Can you evaluate whether the ethical and moral issues related to animal testing are important enough to stop scientific developments.

This is, of course, simply a matter of opinion because
there is no way to objectively measure the benefits of the testing or its costs.  I
would argue, though, that animals are a lower form of life and that human life is so
much more important that therefore scientific research using animals may be
acceptable.

Animals are clearly a lower form of life.  We
accept that when we use them for food or when we make life and death decisions about our
pets.  Therefore, it can be said their needs are less important than needs of
humans.

When medical testing is done on animals, it allows
humans to live better, healthier lives.  If people's lives or even their health can be
saved, that is much more important than the lives of animals.  As long as the testing is
necessary and is humane as possible, it may be argued that the benefits to humans
outweigh the fact that the animals are having to
suffer.

Please follow the link for an opinion piece on this
issue as well as links to many essays exploring other facets of the
issue.