ANIMAL TESTINGThere are many pros and cons toward practice of animal testing. Unfortunately, neither seem to satisfy everyone including the public, government and scientists. To begin with, thousands of lives are receiving the benefits every day thanks to medical drugs and treatments developed from experiments. In contrast, some animal rights campaigners are calling for animal testing ban for the sake of cruelty. In addition, many of these animals received tests for substances that will never actually see approval or public consumption and use. A question then may arise: Should animals be used for laboratory test?Those who are in favor of animal testing say that is vital to improve human health. In fact, there are also individuals who are against but still support animal testing for medicine and the development. Animals used in research have provided vital information for numbers of illnesses including addiction, anxiety disorders, phobias, incontinence, and more[1]. The California Biomedical Research Association states that nearly every medical breakthrough in the last 100 years has resulted directly from research using animals [2]. More important, animal testing has contributed to several life-saving cures and treatments.In addition, people who are in favor say that there is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system. Living systems like human beings are extremely complex. Evaluating a drug for side effects requires a circulatory system to carry the medicine to different organs. Additionally, conditions such as blindness and high blood pressure cannot be studied in tissue cultures [3]. Furthermore, even the most powerful supercomputers are unable to simulate the workings of complex organs such as the brain.On the other hand, people who are against animal testing say that animal testing is cruel and inhumane. According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, and more [4]. Animals suffer a big amount of pain during experiments while being given no anesthesia for relief. In addition to this, the infliction of different types of wounds is necessary to study the healing process. The commonly used LD50 (lethal dose 50) test involves finding out which dose of a chemical will kill 50% of the animals being used in the experiment [5].Personally, I am in the middle, neither in favor nor against of animal testing. Animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. On the other hand, many of these experiments cause pain to the animals involved or reduce their quality of life in other ways. I think is morally wrong to cause animals suffering to that extend, and this experiments should be made as humane as possible. In conclusion, it is wrong to use animals if alternative testing methods would produce equally valid results.References:

[1] http://animalresearch.thehastingscenter.orgNov. 24, 2014, 11:30a.m[2] http://www.articlemyriad.com/argument-favor-animal-research-benefits/Nov. 25, 2014, 12:05p.m[3] http://www.articlemyriad.com/argument-favor-animal-research-benefits/Nov. 25, 2014, 12:50p.m[4] http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.htmlNov. 26, 2014, 10:40p.m[5] http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.htmlNov. 26, 2014, 11:50p.m