The Real Swaraj will not come by the acquisition Essays

The Real Swaraj will not come by the acquisition Essays "The Real Swaraj will not come by the acquisition of authority by a few but by the acquisition capacity by all to resist authority when abused." -Mahatma Gandhi Introduction India is a democratic country. The head of the country is elected by the people of the country. The Government of the country possesses the authority to work for the welfare of the country on behalf of the people. The final decision making power regarding the welfare of the country is in the hands of Government. The people of the country want to know how the government is functioning. People have many questions regarding the functioning of the government. So, to answer all the questions of the people, the Parliament passed a new Bill known as "The Right to Information Act, 2005". The Bill was presented in Parliament on 22nd December, 2004. After intense debate till 15th June, 2005, it was finally passed on 15th June 2005 and came into force on 12th October, 2005. The Right to Information Act aimed at ensuring transparency in the functioning of Central State Governments. The Act provides for setting out the practical regime of right to information for the people to secure access to information under the control of public authorities to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions have been constituted for this purpose. Before passing of this Act, Disclosure of Government Information in India was governed by a law enacted during the British rule named as Official Secrets Act of 1889 which was amended in 1923. After 1923, it has taken India 82 years to transition from an opaque system of governance, legitimized by the colonial Official Secrets Act, to one where citizens can demand the right to information. The Right to Information is derived from our fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. It says, " All the citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. " The main idea is that if the people do not have any information regarding the functioning of the Government and public institutions, then people cannot expr ess any informed opinion on it. For such a democracy to function, Freedom of Press is necessary to be understood first. The main reason for a free press is to ensure that the citizen s are informed. Thus, it clearly flows from this that the citizens' right to know is paramount. The date of 12th October, 2005 shall be remembered as a new era of empowerment for the common man i n India. It is applicable every where except JK. MEANING OF INFORMATION- Information means any material in any form including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force. The formal recognition of a legal Right to Information in India occurred more than two decades before legislation was finally enacted, when the Supreme Court of India ruled in State of U.P. v Raj Narain that the Right to Information is implicit in the right to freedom of speech and expression explicitly guaranteed in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. Subsequently, the Court has affirmed this decision in numerous cases, and has even linked the Right to Information with the right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. The RTI Act, which if used sensibly and efficiently can take the country in the direction of new democracy and good governance. "If liberty and equality, as is thought by some are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost". RTI is perceived as a key to strengthen participatory democracy and ushering in people-centered governance. With access to information on their side, people can function better as an informed and responsible citizenry - investigating and scrutinizing government actions and reviewing the performance of their elected representatives with a view to seriously holding

Tactical mistake - Emphasis

Tactical mistake Tactical mistake Weve all done it: accidentally substituted a similar-sounding but actually entirely different word for the one we meant to write. And while no-one wants to be the person who does it (it could seriously undermine your credibility), for humours sake, were probably all secretly glad it happens occasionally. Take one of the features of a 9 LED Eurohike aluminium torch (offered at an unmissable price with a recent purchase at Millets). Listed between heavy duty aluminium construction and 3 x AAA batteries included we find tactical on/off switch. Now that sounds fancy, doesnt it? But really, whenever any of us make that strategic reach for the on/off switch, with the cunning plan of being able to see where we are going, arent we all tacticians in our own right? Or could this simple, moulded, soft-rubber switch actually be better described as tactile? But then, this is a dangerous game to start.

Social Impact Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Social Impact Paper - Essay Example Many such technologies may lay claim to having been the key milestones in this path of human development. These claims are validated by the impact they have had on human beings and the changes in societal patterns that have resulted from such technological inventions and discoveries. The invention of the wheel is often considered as that which has had the greatest impact on human progress (1). In the same line of thought then the invention of the internal combustion engine has a strong impact on the sped and direction of human progress since its invention, not so long ago in the history of human progress. The impact of the internal combustion engine on human progress has been on a broad. Within the limits of this paper it is not possible to deal with every aspect of social impact that the invention of the internal combustion has. Therefore, this paper limits itself to evaluating the social impact of the gas powered internal combustion engine from the limited perspective of contribution to human progress in overland transportation, with particular emphasis on automobiles and the manner in which it has impacted on society. History The basic technology involved in the internal combustion engine can be truly said to be derived from the gunpowder engine developed in the seventeenth century. Two centuries were to elapse before the technology involved in the gunpowder engine could be harnessed into the internal combustion engine. ... Though passenger cars were developed using steam engine, the best use of steam engines was seen in the engines developed for hauling the locomotives of the train. The deficiencies of large engine size and lower efficiency made the steam engines unsuitable for widespread use in passenger vehicles. By the second half of the nineteenth century the search was on for a more efficient engine (2) Technological advances occur in what appears to be a predetermined sequence, one setting the ground for the other, and when the right idea is seeded into this advance of technology, further advances are made (3). The fundamental idea of the internal combustion engine gas was conceived through the principles contained in the gunpowder engine and the steam engine. The reason for the idea progressing to reality was finding the ideal fuel for the internal combustion engine. In the nineteenth century the availability of coal gas and petroleum removed this barrier to progress in the development of the ga s powered internal combustion engine (2). The high energy fuel of petroleum in a mixture with air on ignition produces a rapid and powerful explosion. From 1860 to1880 the means for harnessing the energy of these explosions to power an internal combustion was under active experimentation and the results were soon forthcoming. Most of these experiments were in Germany and not surprisingly the early results sprang from Germany. Two sets of pioneers of the internal combustion engine using petroleum products emerged in the form of Daimler and Maybach on one side and Karl Benz on the other side. While Daimler and Maybach delivered early initial results of an internal combustion engine that could be used on two-wheelers, Karl

Whether Organizations Should Use Formal Mentoring Schemes Essay

Whether Organizations Should Use Formal Mentoring Schemes - Essay Example It is evidently clear from the discussion that employees’ morale holds the key for the eventual decisions that are made for them when it comes to imparting training and the related facilities. There must be an effort to mobilize the employees more and more and seek from them a feedback mechanism so that their role comes out significantly well within the related context of training regimes. The formal mentoring schemes within the organizations of today are shaping up because there is a need to address the challenges which have come up. The employees know little with respect to social and personal pressures which engulf their domains and it is only natural to understand that formal mentoring schemes would help resolve these issues in entirety. A mentor is defined as an individual who serves as a teacher or a trusted counselor whose main task is to act wise and thus guide and advise on different issues and matters. As far as the formal mentoring schemes and activities are concern ed, they are always very organized and have a serious disciplinary regime within them. Mentoring is more inclined with personal development relationship than anything else; focusing on the experienced senior who imparts the much-needed knowledge and help towards the unknowing junior. The former is regarded as the protege or an apprentice who works to best effects to make sure that the person who is being given the formal mentoring remains on track and is guaranteed to receive the benefits of mentoring in the long run scheme of things. The formal mentoring happens through a professional development process, where formal communication hierarchies are embedded and the information is passed across a number of different significant channels. This formal mentoring is therefore very elusive and takes care of the areas which are not covered by informal mentoring regimes in place. One must comprehend the fact that formal mentoring requires face to face conversation and linkage, helping towar ds building the long-term credibility of the protege and indeed the organization from a strategic perspective. The difference between formal and informal mentoring lies in the fact that since formal mentoring takes care of the employees from a very formal setting, the latter comes about in a haphazard and random manner. What this means is the philosophy that informal mentoring can be held anywhere within the domains of the organization and it basically takes care of the employees on a very one to one level, where the legal codes of inviting employees over for the mentoring programs and activities are not held as such.

Aristotle Essay Essay Example for Free

Aristotle Essay Essay Aristotle Despite being Plato’s student, Aristotle’s views conflict with his teacher’s. The biggest difference being that Aristotle was a realist; he saw the value in studying the physical world and trusted his senses, unlike Plato who believed in the world of forms. Plato believed that we need to look beyond the physical world for a metaphysical explanation of the universe, Aristotle refuted this. Aristotle observed nature and used logic and reason to explain how it works; he tried to find the ‘action’ of why things exist and tried to make sense of them. Also, Aristotle’s approach was imperial and he trusted the use of reason based on his experience. Aristotle rejected Plato’s dualism; he thought that the body and soul are one, as the brain and body are. This opposes Plato’s views that the body and soul were separate. Aristotle believed in the four causes, the principal that everything has four causes of existence: Material cause – refers to what a thing is made of, Aristotle used the example of a bronze sculpture and a silver saucer, Aristotle would say that bronze or silver is the material cause. However, an object can have more than one material cause, for example, the laptop I’m typing on is made of plastic, metal, wires and glass; these would all be material causes. The material cause also counters Plato’s theory of the world of forms, he would say that my laptop has a perfect form however, it is made up of individual things in order to be a laptop, all of the things it is made up of must have their own perfect form according to Plato, making his theory contradictive. Formal cause – refers to the structure of an object, the shape it takes that makes it what it is. It is what we recognise as the thing we are looking at. An object must have a specific order in order to be what it is, for example, a bronze sculpture is not just a lump of bronze, and it has been shaped into a sculpture in order to function, as my laptop has been assembled into an order so it works. Efficient cause – refers to how the object has changed from a state of potentiality to what it is, for example, the way a bronze sculpture has been taken from a lump of bronze chiselled until it is made into a statue by the sculptor. The efficient cause of an object may not be as simple as this i. e. my laptop’s efficient cause may vary from machines and people to plastic moulds and screwdrivers. It is the cause of the change. Final cause – refers to the purpose of an objects being; the purpose of a sculpture might be to be admired, the purpose of my laptop is to let me watch videos of cats playing musical instruments on YouTube. Aristotle uses the example of health being the cause of walking, Why does one walk? he asks, that one may be healthy. The final cause is perhaps the most important of all of the causes. Aristotle’s understanding did not end there, he said that once something has achieved a state of actuality, it will be in a state of potentiality, for example, take ‘whiteness’, when my shirt is washed and becomes clean and ‘white’ but it has the potential to become dirty and ‘not white’ anymore. Aristotle also came up with the idea of the Prime Mover. The Prime Mover is, according to Aristotle, the ultimate and final cause of the universe. He said that everything in the universe is in a state of change (motus) so the Prime Mover must exist outside the universe, so that it is not affected by what happens inside. The Prime Mover cannot change, because to change something must exist in a state of actuality and have the potential to change i. e. an actual child is a potential adult. Aristotle does not consider the Prime Mover as a God, because a god is a living being which effects what happens in the world, however, the Prime Mover does not affect what happens in the universe, it is just the cause of it. Aristotle says that the Prime Mover has to exist because the universe has to have a cause. The Prime Mover also has to be eternal, because if something comes into existence it must be caused by something else.

Fidel Castro Essay -- History Biographies Papers

Fidel Castro In 1959, a rebel, Fidel Castro, overthrew the reign of Fulgencia Batista in Cuba; a small island 90 miles off the Florida coast. There have been many coups and changes of government in the world since then. Few if any have had the effect on Americans and American foreign policy as this one. In 1952, Sergeant Fulgencia Batista staged a successful bloodless coup in Cuba . Batista never really had any cooperation and rarely garnered much support. His reign was marked by continual dissension. After waiting to see if Batista would be seriously opposed, Washington recognized his government. Batista had already broken ties with the Soviet Union and became an ally to the U.S. throughout the cold war. He was continually friendly and helpful to American business interest. But he failed to bring democracy to Cuba or secure the broad popular support that might have legitimized his rape of the 1940 Constitution. As the people of Cuba grew increasingly dissatisfied with his gangster style politics, the tiny rebellions that had sprouted began to grow. Meanwhile the U.S. government was aware of and shared the distaste for a regime increasingly nauseating to most public opinion. It became clear that Batista regime was an odious type of government. It killed its own citizens, it stifled dissent. (1) At this time Fidel Castro appeared as leader of the growing rebellion. Educated in America he was a proponent of the Marxist-Leninist philosophy. He conducted a brilliant guerilla campaign from the hills of Cuba against Batista. On January 1959, he prevailed and overthrew the Batista government. Castro promised to restore democracy in Cuba, a feat Batista had failed to ac... ...ed far longer; measured American responses might have appeared well deserved to an increasing number of Cubans, thus strengthening Cuban opposition to the regime instead of, as was the case, greatly stimulating revolutionary fervor, leaving the Russians no choice but to give massive support to the Revolution and fortifying the belief among anti-Castro Cubans that the United States was rapidly moving to liberate them. The economic pressures available to the United States were not apt to bring Castro to his knees, since the Soviets were capable of meeting Cuban requirements in such matters as oil and sugar. I believe the Cuban government would have been doomed by its own disorganization and incompetence and by the growing disaffection of an increasing number of the Cuban people. Left to its own devices, the Castro regime would have withered on the vine.

Animals Should Not Be Used for Medical Research

UUB 3023 | CRITICAL THINKING| WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT: ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY NAME| 😠 SIFAJEE | TITLE| 😠 ANIMALS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH IN MALAYSIA| Abstract There is no doubt that throughout the centuries, animals have played a central role in medical research in Malaysia. Many of the treatments available for serious illnesses we have today have come from animal experimentation. There has been recorded that the use of animals in research has been going on as far back as the Greek writings.According to the history, Aristotle who lived in 384-322 BC was the first to use living animals in experiments; whereas Galen, a physician in second-century Rome, was known as the â€Å"father of vivisection† from his experiments on living pigs. However, these experiments were not conducted in the name of clinical research; they were done to gain knowledge about the animals themselves. In that period of time, man was not set next to animals in comparison of physiology or any other way because man was seen as a creature above the animal. From century to century, new ideas were developed when Darwin came with his theory of evolution.His theory made a path that linked human with animals; and encouraged researches to be done on different animals to learn how human physiology worked. Even though many believed animal experimentation is important for clinical study, some claimed that it is against the humanity. Many debates have been carried out to argue whether the animal testing is crucial or cruel. The writer believes though many have heard of this matter, yet people need to know about the adverse effects it plays in the toxicology field. TABLE OF CONTENTS | | Page| | Abstract| 2| | Table of Contents| 3| Introduction| 4| | Argument 1| 5| | Argument 2| 7| | Counter Argument & Refutation| 9| | Conclusion & Recommendations| 13| | References| 15| Introduction Toxicology is the scientific study of interactions between chemicals or other biohazards to liv ing organisms and their systems; and how to prevent poisoning of such substances in application to human beings. Toxicologists often practice animal experimentations called â€Å"vivisection† in order to identify the effects of certain dose of drugs in animals; whether it is beneficial or become poisonous.Vivisection also include procedures such as infecting animals with diseases, poisoning for toxicity testing, brain damaging, maiming, and blinding to administer the impacts those acts have on these animals, and then, the theories created later can be practiced to enhance the human well-being. Nowadays, many animals in Malaysia are being used in toxicology field for clinical experiments, which cause more animal extinction in our country. Many people have been aware of this matter and this polemic has led to many arguments on whether it is really necessary to use animals in clinical study.Even though some people had argued that it is necessary to conduct clinical research on a nimals, it is believed that the act is no more applicable. The writer claims that animal testing or â€Å"vivisection† is inappropriate for clinical research in Malaysia because the results can be misleading and cause sufferings to animals. Argument 1 Firstly, an animal has a total different DNA and nervous system from a human and therefore you can’t rely on the results. It is claimed that bypass surgery is conducted to save the life of human beings, but the same bypass surgery can be fatal to animals.Similarly, paracetamol is a well-known medicine to cure headache on human, but it will kill a cat, goat or horse. Many of the animal experiments are not only horrible to the animals, but also unreliable. There are tremendous physiological variations between animal and human. According to a source (http://www. veganpeace. com/animal_cruelty/animal_testing. htm), it is stated that: â€Å"Drugs like ‘thalidomide’, ‘zomax’ and DES were all tested on animals and judged safe but had devastating consequences for the humans who used them.More than half of the prescription drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration between 1976 and 1985 were withdrawn from the market or relabeled because of the serious side effects they had on humans. They had all been tested on animals. † It has long been stated that animal testing can certainly be downright contradictory in the results it provides, as well as merely misleading (Dappleshade, 2012). According to the Medical Research Modernization Committee, human data has historically been interpreted in light of laboratory data derived from nonhuman beings. This had turned out to downtrodden medical consequences.For an example, retrospective studies on human patients, in the early 60’s, had already shown a strong correlation between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. Unfortunately, almost all experimental efforts on producing lung cancer in animals had failed (Medical Research Modernization Committee). Likewise, the relationship between alcohol consumption and cirrhosis (a liver disease caused by frequent alcohol consumption) is undeniable in human. However, experimental tests conducted to produce cirrhosis by excessive alcohol ingestion have failed in all animals except baboons.On the other hand, the case of polio research in animal models has directed to a misunderstanding of the mechanism of infection and it caused failed preventing measures and delayed the development of the vaccine. During the experimentation on monkeys, it has shown that the virus was transmitted via respiratory organs. When the vaccine tested with monkey’s cell, it has shown positive results. Eventually, the vaccine did not help in producing expected changes in human, and medical researchers found out later that the viruses of polio disease were actually transmitted through the digestive route in human.In short, it is clear that we should not rely on experimental studies in animals due to lots of misleading results and misunderstandings it catered. In Dr. Andrew Knight's â€Å"The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments†, it is stated that in a study of twenty randomly chosen cases, only two proved useful in further developing medicines and consistent with clinical trial data. Medical historians argued that key discoveries in fatal diseases in human were achieved mostly through observation of patients and human autopsy because there are lots of misleading results obtained through animal esting. It causes health warnings to be delayed for years, while thousands of people died of various diseases (Medical Research Modernization Committee). Argument 2 Secondly, animal testing or â€Å"vivisection† is inappropriate for clinical research because it causes horrific sufferings to animals. Masses have been debating on the issue that vivisection process is unethical because the helpless animals are harmed and it caused prolonging sufferings to t hem. Animals being sacrificed in the name of medical testing are not presented in objective ways by animal rights organizations in Malaysia.Hence, the general development of animal welfare-opinions has become more engaging. The fact why animal experimentation is against by the community is because the processes is not ended just by giving an animal a pill and see what it does, this is so much ahead than that. This include the action of applying animals with drugs, infecting it with diseases, poisoning for toxicity testing, brain damaging, maiming, blinding and other painful and invasive procedures (Anti-Vivisection Society, 2012). Furthermore, many people think that only mice and rats are being used in animal testing for clinical research.Most people don’t aware that actually rabbits, hamsters, cats, dogs, pigs, horses, goats, chickens, frogs, birds, monkeys and many more are being killed redundantly each year in laboratories. We can’t imagine what will happen to the a nimal’s population if this activity continues further. In addition, the protocols in animal experimentation turned out to be extremely heart-wrenching, where it includes procedures such as long-term social isolation, full-body restraint, electric shocks, withholding of food and water, or repeatedly breeding and separating infants from mothers.Animals suffer excessively when the medical practitioners break their legs, burn them, cut them open while they’re still alive, poison them and remove half their brains, spray fluids in their eyes and so on (Lithium Queen, 2010). The Anti-Vivisection Society further claimed that essentially, it is using animals in ways that cause distress or death in attempts to test the safety of drugs and biological products or finding treatments, prevention, and cures for human diseases. The other point to be noted is that animals are being sacrificed unnecessarily in order to maintain the human wellness.This is totally a failure of logic. Anim als in laboratories live in an intimidating environment within barren cages and experience unnatural lives of daily deprivation. The highly unnatural laboratory environment constantly stresses them. Most of the animals never get the chance to inhale fresh air nor relish sunshine. They are unable to convey their will, make choices, or exert their natural behaviors and needs. The changes that come into their lives are obviously from the intrusive experiments, which range from comfortless ‘zone’ to excruciation.Yet, they are helpless to defend themselves. Animals are not facing natural deaths in laboratories. The viruses that induced into their cells for testing may infect them vigorously and cause them to encounter death gradually. According to a research, it is stated that the viruses transmitted to animals affects the entire organism by altering pulse, blood pressure, hormone levels and immunological activities to their death. In short, it is totally unethical to conduc t animal testing for clinical researches as the adverse effects it has on the animal itself.Peter Singer wrote Animal Liberation in 1975, which has been a major formative influence on the modern animal rights movement. He wrote that â€Å"there are obviously important differences between human and other animals, and these differences must give rise to some differences in the rights that each have. † This is meant in a way that justifies the needs and rights every animal have. Thus, there is no reason to necessarily give an animal what you would have given a man (Dappleshade, 2012). Counter Argument ; Refutation However, there are those who argue that animals should be used for clinical research in Malaysia.The main reason why animals should be used is that animals are more likely resemble to human and they are more accountable to be in replace of human being for clinical studies. Animals are surrogates for humans. The basic reason for animal trials is to determine two issues before any new compound introduced to a human; safety and efficacy, whether a compound is safe for human ingestion and also whether a product works for its intended purpose (Laura Blue, June 17, 2008). In the perspective of doctors and scientists, animal testing is very important for medication and the humanity as a whole.Advocates of animal testing say that the outcomes of testing on animals are the most credible. Millions of medical discoveries decades ago were achieved through animal experimentations. According to the published journal Animal Testing in Medical Research, n. d, one of the most important discoveries was the discovery of insulin in humans. Insulin is secreted from the pancreas. In 1889, a pancreas from a dog was removed to prove its role in digestion. When the pancreas was removed, the researchers discovered flies swarming around the urine of the dog. They found sugar in the urine which proved the connection between pancreas and diabetes.For the following two decade s a lot of researches were done on dogs to figure out how to keep the dog alive without its own insulin production. Similarly, a lot of medical researches involving animals have been conducted to study the correlation it applies on human, and hence, enhance the wellness of human being. Some of the successful discoveries that has helped human from last centuries are as follows: †¢ Kidney transplants †¢ Replacement heart valves †¢ Polio vaccine †¢ Hip replacement surgery †¢ Heart bypass operations †¢ Drugs to treat mental illness †¢ Drugs to treat stomach ulcers, asthma and leukemia Drugs to control transplant rejection †¢ Life-support systems for premature babies It is affirmed that animal testing is important because in the absence of human data, research with experimental animals is reliable for detecting important toxic properties of chemical substances and for estimating risks to human and environmental health. A medical student from the Ox ford University, Kristina Cook, had argued that if this fundamental research is stopped, we won’t find a cure for cancer, a treatment for Parkinson’s disease, a vaccine for AIDS, a therapy for Alzheimer’s and a cure for paralysis.She insisted that any further advances in medicine and human health are absolutely dependent on animal research. Moreover, if to compare who is better to be used to conduct an experiment, of course people will choose animals instead of themselves, even though they realize that animals are also important creatures in our life (Daniyar, 2012). From the drugs testing on animals, now we have antibiotics and vaccines that have saved many people lives. According to Dr. Jane Goodall, n. , he said that, people got used to take all conveniences from life and forget that all those depend on medical researches on animals. In addition, the remedy that now saves thousands of women fighting with breast cancer was developed through medical testing on mice. According to Batul Nafisa Baxamusa, 2010, in DNA level, chimpanzees' body matches up with humans' in 90%. This big number facilitates successful surgeries and transplantations because of similar inner organs of chimpanzees with human's organs.According to University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), liver from baboon was successfully transplanted to a 35 year- old man in June 1992. This case was the first known transplantation from animal to human. It is the best example of how animal testing has resulted in saving human lives. In spite of opinion that using animals for people's curing is wrong, we can’t deny that fact that annually millions of animals are killed for food; they are used for agriculture, hunted for pleasure of people and even euthanized (Natalie Kustcher, n. ). In that case, using animals to treat and save people's lives by using their organs in surgeries, wouldn’t be the worst deal. Nevertheless, this argument can be refuted because it has bee n proven that with the availability of modern alternatives now, animals testing can be considered as useless. With the development of technology in science, various new alternatives have been found to replace the experiment on animals. Studies can be undertaken upon human cell cultures and engineered tissues, than testing on animals.According to a published journal, Animals in Research: The Importance of Animals in the Science of Toxicology (2006), one alternate way is by applying ‘vitro’ tests (meaning) laboratory tests using cell or organ cultures rather than whole organisms. In other cases, organisms such as worms or bacteria are used instead of mammals. In replacement of animals, computer models can also be developed to predict outcomes of the test carried out. The viable options were meant to produce more accurate results on the clinical research and to prevent more animals from being harmed.The cloning of human organs and examining within the cell cultures are now scientifically proven to produce more reliable data to human autopsy and therefore, the need for animal testing will be no longer become an issue. Referring to a reliable source (http://www. newscientist. com/article/mg15120450. 300-pioneers-cut-out-animal-experiments. html), a company by the name of Pharmagene Laboratories in the United Kingdom utilises only tissue cultures and computer modelling on its drug development and testing.The existence of this company shows that the need for animal experimentation is now no longer the case. Medical practitioners by all means can now consider replacing vivisection on animals with cloning of organs and safely test on it. By this way, no one gets hurt, and eventually it doesn’t cost as much as animal testing. Many people may believe that modern alternatives are much more expensive than animal testing because that is what the pharmaceutical industry keeps telling them.It indeed costs quite an amount of money to switch from old techniq ues to new ones, but eventually it will be worth it. It is a one-time investment, whereas with animal testing; you have to keep paying for it. The cost to rear, feed and maintain animal subjects is extremely high, whereas the alternative methods are cheaper and thus less burdensome on the economy. So despite what the industry claims, animal testing is more expensive than the use of modern alternatives (LithiumQueen, 2010). Conclusion & RecommendationsTo sum things up, the writer would like to uphold once again that animals should not be used for clinical research in Malaysia. Through time, the welfare of the animals has come into focus, and several legislations have been made to prevent cruelty and unnecessary acts. Even though many medical breakthroughs have been a result of animal researches, we should only be grateful to the animal tests of the past for the benefits they have provided us, without seeing a need for animal tests in the future (Dappleshade, 2012).Despite of the argu ments that animal experimentation must be conducted because animal pathology is similar to that of humans, we should aware more on the consequences that the misleading results animal testing has played, and that using animals in laboratories cause horrific sufferings to them. There are more negative effects imposed by animal experimentation than the benefits it has provided us with. A professor of philosophy, Professor Charles R. Magel made his statement that: â€Å"Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is: ‘Because the animals are like us. Ask the experimenters why it is morally okay to experiment on animals, and the answer is: ‘Because the animals are not like us. ‘ Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction. † In Europe, a research foundation called 3Rs is being implemented in order to find solution to the abundance number of animals sacrificed in the name of animal testing. The term 3Rs stands for Replacement, Reduction and Refinement. This implies the concept to replace animal testing, to reduce the number of animals used in testing, or to refine methods to minimise the distress for research animals.This kind of research foundation should be implemented in Malaysia as well, to promote good science with no animal experimentation in future. In conclusion, with the new technology lead to viable alternatives and more humane methods like use of cell cultures and imaging, it is hoped that the number of animals used in medical research can be tremendously reduced. References * Christine Egerszegi- Obrist, 3R Research Foundation (n. d). Good Science with Less Animal Experimentation. Available at http://www. forschung3r. ch/ * Dappleshade, Debate. org (2012).Animal Testing should be Banned. Retrieved from http://www. debate. org/debates/Animal-testing-should-be-banned/1/ * Kristina Cook (April 4,2006). Why Animal Research is Important AND Needed: A Copy of the Speech I Gave on the February 25th D emonstration. Retrieved from http://www. protest. org. uk/2006/04/why-animal-research-is-important-and. html * Laura Blue (June 17, 2008). How Much Does Animal Testing Tell Us?. Retrieved from http://www. time. com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815241,00. html * Lee Bowman, Scripps Howard News Service (2011).Animal Testing: Crucial or Cruel?. Retrieved from http://www. abc15. com/dpp/news/national/animal-testing%3A-crucial-or-cruel * LithiumQueen, Mibba Creative Writing (2010). The Cruelty of Animal Testing. Retrieved from http://www. mibba. com/Articles/Science/3703/The-Cruelty-of-Animal-Testing/ * Marte Thomassen, Ellen Trolid, Tonje Arondsen, Marit Gystol (n. d). Animal Testing in Medical Research- Past, present and future. Retrieved from http://www. nt. ntnu. no/users/clabec/pdf/MedicalResearchAnimalExperiments. pdf Medical Research Modernization Committee (2006). A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation. Retrieved from http://www. mrmcmed. org/Critical_Look. pdf * Neavs. org (n. d). Alternatives in Testing. Retrieved from http://www. neavs. org/alternatives/in-testing * The Society of Toxicology (2006). Animals in Research: The Importance of Animals in the Science of Toxicology. Retrieved from http://www. toxicology. org/ai/air/AIR_Final. pdf * Wanda Embar (2008). Animal Testing. Retrieved from http://www. veganpeace. com/animal_cruelty/animal_testing. htm