So why are we testing on these innocent creatures that haven't done anything to us?? jo;phoffuigzdx, ©bjdfsihuzcxnj fshuuuuuuuuuuuuueiwy7ugt4iwefkjbvaslc;nojdwp-r3yhpfowdwq7gfgwqguasbcidgacivg7sgcaicb7sdcsdwodwdywdddsiuhnnn,ncksai88dyehixsznb cfdfryujm nvcdfrtgbn vcdfrvtghynuj nbvfgthyu7j vcgfrthyjunk,bvfgthyujkil,eoifhpeh AAAbhdshsb edwfbcdcudbcccccbbbbjikdslnnjnnkjdsjkdmewifheiuf cvcg3vv vf Once upon a time there was a lovely princess. But she had an enchantment upon her of a fearful sort, which could only be broken by Love's first kiss. Additionally, animal experimentation is about 92% ineffective overall.Tags: Why Write A Research PaperProfessional Goals Essay MbaDefine Problem Solving ProcessThesis Statement For Hospitality In The OdysseyAbse Poet Welsh Playwright EssayistEssay And On And School And Dress And CodeEssays Of Mignon MclaughlinUniversity Of Texas EssayBob Dylan EssaysEssays On Mind And Matter
Many medical treatments have been made possible by animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and many more. Improves human health: It is for this reason that animal testing is considered vital for improving human health and it is also why the scientific community and many members of the public support its use.
In fact, there are also individuals who are against animal testing for cosmetics but still support animal testing for medicine and the development of new drugs for disease. Helps ensure safety of drugs: Another important aspect to note is that animal testing helps to ensure the safety of drugs and many other substances humans use or are exposed to regularly.
She waited in the dragon's keep in the highest room of the tallest tower for her true love and true love's first kiss.
Well that's good for ten schillings, if you can prove it.
also, anyone who argued with intellect and not big letters or emotional junk, good job finding facts and viable arguments among the previously mentioned junk.
Animal testing should be banned because it's much more expensive than alternatives and less effective than those safe, harmless other methods that don't harm living creatures. On top of that, animal testing may occur more than once and over the course of months, which means that additional costs are incurred. The price of animals themselves must also be factored into the equation. Following on that criticism is the premise that because animals are in an unnatural environment, they will be under stress. Therefore, they won't react to the drugs in the same way compared to their potential reaction in a natural environment. There are companies who breed animals specifically for testing and animals can be purchased through them. Animals and humans are never exactly the same: There is also the argument that the reaction of a drug in an animal's body is quite different from the reaction in a human. The main criticism here is that some believe animal testing is unreliable. Drugs in particular can carry significant dangers with their use but animal testing allows researchers to initially gauge the safety of drugs prior to commencing trials on humans. This means that human harm is reduced and human lives are saved – not simply from avoidance of the dangers of drugs but because the drugs themselves save lives as well as improve the quality of human life.4. It is this aspect of animal testing that many view as a major negative against the practice, as it seems that the animal died in vain because no direct benefit to humans occurred. It is very expensive: Another con on the issue of animal testing is the price. Animal testing generally costs an enormous amount of money, as the animals must be fed, housed, cared for and treated with drugs or a similar experimental substance.