Should animals be used for laboratory testing?

  Should animals be used for laboratory testing? Introduction Grabber / hook: Imagine a world without life-saving medicines and treatments. Would you still be willing to argue against the use of animals in laboratory testing? Introduce your topic: The use of animals in laboratory testing has been a highly debated topic for decades. Provide background information on the topic: Laboratory testing on animals involves using animals to conduct experiments and gather data for scientific research and medical advancements. Animals such as mice, rabbits, and monkeys are commonly used in these tests. Explain why you selected this topic: I chose this topic because it raises important ethical questions and has significant implications for both human health and animal welfare. Thesis statement: In this essay, we will analyze both the pro and con sides of the debate regarding the use of animals for laboratory testing. Pros and Cons Pro / “For” Side Transitional device + topic sentence: First, let’s examine the arguments in favor of using animals for laboratory testing. Summary of pro side, including major arguments and reasons: Supporters argue that animal testing is necessary for medical research, drug development, and ensuring the safety of products before they are released to the market. They believe that animals are biologically similar to humans in many ways and that the knowledge gained from animal testing is crucial for advancing human health. Include at least one example of supporting evidence / source cited in MLA style: According to the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS), animal research has played a vital role in numerous medical advancements, including the development of vaccines, treatments for cancer, and surgical techniques. Con / “Against” Side Transitional device + topic sentence: Now, let’s explore the arguments against using animals for laboratory testing. Summary of con side, including major arguments and reasons: Opponents argue that animal testing is cruel, unethical, and unnecessary. They believe that alternative methods, such as in vitro testing and computer modeling, can provide more accurate results without subjecting animals to harm. They also point out that animals may not always accurately predict human responses due to biological differences. Include at least one example of supporting evidence / source cited in MLA style: According to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), over 90% of drugs tested on animals fail in human clinical trials, indicating the limitations of animal models in predicting human outcomes. Analysis & Conclusion Transition statement: In conclusion, both sides of the debate present valid arguments. Summarize both the pro and con side’s major points: Proponents argue that animal testing is essential for scientific advancements and human health, while opponents emphasize the ethical concerns and limitations of animal models. Answer the question: Who has the stronger argument? Based on the analysis, the con side presents a stronger argument. The ethical concerns surrounding animal testing cannot be ignored, and alternative methods can provide more accurate results without causing harm to animals. Memorable closing statement: As we move forward, it is crucial to prioritize the development and implementation of alternative testing methods that can replace animal experimentation while still ensuring human safety and medical progress. Works Cited American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS). “Why Are Animals Necessary in Biomedical Research?” AALAS Foundation, www.aalasfoundation.org/why-animals/necessary-biomedical-research/. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). “Animal Testing 101.” PETA, www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animal-testing-101/.  

Sample Answer