what we as a society should be striving towards and whilst in the past there was no real substitute to using live subjects that is no longer the case as people who have strong beliefs against using animals to test has been working nonstop to create valuable alternatives which they have been successful in doing so. Animal testing should be consigned to the past even thought we cannot forgot what us humans have did to animals in the past and how cruel we were, but we should try move forward. We can acknowledge the contribution that animal testing has made to science and medicine whilst recognising that it is no longer required.

Continuing the reasons to argue against the use of animals is that animal testing is more expensive than alternative methods and are a waste of government money. “An unscheduled DNA synthesis animal test costs $32000 while the vitro alternative costs $11000”. If comparable results can be obtained using vitro alternative at a third of the cost, there is no reason to continue with expensive, outdated live animal tests when there is a viable alternative. Alternative tests are proven to have the same effect if not better than animal tests, and I believe that they should be used instead of testing on animals.