Greetings!
The subject of discussion that involves the use of animals by scientists for experiments is one that, although I have heard people passionately debate, I have not really given much deep thought to. However, writing on this prompt compels me to think about it carefully.
Under normal circumstances, with deep regard for life, it is not fair to take an animal's life or subject it to deep pain just to run an experiment. It does not sound right at all. However, what other alternatives exist to achieve the same results, given that animals are the creatures most similar to humans, with nearly identical characteristics? This is why I do not actively engage in such arguments—my thoughts are straightforward.
Perhaps my thoughts are limited in scope, but I have tried to think of possible ways animals could be replaced in experiments, and nothing substantial has come to mind. Even if scientists could develop synthetic skin and flesh that mimics humans or animals, it would still fall short of exact replication, especially regarding biological reactions. Similarly, if a human-like robot were created for experiments, there is no way the results would be as authentic as those obtained from tests involving living humans or animals. Using such alternatives might result in inaccuracies, potentially causing harm to human life when the tested products are put into use.
Many people argue that animals' lives are just as precious as human lives and suggest that humans should be used for such experiments instead, as this would yield more accurate results. However, while we may want to consider animals and humans as equals, our emotional connections differ. The feelings we have for the death of a human and that of an animal are not the same, except for those with deep attachments to their pets. Even then, there is still a distinction between the loss of a human and that of an animal.
!
Do I hate animals? No, I do not. However, I am not a vegetarian either.
One possible way to strike a balance in the debate over using animals or humans for tests could involve using convicted criminals sentenced to death. These individuals could be used for experiments before their execution, or the method of execution itself could be incorporated into the experiments. While this suggestion may sound awful, especially considering the feelings of the victims' families, it mirrors what happens in the animal kingdom. Animals also have families and communities, but as humans, we rarely perceive or feel their pain in the same way.
If such a system were adopted, the debate about using animals for experimental tests might be resolved. However, many people would likely still oppose it, arguing that using animals is inherently unethical, and they may perceive the use of death-row inmates as equally inhumane. They might also argue that this approach devalues human life, even if those being used have been deemed "less important" due to their crimes.
Conclusion
Implementing the use of sentenced criminals for experiments would undoubtedly be a daunting task. As it stands, animal testing seems to remain the only viable option, and we may just have to accept it as an unfortunate necessity.
Thank you for reading.