In the world of animal experimentation, there are two very different sides. One example is the experiments and research conducted to improve the way humans live from a medical aspect. The other side is taken from invasive and redundant experiments that are done to test new cosmetic, personal, and household products. In regards to medicinal testing, there are very positive connotations, which allow us to realize that these tests are being done to help save the lives of those in need. In the long run it is evident that these tests are worth more than the animals that have to die in the process. On the other hand, testing done to improve eyeshadows, soaps, and furniture polish seem to be far less significant.
             Due to countless differences in the anatomy, physiology, genetics and cell makeup of animals and human beings, there is no foolproof plan that can be used to guarantee that research done will produce positive results. With this in mind, using animals in medical tests has also proved to have some benefits. For example in 1961, almost thirty years after beginning his research, Albert Sabin introduced his oral vaccine for polio. Mr. Sabin had said, " There could have been no oral polio vaccine without the use of innumerable animals, a very large number of animals." To this day, as new vaccines for the disease are produced for today's youth, the use of animals continues.
             On the other hand, every year millions of animals are put through extremely painful tests of substances such as makeup, household cleaning products and topical products. These tests are continuously conducted despite the fact that no reliable results have been produced to help prevent or treat product related human reactions or illnesses. For example toxic products that have been tested on animals such as permanent body wave solutions, oven cleaners, soaps and detergents are regularly introduced into the marketplace. Despite testing toxicit...