Some people argue that all experimentation on animals is bad and should be outlawed. However, others believe that important scientific discoveries can be made from animal experiments. Can experimentation on animals be justified? Are there any alternatives?
Clinical trials on animals have long roused bitter controversies, with some deriding this practice, deeming it cruel, and demanding prohibition, whereas others claim that such research remains essential for major scientific and medical breakthroughs. I believe in the absence of more credible options, such procedures must continue.
Those opposing treat such endeavors with indignation, and argue that it is unethical to harm living creatures for human benefit: subjecting them to pain, fear and distress, toxic substances, and surgeries, or behavioural studies raises moral concerns. Similarly, many maintain that humans are not entitled to exploit animals simply because they cannot defend themselves.
Nevertheless, supporters of this system vehemently defend such activities; they are pivotal to the development of life-saving medicines and understanding diseases. Historically, several breakthroughs - such as vaccines for polio and rabies - were achieved through animal studies. Researchers argue that before prescribing drugs to humans, evaluating their safety on animals is critical, for this can help circumvent severe side effects, justifying controlled and regulated use of this method for the sake of mankind.
Although the opponents suggest that advancements in technology have introduced several state-of-the-art alternatives: laboratory testing using human cells, computer simulations, and artificial intelligence to predict toxicity and drug interactions, these machine-based models are prone to producing unpredictable outcomes that fail to clearly predict the impact of simulation tested substances on the human body, making it quite risky to release such products for human consumption, upholding the need for continuation of such exploration.
Overall, while animal experimentation raises serious ethical concerns, it can still be deemed warranted in cases where the research is essential for medical progress, but lacks any plausible alternatives. Nonetheless, continued investment in modern scientific methods should be encouraged so that dependence on animal testing can be gradually mitigated.
