Prompt: Some people think that scientists experimenting with animals in a laboratory is the only way we can guarantee new products will be safe for human use. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Animal testing in medicine has been carried out since a really long time. Scientists use animals to examine whether new products are safe for human to use. We cannot deny that the experimenting with animals is effective and evident-based to examine the new products' safety. From my point of view, I do not think there is an alternative method to instead of animal testing, in the future maybe, but not this moment. Ċ First of all, mammals have the same body anatomy with human being's, which could present almost the same reaction after they have been given the new treatment. Drugs, for example, require bloods flow, multi-organs cooperation and metabolism to show their reactions. Neither computer nor high-tech robot can represent this complex reaction. Only living creatures can prove the implications of drugs and procedures as mankind. Secondly, the national ethic standards are well regulated with all the laboratory's experimenting with animals. Animals which under take a test are less pain and suffer. Specialists use analgesia to put the animals under sedation to be pain free. Ċ However, when we speak about animal testing cons, there still are plenty of emotional and ethical issues staring in our faces. The first and foremost con is the hurt and death the animal must be going through. Animals cannot talk, so how can we determine whether or not and the level of pain the poor creatures are going through? Ċ To sum up, animals should be treated with respect. Animals make a significant contribution to humans. Every coin has two sides, so does animal experimentation. But I think animal trials helps a lot, especially in minimize the chances of human death during clinical practice, its pros over its cons.