Animal TESTING

Do you agree with Animal testing/research?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 25 65.8%

  • No.

    Votes: 13 34.2%
  • Total voters
    38
hug-a-tree said:
If you can hurt an animal without any remorse that shows what kind of person you are... Animals can feel pain.
Click to expand...

So what if they feel pain? If you don't think too much about it... you won't feel the pain of remorse.
 
Blue_UK said:
So what if they feel pain? If you don't think too much about it... you won't feel the pain of remorse.
Click to expand...


So what if they feel pain? I can't not think about it.
 
spuriousmonkey said:
There are no alternatives since the alternatives means you couldn't publish your results, meaning you couldn't apply for grants, meaning your couldn't do research in the first place.

edit:

Or in other words: how can you use an alternative model for a model you do not understand?
Click to expand...

I don't get what your saying.
 
gizmo580 said:
I don't understand what you are saying either, monkey
Click to expand...
it sounds to me that he is saying he does research for the sake of research

he's into the 'what if' scenario.

in my opinion that is the only 'true' scientist.

not to be nosey but who is the most inerested in your labs results spurious?
 
i'm coming on to this topic late in the game, but i'm going to go ahead and say that i'm against animal testing pretty much across the board as far as chemicals, drugs, cosmetics...etc are concerned. i don't think that there is a need for it. animals are not the same as people. if you want to find out whether or not something will help or harm people, you should conduct the test on a human. i wouldn't have a problem with that, especially if the people having things tested on them were being paid and doing it of their own volition, or alternatively i think that i would be ok with it if it was being done focibly on violent criminals. animals are basically helpless forms of life that rely on human beings to not brutalize them or torture them at their whim to find out if something like iced tea mix will burn your skin or eat away your liver. we should amend our laws to allow more types of human testing, or at least admit as a society that if we wouldn't test something on a person, then we shouldn't test it on an animal.
 
charles cure said:
i'm coming on to this topic late in the game, but i'm going to go ahead and say that i'm against animal testing pretty much across the board as far as chemicals, drugs, cosmetics...etc are concerned. i don't think that there is a need for it. animals are not the same as people. if you want to find out whether or not something will help or harm people, you should conduct the test on a human. i wouldn't have a problem with that, especially if the people having things tested on them were being paid and doing it of their own volition, or alternatively i think that i would be ok with it if it was being done focibly on violent criminals. animals are basically helpless forms of life that rely on human beings to not brutalize them or torture them at their whim to find out if something like iced tea mix will burn your skin or eat away your liver. we should amend our laws to allow more types of human testing, or at least admit as a society that if we wouldn't test something on a person, then we shouldn't test it on an animal.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.
 
To experiment on beings that dont have the luxory of a voice and very little awareness of the intentions of those who *seem* to be their guardians and providers for personal gain i think is possibly one of the worse ethical crimes you can commit.

I have a feeling future generations will judge this society for its animal testing in the way we judge past generations for slavery.
 
seriously folks, there are some experiments which cannot be performed in vitro. and i too work with animals, and the goal of all scientific institutions is to design procedures which result in the minimum of pain for the animal in question. you should see all the damned paperwork one has to fill out… :(
 
antifreeze said:
seriously folks, there are some experiments which cannot be performed in vitro. and i too work with animals, and the goal of all scientific institutions is to design procedures which result in the minimum of pain for the animal in question. you should see all the damned paperwork one has to fill out… :(
Click to expand...

The animal rights movement would like a stop to ALL animal testing, but that isn't realistic, yet. The best we can hope for is that all animal testing stop unless it is almost certain to be of direct benefit to both humans and animals. To give people carte blanche to carry out any tests they like under the huge blanket of 'medical research' is bound to result in needless experiments that have no benefit whatsoever.
 
i am for animal testing like most other on a controlled basis... that it's not just "scientist" f*cking around cos they had a joint at lunch but rather for pursuit of scientific progress... i don't know too much on the area in question but i can't believe that the alternatives mentioned can cover all that animal testing entail...

my mother happens to be a biologist and as such she works with mice in experiments on a day-to-day basis... apparantly she has a liscense that entitles her to work with animal testing... a liscense that can apparantly be revoked rather easily should she not "treat" the animals with considerate care during the process of experimentation... i also have 2 dogs and a cat at home and she is very careful that they are treated properly and taken care of well because she might have her liscense revoked...

i don't think anyone can disagree that they'd rather have the testing be done on an animal than a relative (mentioning relative to evoke emotional attachment as eventually everyone must be known to someone)...

if i'm not entierly mistaken medical trials do occur even on humans... and as far as i'm concerned it's either sick people who have nothing to lose by going through the procedure or poor students like me that get injected with all sorts of thing so they can get the money for their pot noodles... the latter doesn't seem too ethical in a way does it? yet that's the type of people that testing attracts would they not be able to do it on animals (forseeing as i said that i don't think the alternative measures mentioned covers all that is in the area of animal testing.
 
Maxi said:
i am for animal testing like most other on a controlled basis... that it's not just "scientist" f*cking around cos they had a joint at lunch but rather for pursuit of scientific progress... i don't know too much on the area in question but i can't believe that the alternatives mentioned can cover all that animal testing entail...

my mother happens to be a biologist and as such she works with mice in experiments on a day-to-day basis... apparantly she has a liscense that entitles her to work with animal testing... a liscense that can apparantly be revoked rather easily should she not "treat" the animals with considerate care during the process of experimentation... i also have 2 dogs and a cat at home and she is very careful that they are treated properly and taken care of well because she might have her liscense revoked...

i don't think anyone can disagree that they'd rather have the testing be done on an animal than a relative (mentioning relative to evoke emotional attachment as eventually everyone must be known to someone)...

if i'm not entierly mistaken medical trials do occur even on humans... and as far as i'm concerned it's either sick people who have nothing to lose by going through the procedure or poor students like me that get injected with all sorts of thing so they can get the money for their pot noodles... the latter doesn't seem too ethical in a way does it? yet that's the type of people that testing attracts would they not be able to do it on animals (forseeing as i said that i don't think the alternative measures mentioned covers all that is in the area of animal testing.
Click to expand...

Humans testing would be welcomed by the scientific community if they could get enough volunteers, since it would speed up research.
Are the experiments your mother carries out essential? Do they directly benefit humans and animals with the minimum possible suffering of the mice?
 
animal testing is NOT neccery!

When will people get over the idea that animal testing is important its NOT anymore! once a pone a time yes because we weren't as scientifically advanced as we are now. there are other alternatives that are more accurate than animal testing are hell of alot cheaper and don't cause pain! and don't give me trash about its in the name of science because i come from a family of scientists and ALL of them a posse testing on animals, its no longer that its a moral issue, there are OTHER RESOURCES!!!! people are so busy in caring about them selves that you forget what your actually doing. do you get a kick out of torturing animal? cause thats what it is don't even bother to deny it. you can't explain why you do it, you excuse it as its for science, or its better 1,000,000 animals die (tortured) than people , well how about this one no animals die, you test on lab created tissue of humans and humans don't die either. is that so hard for yous to get your head around ? i mean can you be that moronic to not give it a go ? what are you scared of that it might actually work and you don't the chance to harm animals any more? seriously you should be ashamed.
 
very touchy subject

i would go and contact laboritries and see what happens to animals
then go and see the human labs and see what they do to humans
not much to humans you will find animals being tested for human research

but if they do tests for animals on animals to help them
coool
and tests on humans for humans that would be even more bloody cooool
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top