Many people believe that animal experiments are cruel. Others believe that they are necessary for scientific development. To what extend do you agree or disagree

Medical research and invention have been increasingly developing over the past decades. Whilst I adopt a view that animal testing is inhuman, I also agree that the advancement of science cannot lack the performance of these methods. On the one hand, animal experimentation would discernibly reflect both injustice and selfishness of man. It is undoubted that humans practically evade their risks and failures of medicines by converting their experimental procedures to creatures being deeply sentient about their pains. Moreover, animals are thoroughly inevitable to endure physical and mental traumas. In fact, various practices are ruthlessly conducted through painful methods such as surgery operating, forcing toxic chemicals, or even cruel killing. Consequently, these techniques universally trigger off many waves of protests owing to their adverse effects which potentially inflict utmost physical pains, permanent handicaps, and deaths. On the other hand, researching on animals is still the most efficacious and reliable way until recent days. In particular, laboratory species are abstractly similar to humans in body structures and genes while other artificially alternative achievements would be financially and meticulously demanding for completing scientific structures. If animal experiments are purely abolished, there would be different impediments of indispensable medical development resulting in the deficiency of drugs, the spread of infectious diseases, and subsequently death. In a nutshell, it is evil to do animal testing in spite of its necessities. From my perspective, besides, applying adequately ethical initiatives to their processes of researches aiming to ease their pains, scientists should promote alternative studies to minimize the uses of these experiments. (259 words)