The United States spends approximately sixteen billion dollars of taxpayer money on animal testing each year. Many people think that animal testing is a good thing for society and should continue. However, some people disagree, saying it is inhumane and cruel to all animals used in the experiments. Animal testing is very misunderstood because people do not know the purpose, benefits, harms, alternatives, or how animal testing has helped the medical field. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Many people don't understand why animals are used to test products that are primarily used on/for humans. Researchers usually use animals because they are very similar to humans. However, scientists recognize the limitations and differences between animals and humans. Testing is carried out on animals as they are considered the closest and most suitable for applying the data to humans (Murnaghan “Use”). So, where and why are animal tests carried out? Animal testing is done everywhere for various things. Animals are used to test drugs, create vaccines, etc. There are many regulations that companies and laboratories must follow to use animals for their experiments. For example, the United Kingdom has very strict standards. Animals can only be used if there is no other option. Universities, the military, medical schools, and pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies are the only places allowed to use animals for research and testing ("What is Murnaghan"). There are some benefits to animal testing that people sometimes overlook. One of the main benefits of animal testing has been the creation of vaccines and new drugs. Many treatments have been made possible through animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and more. Many scientists consider animal testing essential to improving human health. This is why the scientific community supports animal testing. Pharmacologists use animals to test the safety of a new drug before allowing the public to use it. Drugs can carry major dangers, but animal testing allows scientists to ensure a drug's safety. Drug testing on animals has stopped people from taking harmful drugs and increased the number of people saved - not by avoiding the dangers of drugs, but because the drugs themselves save and improve human life (Murnaghan " Use "). Pharmacologists and scientists are not the only ones. those who use animals for testing. The military uses animals to mimic combat injuries and evaluate the reactions of operators used in war. Animal testing will also be an essential part of avoiding a major catastrophe if a chemical attack ever takes place in the country (the Murnaghan “controversy”). Many people question whether the benefits of animal testing are worth their drawbacks or argue that these benefits will never justify the use of animals in testing. One of the disadvantages of animal testing is that the animals will livestill in captivity. Many animals die after being tested and those that survive may be permanently “disabled” after testing and put down. About eleven percent are used for toxicity testing and about ten percent die in tests that look for adverse effects of a product (Seiler 1363). Another disadvantage is that some products tested on animals are not used in any useful way if they are made public. . The sad truth is that many products tested on animals are never used by humans because they are never approved. This is the aspect of animal testing that people view as negative because the animal is being tested without any direct benefit to humans (Murnaghan “Use”). But what about the cost? Animals kept as pets can be expensive, as can animals used in experiments. Another reason people think animal testing should be banned is because animal testing is not cheap. Animals must be housed, fed and cared for throughout the experiments. The experiences can last from a few weeks to a few years. Also included is “the price of animals should also be factored into the equation.” There are companies that breed animals specifically for testing and animals can be purchased through them” (Murnaghan “Use”). Many say the downsides of animal testing should be enough to ban them, but what alternatives would scientists and researchers use instead of animals? There are many alternatives to animal testing, but what are these best alternatives? The most common are organs, tissues or cells grown in a laboratory. These alternatives have the capacity to reduce testing carried out on animals; a cell line, once created, ends the need for animals in research (Watts). However, there are many other alternatives. Some commercially available frames are financially accessible. MatTek, for example, has been promoting human skin equivalents for over a decade. Its EpiDerm system includes a sheet of human skin cells growing on the surface of a culture medium in a small plastic well. The solution is poured drop by drop onto the surface of the leaf then washed after a specific time. The reasonableness of the cells demonstrates the danger of the chemical associated with them (Watts). Mathematical models and PC simulations arouse the most inappropriate enthusiasm among activists. One of their basic standards is that the natural impacts of a chemical will depend on the size, shape, and different qualities of its molecules, making it conceivable to predict toxicity without real testing. The database these frameworks depend on will come from animal testing. However, once the link between subatomic structure and activity is understood, the toxicity of any new substance can be anticipated with a PC rather than a live mouse (Watts). Microdosing is another alternative that some researchers are studying. A more recent development is microdosing, which “puts experimental studies back into the bodies of human volunteers.” The process uses doses too low to create an adverse effect and "was made possible by analytical methods capable of detecting substances in blood and plasma at concentrations in the pg/ml range" (Watts). This is another great alternative, but Seiler also gives a great example. Seiler gives another great example of an alternative testing method.