Animals Shouldn't/ Should be Used When Testing New Things

[Gyro_Plasma]

Who is the first one in drinking a new type of coke or Pepsi-Co? Who is the first one in taking a tablet of aspirin? Who is the first one in using shampoos? Did you know all these things? The one I’m referring to is the animal—cat, rabbit, rat and so on which are widely and cruelly used in various kinds of scientific researches, and millions of them die every year. Every life created by god is equal. Bearing that in mind, a huge amount of people have been no-animal-testing users. They strongly propose that animals shall not be used in scientific researches.



OR


The main reason why animals should be used is that it will be wrong to deliberately expose humans to health risks to observe the course of a disease. Animals are very similar to humans, most of their chemistry, cell structure and organization are the same as ours. Therefore, they are susceptible to many of the same health problems and are necessary for medical research when it is impractical to use humans.

[Dr Frook]

using animals is the easy way out and in some cases the only option. Not sure where I stand in this. Just as long as the animals are not made to suffer too much...

[Shadow00]

Depends on the thing, really.
I believe that as long as the test is done for something good (eg cure for cancern) then its ok.
If youre against that, offer to take their places

[Shadowstar1922]

The only animal should be really tested are Monkeys, and only for vacines. And, maybe other animals if they're trying to find medicine for another animal, but only to cure for a disease.

If a doctor is testing cats to make medicine to help cats jump, or digest better, that really isn't needed. But if it's to save the cat species, then it's ok.

Like Shad said,it depends on the thing.

[Lamb]

Hmmm...The only reason i see people dont agree with animal testing is because we put ourselves in the place of the animal...

ex.A higher intellegents controls the world and we are now animals and have to hunt to survive and we are tested on...

[Mr_Valentine]

Since there are few willing human participants willing to take drugs with possibly fatal side-effects, it is the only option to use an animal (for the sake of the experiment). Whether-or-not something is morally wrong or right rarely has strength in science. Scientists (on the job) approach things, encounters, incidents, interactions, life-- with an attitude based in reason instead of emotion. Your thoughts are to be merely considered for your opinion. You do not have to automatically buy into them. If they create drama, conflict, and the like-- they (the scientist) consider them (their emotions) non-useful and change their tack towards interactions that are constructive and beneficial to all involved.

I, personally, would never preform anything on an animal I'm not willing to do myself. I don't think that animal testing is right, morally. There's nothing else to say.

[Dr Frook]

Since there are few willing human participants willing to take drugs with possibly fatal side-effects, it is the only option to use an animal (for the sake of the experiment). Whether-or-not something is morally wrong or right rarely has strength in science. Scientists (on the job) approach things, encounters, incidents, interactions, life-- with an attitude based in reason instead of emotion. Your thoughts are to be merely considered for your opinion. You do not have to automatically buy into them. If they create drama, conflict, and the like-- they (the scientist) consider them (their emotions) non-useful and change their tack towards interactions that are constructive and beneficial to all involved.

I, personally, would never preform anything on an animal I'm not willing to do myself. I don't think that animal testing is right, morally. There's nothing else to say.

nature is cruel. The testing we do on animals is no less cruel than what animals do to one another every day to survive. We are only doing what we are programmed to do to survive in this universe.

[Hitokiri]

I'll throw something frank in.
Most of the people complaining about animal testing would also complain about testing things on humans. Especially to test something potentially deathly on a person.

Though most of them expect to be saved by some miracle drug when they fall ill.

To sum it up: it's nothing but hypocrisy.

I think we can now let mr valentine die next time he has an illness.

BTW: to shadowstar who suggested monkeys should be the only animals used for experiments.
In behaviour and some aspects monkeys resemble the humans most.
However they also cost alot and there arent that many around.

Whereas mice do come plenty and resemble the human immune system the same way monkeys do.

[Shadow00]

I'll throw something frank in.
Most of the people complaining about animal testing would also complain about testing things on humans. Especially to test something potentially deathly on a person.

Though most of them expect to be saved by some miracle drug when they fall ill.

To sum it up: it's nothing but hypocrisy.

I think we can now let mr valentine die next time he has an illness.

BTW: to shadowstar who suggested monkeys should be the only animals used for experiments.
In behaviour and some aspects monkeys resemble the humans most.
However they also cost alot and there arent that many around.

Whereas mice do come plenty and resemble the human immune system the same way monkeys do.

Perfectly worded. Agreed 101%.