Table of contentsIntroductionBodyArgument 1: Animal testing is necessary for scientific and medical progress.Argument 2: Animal testing causes unnecessary harm and suffering to animals.Argument 3 : Animal testing may not accurately predict human results.ConclusionReferencesIntroductionAnimal testing has been carried out since ancient times and remains a controversial and sensitive issue today. On the one hand, animal testing has contributed significantly to scientific and medical advances, which have improved human life and increased our knowledge of biology. On the other hand, many people argue that it is unethical and cruel to inflict suffering on animals for the benefit of humans. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay The purpose of this essay is to evaluate both sides of the debate and present a reasoned argument regarding the issue of animal testing. BodyArgument 1: Animal testing is necessary for scientific and medical progress. Proponents of animal testing argue that they are essential to the development of new treatments and therapies. For example, vaccines for polio, hepatitis, and rabies were all developed using animal testing [1]. Likewise, surgical procedures and drugs are commonly tested on animals before being used on humans. However, critics of animal testing often claim that animal models are not reliable indicators of results in humans. For example, a study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that almost half of drugs that showed promising results in animal testing failed in human trials [2]. Additionally, many animals react differently than humans to medications and illnesses, which can lead to inaccurate test results. While these concerns are valid, proponents of animal testing argue that there are not yet alternative methods to replace animal testing. For example, computer simulations and cell culture models can provide useful data, but their ability to reproduce the complex interactions of a living organism is limited [3]. As such, animal testing remains an integral part of the scientific and medical research process. Argument 2: Animal testing causes unnecessary harm and suffering to animals. The use of animals in scientific experiments has been criticized on ethical grounds by animal rights activists and others. argue that animal testing constitutes cruelty. There are many cases where animals suffered unnecessarily during experiments, were subjected to painful and harmful procedures, or were kept in inadequate conditions [4]. A counterargument to this claim is that the benefits of animal testing outweigh the harm to animals. Human well-being, it is argued, is more important than animal rights. However, animal rights advocates say this is a false dichotomy and that there are alternative testing methods that do not harm animals. Examples of this include in vitro studies, mathematical models, and other methods. It is worth noting that major pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, Roche and Novartis have invested in non-animal alternatives and are working to replace animal testing in many, 20(12), 1433-1445.