Many people share a strong bond with non-human animals, such as dogs and cats. So why do we continue to disavow the inadequacy of animal testing? As you've probably heard, many people try to explain how without animal testing we could put ourselves at risk. Since we have the power to try the product on an animal that can't say no at first, why not, right? However, animals are living creatures and deserve the same treatment as humans, just because animals are unable to speak and tell what hurts them, should we take advantage of this? Provided that the three most important rights of a human being are when; a person's life, health or liberty is in danger. So why aren't there the same rights for animals as for those? In particular, there are alternatives to animal testing, but for some reason we are still using animals. A very intelligent doctor named Elias Zerhouni once said: “We have moved away from the study of human diseases in humans. … We all drank the Kool-Aid on that one, including me. … The problem is that [animal testing] hasn't worked, and it's time we stop beating around the bush. … We need to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans to understand the biology of disease in humans.” This means it was time to move away from the animals and use a new method for better understanding and understanding. An interesting quote I found by Charles R. Magel reads: “Ask experimenters why they experiment on animals and the answer is, “Because animals are like us.” Ask experimenters why it is morally right to experiment on animals and the answer will be: "Because animals are not like us." Animal testing is based on a logical contradiction." Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I can almost guarantee that if you were the one doing the experiments, or if it were your puppy Cleo, you wouldn't do it.