In certain specific and highly controversial cases, there is a discussion about whether animal suffering can be considered a necessary sacrifice, but this view is complex and controversial. One case is in the field of medical research. In order to develop drugs, treatments, etc. that save human life and health, experiments may be conducted on animals. From the perspective that medical progress can bring great human benefits, some people think that this is a helpless and necessary move. For example, when new anti-cancer drugs are studied through animal experiments, although animals will suffer, if effective cancer treatment methods can be found and many human lives can be saved, some people think that animal suffering can be regarded as the price of achieving more important goals to a certain extent. However, this view faces many doubts. First, animals can feel pain just like humans, and their rights should be respected. Second, in many cases, alternative methods such as in vitro experiments and computer simulations can be used to reduce reliance on animal experiments. Moreover, strict experimental ethics require minimizing animal suffering and ensuring the necessity and scientificity of experiments. Another case is in wildlife management. For example, when the excessive number of a certain wild animal causes serious damage to the ecosystem, triggers a survival crisis for other species, or threatens human interests, measures to control the number may be taken, and animals will suffer in the process. But at the same time, we should try to manage it in a humane way, minimize animal suffering, and evaluate whether there are other more reasonable ecological restoration or balance methods. In general, the view that animal suffering can be regarded as a necessary sacrifice is controversial. Modern society increasingly emphasizes seeking solutions to balance human needs and animal welfare while respecting animal rights and protecting their welfare, rather than easily rationalizing animal suffering.