Animal experimentation is a contentious issue, but it boils down to two essential questions: does it work, and is it ethical?

Antibiotics, insulin, vaccines for polio and cervical cancer, organ transplantation, HIV treatments, heart-bypass surgery - it reads like an A to Z of medical progress. But these major advances have something in common: they were all developed and tested using animals.

The use of animals to better understand human anatomy and human disease is a centuries-old practice. Animal research has provided valuable information about many physiological processes that are relevant to humans and has been fundamental in the development of many drugs, including vaccines, anesthetics, and antibiotics. Animals and humans are similar in many ways. Animal behaviour can be as complex as human behaviour, and the cellular structures, proteins, and genes of humans and animals are so similar that the prospect of using animal tissues to replace diseased human tissues is under intense investigation for patients who would otherwise never receive a potentially life-saving transplant.

Alternatives to animal testing are primarily based on biochemical assays, on experiments in cells that are carried out in vitro (“within the glassâ€), and on computational models and algorithms. These techniques are typically far more sophisticated and specific than traditional approaches to testing in whole animals, and many in vitro tests are capable of producing information about the biological effects of a test compound that are as accurate as―and in some cases more accurate than―information collected from studies in whole animals. In addition, basic research is focusing increasingly on developing models based on organisms that are less expensive and more experimentally efficient than mammals. Such organisms include fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster), nematodes (Caenorhabditis elegans), and zebra fish (Brachydanio rerio).

http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/09/scientific-alternatives-to-animal-testing-a-progress-report/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3353960/Should-we-experiment-on-animals-Yes.html

Animal experimentation is a contentious issue, but it boils down to two essential questions: does it work, and is it ethical?

Antibiotics, insulin, vaccines for polio and cervical cancer, organ transplantation, HIV treatments, heart-bypass surgery - it reads like an A to Z of medical progress. But these major advances have something in common: they were all developed and tested using animals.

The use of animals to better understand human anatomy and human disease is a centuries-old practice. Animal research has provided valuable information about many physiological processes that are relevant to humans and has been fundamental in the development of many drugs, including vaccines, anesthetics, and antibiotics. Animals and humans are similar in many ways. Animal behaviour can be as complex as human behaviour, and the cellular structures, proteins, and genes of humans and animals are so similar that the prospect of using animal tissues to replace diseased human tissues is under intense investigation for patients who would otherwise never receive a potentially life-saving transplant.

Alternatives to animal testing are primarily based on biochemical assays, on experiments in cells that are carried out in vitro (“within the glassâ€), and on computational models and algorithms. These techniques are typically far more sophisticated and specific than traditional approaches to testing in whole animals, and many in vitro tests are capable of producing information about the biological effects of a test compound that are as accurate as―and in some cases more accurate than―information collected from studies in whole animals. In addition, basic research is focusing increasingly on developing models based on organisms that are less expensive and more experimentally efficient than mammals. Such organisms include fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster), nematodes (Caenorhabditis elegans), and zebra fish (Brachydanio rerio).

http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/09/scientific-alternatives-to-animal-testing-a-progress-report/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3353960/Should-we-experiment-on-animals-Yes.html

Please go through an interesting article at the following thread. "Scientific discoveries have compensated for the pain we impose upon research animals".

http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N39/trent.html

Dear Mostafa, at first thank you for your thought.

See, stopping animals' sacrifice for food all over this world is not so easy and I did not ask for it though, killing endangered animals for sake of just advancement in science is not a wise idea. Isn't  it?

I hope you know that many countries are banning animal sacrifice in practical classroom now-a-days. Scientists from all over the world always try to innovate alternative methods for every kind of  hazards. Don't you think that there will be a day when we will be in danger from disturbance in ecological equilibrium? This problem is growing day by day. Shouldn't we stop endangered animals' sacrifice?

I still agree with you in one aspect that to acquire advancement in few fields of medical sciences, sacrificing fewer animals is an effective approach as no alternative method is in our hand until now. But classroom dissection can be immediately stopped in all global institutions and replaced by e-learning methods those are popular in advanced countries.

Regards,

Shankhadeep.

Very good explanation dear Mostafa though, in this case I suppose using heart is more necessary than using brain. Isn't the act altruistic to you?

Well, there are other arguments also!!!!!

The fact of the matter is that the point you just raised is not under the hand of human being. Lot of researches can find a solution to your problem.

Animal sacrifices by the hand of this very intelligent human being is the point of question here. Personal feelings should not be given independence to harm this beautiful world!!!!!

The regulations those your country follows in order to protect the ecosystem sound very much scientific, justified and human to me dear Pierlorenzo . That is one good way to solve the problem. I want to know what other countries are doing with this kind of situation?

Thanking you.

Here are some facts about animal experimenatation:

- Over 100 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned, and abused in US labs every year.

- 92% of experimental drugs that are safe and effective in animals fail in human clinical trials because they are too dangerous or don’t work.

- Labs that use mice, rats, birds, reptiles and amphibians are exempted from the minimal protections under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA).

Fore more information, you can refer to the following link

https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-animal-testing

I do support controlled animal sacrifice for science and education. It is not possible, for example, to educate veterinarians without it, or to test drugs in preliminary phases...

Why only animals, today even human embryonics are developed for stem cells and cloning researches. The question is not on ethics but related to excessive Darwinism.

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.ise.ox.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/9008/Ethics_of_Stem_Cell_and_Cloning_Research.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi_rbmo-qLMAhVMkY4KHXxiAtU4PBAWCCUwAw&usg=AFQjCNF-IGUrxqKZ25lfQszAxlM6fCA9yA

Thank you for sharing the reference which is very informative.

Yes really, human embryonic are also developed for researches but well, thank you for your novel idea about Darwinism ignoring our basic ethics.

Dear Shankhadeep:

I'm totally against the sacrifice or various forms of torture of animals for scientific experiments or other goals. 

Necessary for the survival of humankind, but should be practiced rationally.

Creative use of alternatives can support this case of reducing our dependence on animals.

Example - LEATHER  from TEA 

A sustainable film made from a byproduct of kombucha tea could be a new material for clothing, shoes, or handbags. The gel-like film, grown by a symbiotic colony of bacteria and yeast, feeds on a mixture of vinegar and sugar. The properties of this film is similar to leather once it’s harvested and dried,

Y. A. Lee (2016), Case Study of Renewable Bacteria Cellulose Fiber and Biopolymer Composites in Sustainable Design Practices

Thank you Krishnan and Yogesh. Your answers will send wise messages to the global community via RG.

Some people just make fun killing innocent animals for no reason. It is one of the shame for this century. The point of concern is even some well educated people are supporting this via RG.

Animal experiments have played a crucial role in the development of current medical treatments and will continue to be needed to respond to the emergence of new diseases.

Throughout history, different models in invertebrates and vertebrates have been used in scientific research to obtain information from biochemical, physiological and morphological issues of living beings, in general aspects and from the point of view of science related to or arising medicine, these models have allowed understanding the human being in health and disease, discover the mechanisms of disease and methods to prevent, as well as production, development and evaluation of drugs, it would be impossible to perform research directly in humans. Although have been developed no animal models, complex multigenic disease research and therapeutic trials need to be tested in animal models. It is generally recognized that in the absence of human data, animal research in many cases can offer approximations and predictions of human responses.

The research has been directed at replacing animal models with the development of in vitro systems such as cell culture or assay development in bacteria or yeast, or even computer systems simulation, which provide useful information; however, the complexity of multicellular organisms requires that research performs in animal testing.

Very many animal experiments are totally unnecessary today and therefore cannot be justified. Whether a substance is toxic can be determined without subjecting animals to pain and suffering.

Very many more experiments would be rendered obsolete if data sharing was encouraged.  As for sacrificing endangered animals to gain knowledge, I cannot see where that would ever be necessary in the 'interests of science' 

I agree with both of you dear Francisco and Barry.

You need to loose something to gain something.

“3Rs” guidelines proposed by William Russell and Rex Burch for making the use of animals in scientific research more humane:

• Restrict the use of animals;
• Refine experiments to minimise distress
• Replace tests with alternative techniques.

https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/the-3rs

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20130609-will-we-ever-end-animal-testing

Very helpful answer dear Yogesh.

Living and Working in Defense of Animals

Not only is vegetarianism more widespread in some countries in Europe, farmed animals there are also afforded much greater protection.

http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic983317.files/Readings%20October%2026/AgainstZoos_DaleJamieson.pdf

I do believe, Medical science has not learnt from its early interactions with animals and still does not have areal plan for using animals in science Apparently drugs tested successfully on a rat population in the laboratory have repeatedly failed in human populations yet one continues  the charade. Guideliness for Clinical trials work only till Phase II trials and later trials remain a complex problem for medical experimentation to convert the FDA approval into a viable drug system.

Also emerging market multinationals are not being educated rightly while the Academia in the US is only seeming to try to help without real contributions to solve these problems, continuing the charade of expensive drug development. Anything done with rational means can be justified. However, that needs to happen not in isolated barns but in public forums. 

There is more reason for continuing animal testing in behavioral studies. However, here also man's effort must be duly supervised. 

Do you support endangered animal sacrifice for development of science?

Sacrifice of the endangered animal for the development of science can be supported provided those developments are for the benefits of mankind as well as for the saving of the endangered animal species.

Any alternative idea to lead science progress without causing any harm to the innocent animal lives?

If the endangered animal need to be sacrificed for the very first time, perhaps detailed video recording & in-dept research can be done, so that through the advancement of 3D & 4D printing and computer technologies, those endangered animal physical conditions can be fabricated for testing or for experiment.  Alternatively, research can be conducted to find easily available animal substitutes that closely resemble to the attributes of the endangered animal for those experimentation or R&D.

I do not suppor endangered animal sacrifice.

No, simulations could be done for scientific studies. No sacrifice. If endangered animals are scarified for the sake of  science, What will we show to our younger generation? Medical related studies could be done only after the animals find their natural death. Will we sacrifice human life for scientific studies? Even law prevents mercy death for ailing patients in major parts of the world.

Anthropogenically created or modified landscapes, such as cultural landscapes, and temple sites and gardens can play an important role in the protection of plants and animals

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001478/147863e.pdf

The development of scince should replace experiments with animals by other means to do the same.

Dears

You can firstly try with simulations.

Regards

In some cases it is necessary. The important is that animals do not suffer too much . Simulations cannot always respect the real life.

Illegal poaching leading to more slaughter

http://mostendangeredanimals.com/

It should be avoided. First conservation of endangered animals should be given importance, then think about development of science. Human made disasters increases the extinction of plants and animals. Further killing is not acceptable.

Sacrificing animals for various scientific causes and welfare of humankind is imperative. But why endangered animals when so many others are available for the same. Animals endangered or becoming endangered should be protected and not sacrificed. 

It would be worth ONLY if there is a very high certainty thar results will significantly contribute to its conservation with effective and  feasible acrions to be implemented in a rather shiort term, ABSOLUTELY NOT worth but irresponsible if the objective is simply to add something new to general knowledge or to add one more new paper to the researcher's curriculum. What I think is right is to seek for other research alternatives as are some of the ones proposed in previous answers instead of killing endangered species,