"Stop animal testing - it's not just cruel, it's ineffective"

In an article on the Baltimore Sun newspaper website, critics of animals testing argue against not only the moral implications of animal testing, but also the effectiveness of it. This article draws a distinct line between animals and humans by arguing that the results from animal testing is not effective enough for humans to continue the practice due to the differences in physiology between animals and humans that cause results to be skewed. As an example the article says that the results of animal tests proved "penicillin to be deadly, strychnine to be safe, and aspirin to be dangerous." It also states that human stem cell testing is far more effective because they are testing human cells for human cells which is the only accurate way to develop vaccines for diseases in humans. The author argues that most Americans find animal testing to be a necessary evil because they are taking the rights away from animals by performing non-voluntary experiments but are willing to deal with it because the animals are not humans. This means that many humans still see animals as having fewer rights than humans and that humans should have superiority over all other creatures.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2006-06-23/news/0606230051_1_animal-testing-stem-cells-cell-research