From ancient times, some live animals such as rabbits and mouse have been used for scientific research around the world. These methods of testing have been a controversial topic discussed by the scientists. While some scientists believe that animal testings are essential for their experiments, others doubt the value of animal testings. This paper examines both the arguments for and against using live animals for scientific research and provides suggestions based on these arguments.
A number of scientists advocate the use of live animals in scientific research. They think that animal tests can improve their understanding of medical knowledge. According to ProCon Organization (2016),’’animals and humans are so biologically similar, they are susceptible to many of the same conditions and illnesses, including heart
…show more content…
Ellen Frankel & Jeffrey (2001) considered that testings should be using human instead of animals for good scientific reasons. Although some of the animals are similar to human, the DNA are different. As a result, the side effects that made by the medicine on animals and humans may not the same. Moreover, the size of humans are different from the animals, the same dose of drug may harmful some small size animals like rabbits but do not have effects on humans.
It is clear that there are both advantages and disadvantages to using live animals for scientific research. Animal testings may improve the understanding of medical knowledge and advance the health of human beings. These benefits, however, using the life of animals and include some inappropriate treatments to those testers. A great deal of animals using in the tests are dead because of harsh environment. In addition, animals are not as same as humans because they have different DNA and size, so the result of those researches that using animal tests are