There is ongoing debate about whether or not performing performing
=
conducting
=
carrying out a laboratory experiment on animals is the one and only method to ensure ensure
=
confirm
=
ascertain the safety of products that are to be developed for human use. Looking on it as an insupportable assumption, I will seek to challenge challenge
=
dispute
=
argue against it in this essay.

  Of course, there is no disguising the fact that humans have so far been able to access only specific species of animals as the closest living creatures with the most striking genetic similarities. similarities
=
resemblances
=
likeness As most of other creatures have naturally varied genetic structures, these species are the only chance of humanity to assess assess
=
evaluate
=
measure or reduce risks of products that are about to be launched on the market. For example, to develop drugs, monkeys or mice, which are nearly equivalent in their genetic codes to human beings, are two typical breeds of animals which can serve serve
=
be in service of
=
be employed by mankind. However, it should not be overlooked that such studies are commonly against the ethical values as well as animal rights.

  From my standpoint, these examinations examinations
=
research programs
=
analyses cannot genuinely assess the reliability of products that are to be used, even if we disregard disregard
=
take no account of
=
take no notice of valid objections against them. The justification for my argument is that there exist still a number of genetic differences between human and even extremely similar animal species. These dissimilarities can impair impair
=
undermine
=
compromise not only accuracy but also practicality of such clinical trials. If If
=
Provided that
=
Given that it had not been necessarily the case, there would have not been any human trials after animal trials in the process of development of vaccines or drugs.

  In short, although these studies can broaden broaden
=
extend
=
add significantly to knowledge of humanity humanity
=
humankind
=
the human race and propel them to valuable discoveries, there is still inarguably a distinct chance that they fail to accurately measure harmlessness of products. Thus, it seems to me that this idea is not essentially correct. I suggest we turn to the major invention of our time (computers) so as to develop an alternative method for safeguarding safeguarding
=
protecting
=
defending ourselves.