英语论文网

药是非常复杂的领域。毫无疑问，它已经走过的历史可以证明药物可以帮助人类活得更长，但它也有其不好的时候。由于医学的进步，我们已经找到治愈各种疾病的药物，并且可以延长我们的生命。但是，偶尔，医学也是一个很有争议的领域，动物实验是医学的最有争议的领域之一。一些医学专家认为动物试验必要和有益的探索不同的治疗方法。在另一方面，许多动物群体的权利机构，也包括医学专家，考虑动物试验残忍和不必要的。我认为动物试验是不道德的，如果不禁止也应该进行限制。动物试验是杀害无辜的动物中最残酷的方式，如解剖，中毒，活体解剖，毒理学试验等方法。为了更好地理解为什么动物试验是不道德的，为什么要限制这种实验，一下我将介绍关于动物试验的利弊争论。

Medicine is very complicated field. There is no doubt that it has helped human beings through history to live longer, but it has had its bad times too. Because of medicine we have found cures for various diseases, and now can extend our lives for years. Medicine is helping animals too. However, on occasions, medicine is a very controversial field, and animal testing is one of the most controversial fields of medicine. Some people and Medical experts regard animal testing as necessary and helpful in discovering various cures. On the other hand, many animal right groups, and also medical experts, consider animal testing cruel and unnecessary. In my opinion animal testing is unethical and if not forbidden it should be limited to the maximum. Animal testing kills innocent animals in the cruelest ways such as dissection, poisoning, vivisection, toxicology testing, and other methods. To better understand why animal testing is unethical and why it should be limited I will present the pros and cons arguments of animal testing.

First of all, animal testing should be forbidden because for certain products there is no need for testing. There are products, which pose no danger to the human health, but medical personnel still performs tests on animals to see the results. These are 'just in case' tests, which kill animals for no cause. For example, killing animals just to find out if a shampoo or soap smells good is unethical. Medical companies, and experts, should create some kind of ethical code for animal testing. For example, animal tests are forbidden for products that do not cause serious health problems in human beings. Lab experts and doctors should find other ways how to conduct safety testing for such basic products, and limit the number of animals that are killed.

Additionally, many experts argue that results from animal testing may generate at least two or more different outcomes. For example, soap may cause allergy in rats, but not in rabbits. In this case both animals would be killed for no result. Also, blinding or killing a rabbit just to see if some new kind of mascara is satisfactory is very cruel and unethical. Further, animals are different from human beings - they have different bodies and other organs, so testing on animals may not bring the expected results. Rats, frogs, or rabbits may react to some chemical or drug, but this does not guarantee that the reaction will be the same or similar when tested on human beings. Because, humans are different from animals there is no need for animal testing. Medical workers should find more efficient ways to test products that will get them the right results.

According to many animal rights groups and medical experts, that are against animal testing, the biggest argument against animal testing is that there are now many other alternative testing methods available. The medicine has become so advanced that animal testing is obsolete. If we want more accurate and real results we can use human cells for testing. They may show the exact reaction and results from drugs or other testing. Also,