Many believe using animals to conduct experiments is inappropriate and that it shouldn’t be considered lawful. At the same time, others argue that it’s quite useful for science. This essay will discuss whether animal experiments are reasonable, and suggest some substitutions.
Some of the most common points in arguments in favour of this practice are that it’s irreplaceable for science to some extent, and that the absence of it could harm people. Firstly, a lot of scientific research is actually based on previously conducted experiments. Many of them involved animals, which allowed to understand the closest possible results of testing the same substances or irritants on humans. Even up to our time, scientists don’t know how it could be replaced, because the outcome has always been the most precise. Secondly, and consequently, lots of products are animal-tested before being sold to the public. Losing this opportunity could mean higher risks for health, as some of them would be under-researched.
However, there is something done in order to find alternative practices. To begin with, the AI development played a major role in this sphere. As I said before, there was a lot of research done previously, and AI can use this data to predict and calculate potential outcome needed for the following actions. Moreover, some scientists tend to conduct research using lab-grown bacteria. The key plus of it, is that molecules cannot feel pain or suffer from actions of experiments. As we can see, animal experiments are not always irreplaceable.
In conclusion, animal experiments can be justified because of the problems it creates to find the alternative to it, and the risk it puts on the human well-being, if not used. Despite that, there are some possible substitutes that scientists try to integrate.