Ethics of Animal TestingIs animal testing good or bad? No one has really answered this question until now. Everyone has their own opinion on this. I personally think that if we don't abuse the tests, they should be allowed. I don't think it's necessary to test animals for everything that comes on the market, but why not when it's a life and death issue like cancer. How else could we ensure that drugs don't kill us? Safety testing is carried out on a wide range of chemicals and products, including medicines, vaccines, cosmetics, household cleaning products, pesticides, food and packaging materials. Safety testing of chemicals and consumer products probably accounts for only 10 to 20 percent of animal use in laboratories, or about two to four million animals in the United States. Yet the use of animals in safety testing looms large in the animal research controversy. It raises questions such as the ethics and humanitarian nature of deliberate poisoning of animals, the appropriateness of harming animals for the purpose of marketing a new cosmetic or household product, the applicability of animal data to humans and the opportunity to save millions of animals by developing alternatives to a handful of widespread problems. procedures used. The Animals in Research section is committed to promoting alternatives to the use of animals in product testing and biomedical research and education. Alternatives are scientific methods that satisfy one or more of the "Three Rs": they replace the use of animals in a scientific procedure, they reduce the number of animals used in a procedure, and/or they refine a scientific procedure. permissible way of killing and inflicting pain in order to prevent (quantitatively or qualitatively) greater harm, to protect life, and when no reasonable and feasible alternative exists is available. Attempting to claim that moral responsibility is reserved for the human species is doomed to failure. If this is the case, then we definitely have a moral obligation to the weaker and gentler. If not, what right do we have to decide who will live and who will die (in pain)? The increasingly fragile “fact” that species do not interbreed “proves” that species are distinct, some say. But who can deny that we share most of our genetic material with flies and mice? We are not as different as we would like. And ever-increasing cruelty toward other species will not establish our genetic supremacy – just our moral inferiority..