A Question Of Ethics 'And Animal Research Saves Lives'

“A Question of Ethics” by Jane Goodall and “Animal Research Saves Lives” by Heloisa Sabin presents two sides of the same coin in regards to Animal testing. Thereby, questioning the validity or necessity of animal research and testing today. In “A Question of Ethics” by Goodall she presents a scenery of the living conditions of the animals which are often isolated; posing the ultimate questions of, whether animal research is essential to medical research? Or How many tests are performed only to conform to laws and not out of scientific merit? The Suggestion was made that scientists should explore alternative options, such as testing on cell and tissue cultures. On the other hand, Sabin also puts forward an argument in support of animal testing, as her dear late husband Albert Sabin conducted many tests on animals whilst perfecting his vaccine against polio. The sacrifice of these animals has enabled entire generations of humans to grow up without fear of the crippling effects of polio. Animal rights advocates who see animal experimentation as cruel and wasteful overlook the fact that it has been instrumental in developing medicines that have saved countless human

In “Animal Research Saves Lives” by Sabin, she purports “…. those who support an “animal rights’ agenda would cripple research and halt medical science in its tracks are slamming the door on the possibilities of new treatment and cures.” In, Goodall’s “A Question of Ethics” argument, she states “I believe that more and more people are becoming aware that to use animals thoughtlessly, without any anguish or making an effort to find another way, diminishes us as human beings.” Clearly, both arguments had a claim for what would be the premise of their essay, setting the stage for their readers to understand the background of the argument and the accepted or understood