Assuming Regan’s argument is true, that all non-human animals have the same rights as human beings, the world in which such logic works and execution would face several contradictions. By declaring that the treatments to animals are fundamentally wrong, the benchmark of judging their rights are fundamentally different due to the inability to understand and comprehend their rights or needs. In this case, it is impossible to apply human rights onto non-human rights since the definitions are originally different. Secondly, according to Regan, those who have experienced subjects of life have inherent values of their own and have them equally. However, the definition about equal inherent values are vague. The failure to measure that humans have more inherent values than animals cannot lead to a conclusion that the measurements will grant equal value. Third, granting that the medical science treatment of animals are immoral, many diseases and viruses would be incontrolable and affect in a greater scale.