Over the years, animal testing has been an argumentative and sensitive subject. With the increased importance of science and medicine over the last century or so, the use of animals in testing and research has increased proportionally, increased awareness of this issue has come about with the advancement into new technology. This has led to much debate both for and against testing expressed in both moderate and more extreme ways. Although there is some evidence to suggest that animal testing is successful in treating medical conditions in humans, it is equally disputed that testing on animals for medical purposes can be cruel and inconclusive. Too often emotion is allowed to overshadow …show more content…
It would mean scientists using computer models based on previously documented test results, predicting laboratory test results using known data. According to Max Planck institute of Biological Cybernetics (2013: online) no computer modeling is an effective substitute to a live subject. It is said that no type of computer modeling is able to replicate even a small neural population, let alone a complete brain. Due to the nature of their research they do not look at a very broad range of tests, they specifically focus in one area. Various other simulations do exist and are acceptable models in the research of many different fields, for example drug absorption, diabetes and asthma. Despite the success of finding new medicines from this method it is still used in conjunction with, rather than a substitute to live testing and any results found still need to be validated via other methods. Similarly, it has been suggested that lab testing could be an alternative to a certain degree. However this also in practice is an inadequate substitute but can be used effectively along side live testing on the