Persuasive Essay: Should Scientists Use Animal Testing?

Animal Testing Should scientists use animals for scientific testing? Scientists have been using animals to test on and develop a medical treatment for thousands of years. Some people support animals testing because it saves lives for many people. Other people are against animals testing because it is not fair to harm animals. Scientists should stop using animals for scientific testing because there is different methods now exist that can replace the need for animals, using animals for scientific is more expensive than alternative methods and are waste of government research dollars, and animals are very different from human beings and therefore make poor test subject. First of all alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. “In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can “(Kara Rogers). This shows how we can use human cells for scientific testing and we don’t need to use animals for testing. “Computer models, such as virtual reconstructions of human

“Humane Society International compared a variety of animal tests with their in vitro counterparts and found animal tests were more expensive in every scenario studied”(Humane Society International). This comparison shows how much cheaper are other methods of testing compared to animal testing. "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) found $56.4 million of government funds spent on animal experiments that, despite running over many years, failed to provide any useful results”(Emily Trunnell). Many of the government money that goes to animal experiments gets wasted without any useful information. If scientists didn’t stop using animal testing government research money will be