I believe that animal rights should not be violated by testing, but testing may be done with lab grown organs, or any government approved alternatives. Animal testing is not wrong if it is a drug for a certain animal. However, extensive research must be done first, before testing commences. I believe this because of animal cruelty laws, and because you could find ways around the issue. Also you should not have to do much biological testing in the first place, simply because of what type of research you are doing, you should have done chemical research of the human or animals targeted, and there is the alternative of organ growing. Animals also have basic rights. Animal test subjects are also never perfect, they have many genetic differences …show more content…
A drug used in an animal may not react to anything in them, but it may react to our bodies, like the neurons in our brain, which are much more advanced, more than that of a mouse, therefore having more diverse chemicals in them. There is also an alternative, growing an organ. They’re accurate, they have no outside variables, and are a closed system. This is also better because it develops organ growing technology to save more people's lives. Another reason is that the organ can be any organ, provided you have a cell of it, it could be the heart of an antelope, the liver of a macaw, or even a human pancreas. The options are almost limitless. Also, it is morally wrong to test on animals. Animals have basic rights. One right is to have some control over their own lives. Another right is to avoid suffering, which includes having food, water and shelter to boot. By testing, we are subjecting animals to possible suffering; therefore lowering their quality of life. An animal values its life just as much as we do ours. The proof of this is that they will fight for life. Why kill and maim what did nothing to us? Animals are not entirely stupid as well; they can reason, and they do suffer the same as we