Animal Testing, Do We Need It?

In order for any argument to be dependable, research must take place. Analysis, assessment, and, eventually, judgment occur. This, however, does not happen until thorough evaluation of reliable sources takes place on behalf of both sides. In order for this assessment to take place, it's important to dwell on the following question: Should animals be used for research? While Side A believes, yes, animals should be used for research, the opposition does not share the same perspective. Side B, on the other hand, thinks animals should not be used for research. It's important to explore both sides in order to fully answer the question being debated.

According to Webster's Dictionary, liberation is defined as the act or process of freeing someone or something from another's control: the act of liberating someone or something. In addition, beneficial is defined as producing good or helpful results or effects : producing benefits.

One important point to consider is if animal research is vital to medical research. Side A believes that yes, it is vital to medical research. “In a 2004 issue of Hospital Doctor, Professor Tipu Aziz of University of Oxford and Imperial College London encouraged scientists to speak out against intimidation by animal activists. He told his peers, “Anyone who has been to medical school and treated patients will understand the vital contribution made by animal research” (Haugen 18-19). According to the American Physiology Society, in order to even understand let alone treat new diseases, physiologists need to recognize how the body works under both abnormal and normal conditions to start new ways to prevent and treat disease; thus experimenting on animals who are living organisms.

Historically speaking, a disease such as polio, which was once a widespread

disease, is preventable and treatable thanks to animal research. Albert Sabin, who

developed the Polio vaccine said, "Without animal research, polio would still be...