In the past 100 years, almost every medical breakthrough that has changed the lives of humans and animals has been possible because of animal testing. If animal testing were banned more lives would’ve been lost just because of the lack of proper medication or treatment. Animal testing doesn’t only help humans, it helps what we are testing on, animals.This topic is very important because if animal testing weren’t allowed then many humans and animals would die. ¬†Animal testing should be allowed because it creates life-saving treatments and cures, there is no adequate alternative to test on a living, whole-body system, and prevents the chance of humans being tested on or even dying without the cure or treatment required. Animal testing should be allowed because it results in life-saving treatments and cures. According to the “CBRA” “For more than a hundred years, virtually every medical breakthrough in human and animal health has been a direct result of animal testing”. This shows that animal testing resulted in the life-saving cures for humans and animals. If someone had a child and that child had something deadly, they would be given a cure or be treated. This treatment or cure has been tested on animals to be safe for humans. Furthermore, according to “Texas News” “We wouldn’t have a vaccine for hepatitis b without testing on chimpanzees”. This is another supporting point to that this saved many people’s lives as a result of animal testing. To summarize this point, animal testing should be allowed because it has saved many lives by creating cures. Animal testing should be allowed because there is no adequate alternative to test on a living, whole-body system. According to the “CBRA” “blindness cannot be studied in bacteria and it is not possible to study high blood pressure in tissue cultures”. Even though artificial tissue and cells can be used, if tested on, we need to know if the medicine or treatment affects any other part of the body. Knowing the effects on other parts of the body using artificial tissue is not possible because the body has very complex connections in all sorts of ways. Adding on to this idea, according to the “CBRA” “The nervous system, blood and brain chemistry, gland and organ secretion, and immunological responses are all interrelated”. This shows that you cannot test on single pieces of tissue if you want to know the side effects of other parts of the body. As a result, animal testing cannot be replicated and used on artificial tissue because the body is interrelated. Animal testing should be allowed because it prevents humans from being tested on because animals are used as a substitute. For instance, “some involves genetic manipulation, which would be unethical to perform on a human being” (Marvizon). This shows that we use animals to test on because it would be unethical to do to a human being. If someone would rather test on a rat or their own child or someone they love, they would choose the rat. To sum this up, animal testing is the only alternative to human testing, therefore, it should be allowed. On the other hand, some people might say, “The most familiar superior replacement to testing on animals is organs, tissues, or cells grown in a culture”(Geoff Watts). This point of view makes sense because it would work in some situations. However, this is unreliable, because as stated before, single tissue samples can be tested on but if one would like to know different side effects in the whole body, they would have to use an animal or human which would be unethical. In conclusion, animal testing should be allowed because it creates life-saving treatments and cures, there is no adequate alternative to test on a living, whole-body system, and prevents the chance of humans being tested on or even dying without the cure or treatment required. The many cures and lifesaving treatments were all a result of animal testing. Single tissues or samples cannot be tested on because you need to know all the side effects. Animal testing is the only currently adequate replacement for human testing which would be unethical. If someone had the choice to let their rat or child be tested on, they would most likely choose the rat.