90% of drugs fail during human trials, even though there were promising results in animal testing.Using animals for testing to see if it’s safe for humans gives little data useful for analysis. Studies have shown that drug tests on monkeys are just as useless as those used on other species in showing how human will react to the drug even though it is the closest animal that resembles humans. All animals should be protected from inhumane testing of products that benefit humans because their is alternative testing methods now exist that can take the place of animals, The cells and structure of animals is different from humans because of this they are poor test subjects, when animals are used for testing afterwards they are almost always killed. …show more content…
Any of the results that can help humans can be produced in other ways. Using mice and rats to see if a drug is safe is only accurate 43% of the time. Plus 19% of 93 dangerous drug symptoms could have been predicted by animal testing. For example High-Throughput Screening is one of the alternative testing method by using a computer to simulate the process. For these reasons it would be better if humans used alternative testing methods.
The cells and structure of animals is different from humans, because of this they are poor test subjects. Testing on animals to see if something is safe for humans has not been proven. The bigger the drug the less it works even after it was proven to work on rats and mice. Out of 48 cancer drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency that were tested on animals almost half showed no survival.Because of this the testing on animals to see if safe for humans half the time it won’t