Arguments that are hard to refute for my topic would be the fact that animal testing has produced many favorable results. It has been done for years and has helped to develop the polio vaccine, insulin and many other diseases. It has even made make-ups and cleaners safer for human use.
Testing on animals has been around for years with good results. The scientific world still uses it today despite improved technology. It is hard to say something is bad when it has produced so many good results. How do you argue that animal testing is bad when it may have in some way saved your life or the life of someone you know. Testing has also helped to test artificial hearts lungs and bionic limbs.
Although I plan to argue that although animal testing has produced favorable results it is immoral especially since now days alternatives are available. We have plenty of alternatives that offer the same results faster and cheaper. Not to mention that they save animal lives. Also the results from these tests are more reliable and are more directly related to humans.
This is the new age. The age of technology and we should be using that instead of a life. A life is a life. Companies could expand and be more successful at what they do by embracing this new technology. They would not have to worry about all of the rules and regulations that they have to deal with when having animals as test subjects. In the end it my not take as many workers either and they might be able to save time and essentially lives with this time.Posted by burg0199 at November 19, 2004 11:17 AM