If it has a purpose

I find this to be a very controversial topic. The idea of finding a cure for cancer and other diseases is great. And obviously most people wouldn't want to be tested on, whether it's for medical purposes or something else, unless of course they volunteer (which some do). Animals do not have that luxury because they are animals. You need the human's consent in order to test on them, except for third world countries where the most human testing takes place. But you do not need an animal's consent, and researchers take advantage of that. The recent articles we read in class argue that there are few animal groups that have cognitive abilities, and some (like Koko) can be taught sign language. Another article claims that fish have the same sensory wiring to detect pain. What they don't know is if the animals themselves can understand what they are doing. They would need to do a more deeper analysis, and run more extensive tests. When it comes to finding cures for people, the obvious choice is to test on animals. If it means that this specific medication might be able to significantly help with Parkinson's disease or any other, then go for it and test away. Where I cross the line is the point when pharmaceutical companies test meaningless drugs, or want to produce another type of painkiller only too make more money. That is a waste of time.