Vivisection

Vivisection Considerable evidence demonstrates that animal experimentation is inefficient, unreliable and unsafe. It is also unnecessary because newly developed methodologies are more valid and less expensive than animal studies. An increasing number of doctors and scientists agree that the methodology of today’s biomedical research is invalid and counterproductive. Many times the unreliability of animal research has produced highly unpredicted and unwanted results. The danger and varying reliability of animal experimentation stems from the fact that vivisection (live animal experimentation) research entails gathering data on animals with artificially induced versions of human diseases in place of information on humans with the actual diseases. This is nearly useless because not only is every species bio-mechanically and bio-chemically different but laboratory results are further skewed by the stressful and unnaturally living environments of the test subjects. In addition the researchers involved in vivisection are often said to overshadow its negative aspects. Although vivisection supporters claim that it has played a crucial role in virtually all medical advances. Several medical historians argue that key discoveries in such areas as heart disease, cancer, immunology, and anesthesia, were in fact achieved through clinical research, observation of patients, and human autopsy. In addition in vitro cell human, animal, research, researchers, diseases, animals, cancer, because, humans, clinical, vivisection, disease, cells, tissue, studies, experimentation, data, been, much, vitro, culture, proven, promising, observation, even, different, models, less, induced, however, further, effective, cell, tests, rats, information