ducts on defenseless animals is immoral, claiming that the animals themselves have no in this process. "Vivisection is barbaric, useless and a hindrance to scientific progress." (Goodwin 22).
             Many of these people refuse to believe in the validity of the many new processes and technology that is offered as an alternative to harming the many creatures that are used during these tests. It should be taken into consideration, the many factors behind the examination of animals and the new technology that can be used to produce quicker and more accurate results then animal testing could ever generate.
             Throughout the years, researchers have come about with several alternatives to testing on animals. Some of these methods are not only more accurate, but are proven to be cost efficient. Some of these methods include epidemiological studies, clinical intervention trials, astute clinical observation aided by laboratory testing, human tissue and cell cultures, autopsy studies, endoscopic examination and biopsy, as well as new imaging methods. These techniques make it evident that the testing of animals is unnecessary, due to the amount of options in testing products and diseases.
             "In 1952, a woman dying of cancer allowed some of her cancer cells to be taken from her body. Her cancer cells started a colony of cells that provides the basis for some current experiments. Scientists have also succeeded in keeping heart cells alive and beating for almost three months. The cells have been used to test new heart drugs" (Woods 25).
             Situations such as these have proven that there are several ways to go about saving lives rather than killing helpless beings. Scientists spend several years being trained in how to deal with animal research techniques. Some researchers seem to be reluctant to adhere to new methods that would require re-training and a great deal of their time and money.
             Chemical and computer studies...