Animal resting/ research yay or nay?

[britishboy]

This is a highly controversial subject, many believe animals should have no rights and support this whereas others believe animals shouldnt be kept as pets, what do you think? yay ir nay?

[ImCoolBeans]

I personally don't like the idea of animal testing for products. I think it's cruel and immoral to subject them to tests when they really have no idea what's going on; but on the other hand it can be dangerous to test on humans too and it's a lot more expensive, so pick your poison. But all in all I think it's wrong.

[Jess]

If the testing is used for good, like researching a cure, and the animal won't feel pain and suffer, it's fine, but for cosmetic products I feel it's wrong. But what can we do? We can't test on humans...

[Stronk Serb]

Only test meds on animals. We have to do that so that we can get a brighter idea what the meds will do to us.

[britishboy]

im fine with it all, for example, you can cut an axolotl in half, crush its body abd cut its spine and it will regenerate, imagine if that skill was available to help us.

www.ambystoma.org/research/87-what-types-of-research-are-axolotls-used-for-

[Harry Smith]

Only for medical uses which don't harm the animal, it's sickening to test cosmetic products on animals

[sqishy]

The mimal amount of animal resting as possible when it's needed, and to make sure suffering (if there is any) is kep to a minimum.

[SosbanFach]

Only for medical uses which don't harm the animal, it's sickening to test cosmetic products on animals

With all due respect, that's just naïvety. It is almost inevitable that lab mice will be in some way harmed for testing of medicines. Often, they must be infected first, before a drug is administered to try and cure them. If there were no risk of their being harmed, human test subjects may as well be used.

In terms of the options, we don't really have much choice as to whether we test drugs for medical development on animals - they have to be tested, so it's the mouse or the man if we ever want cures to some diseases. Cosmetics, however, are a somewhat more complex matter, I think. In the EU, animal testing for cosmetics is prohibited, as are products which have been thus tested (with exceptions, of course. It wouldn't be EU regulation without exceptions.) However, it is important that the products are safe for use, won't cause allergic reactions. Of course, there is a great probability that the animal will suffer, and cosmetics are, in most cases, hardly an essential. I don't know enough about it to make an informed conclusion on that front.

[Zenos]

This is a highly controversial subject, many believe animals should have no rights and support this whereas others believe animals shouldnt be kept as pets, what do you think? yay ir nay?

is ur topic about animals as pets or research subjects

[LouBerry]

It's sick, and I think it's horrible. But, it's also necessary. Especially when dealing with diseases. If someone could find the cure to cancer, and save millions of lives, (that pertains to animals too) but if cost the lives of a dozen test groups, in the end it would be worth it.

Now, if you're killing animals in order to try out a new body mist, you should probably not be alive.

[Zenos]

It's sick, and I think it's horrible. But, it's also necessary. Especially when dealing with diseases. If someone could find the cure to cancer, and save millions of lives, (that pertains to animals too) but if cost the lives of a dozen test groups, in the end it would be worth it.

Now, if you're killing animals in order to try out a new body mist, you should probably not be alive.

u do realize meds used on animals react diffrently in their systems then in ours

[LouBerry]

u do realize meds used on animals react diffrently in their systems then in ours

I am quite aware. I am also aware that the things that they do to the animals are sometimes too horrible to describe. The conditions they are kept in, the chemicals they are exposed to, it's all sickening. But have you ever been to a children's hospital? Where there are infants dying from un-curable diseases? Or an orphanage for children whose parents contracted AIDS and died? People are dying everyday. Good people. Hell, animals get things like cancer, too. It kills hundreds of them. What if twenty years from now, because of animal testing, we could have vaccines that eliminate chronic diseases? Is it fair to do that to animals, just because they can't tell us no? Of course not. And it's a difficult decision, but it's one that I'd make in a heartbeat.

[Zenos]

I am quite aware. I am also aware that the things that they do to the animals are sometimes too horrible to describe. The conditions they are kept in, the chemicals they are exposed to, it's all sickening. But have you ever been to a children's hospital? Where there are infants dying from un-curable diseases? Or an orphanage for children whose parents contracted AIDS and died? People are dying everyday. Good people. Hell, animals get things like cancer, too. It kills hundreds of them. What if twenty years from now, because of animal testing, we could have vaccines that eliminate chronic diseases? Is it fair to do that to animals, just because they can't tell us no? Of course not. And it's a difficult decision, but it's one that I'd make in a heartbeat.

then test the meds for humans on willing and well informed humans

[LouBerry]

then test the meds for humans on willing and well informed humans

Okay, please, by all means, direct me to a few hundred people, that are in good health and are willing to give up their life for others. You might find ten or so. Humans are selfish. I'm selfish. My grandpa has cancer. He's fighting it off, but when it comes back in five or six years, it'll kill him. My grandma has a type of skin cancer that, while it isn't killing her, causes her extreme pain. If they never had to go through that again, if no one ever had to go through that again, I would probably wipe out a whole species through animal testing. Trust me, you'd feel differently if it was closer to home.

[Zenos]

Okay, please, by all means, direct me to a few hundred people, that are in good health and are willing to give up their life for others. You might find ten or so. Humans are selfish. I'm selfish. My grandpa has cancer. He's fighting it off, but when it comes back in five or six years, it'll kill him. My grandma has a type of skin cancer that, while it isn't killing her, causes her extreme pain. If they never had to go through that again, if no one ever had to go through that again, I would probably wipe out a whole species through animal testing. Trust me, you'd feel differently if it was closer to home.

hmm to see if it will work on a disease u dont test it on tje already healthy that doed not shoe if itll work .

[Zenos]

Okay, please, by all means, direct me to a few hundred people, that are in good health and are willing to give up their life for others. You might find ten or so. Humans are selfish. I'm selfish. My grandpa has cancer. He's fighting it off, but when it comes back in five or six years, it'll kill him. My grandma has a type of skin cancer that, while it isn't killing her, causes her extreme pain. If they never had to go through that again, if no one ever had to go through that again, I would probably wipe out a whole species through animal testing. Trust me, you'd feel differently if it was closer to home.

i have had family die of cancer diabetes etc etc and i still stand by finding and testing the meds on sick people

[LouBerry]

i have had family die of cancer diabetes etc etc and i still stand by finding and testing the meds on sick people

I have no idea what your last post said, so I'll just reply to this one.

So, you'd rather test a medication on your sick family member? Call me Hitler, but I'd rather kill a few bunnies than my Grandpa.

Look, it all comes down to the fact that sometimes hard choices have to be made. This is one that has no good answer. Either way, pain is inflicted to those who don't deserve it. Some people have to be strong enough to make those decisions, right or wrong, depending on what they think is better for greater good.

[Luminous]

For medicinal purposes, yes testing on animals is okay. But only that. No cosmetics or anything.

[Zenos]

I have no idea what your last post said, so I'll just reply to this one.

So, you'd rather test a medication on your sick family member? Call me Hitler, but I'd rather kill a few bunnies than my Grandpa.

Look, it all comes down to the fact that sometimes hard choices have to be made. This is one that has no good answer. Either way, pain is inflicted to those who don't deserve it. Some people have to be strong enough to make those decisions, right or wrong, depending on what they think is better for greater good.

if i had cancer i would willing take the meds so it could be gounf out if it eorkd and just whay effect it has instead of giving it to an animal when it will hsve diffremt effects on tjem them

[LouBerry]

if i had cancer i would willing take the meds so it could be gounf out if it eorkd and just whay effect it has instead of giving it to an animal when it will hsve diffremt effects on tjem them

Good for you. I would do the same if it would make a difference, but a few people here and there wouldn't. You have to be able to run test after test after test. That's a lot of subjects. A lot of people. A lot of people who would not be willing to do that. So, it goes back to, let millions of people suffer and die every year, or unfairly subject animals to testing. I see only one real option.

[britishboy]

is ur topic about animals as pets or research subjects

Research subjects but also animal rights as thats hardly off topic

[Human]

I think it's definitely wrong to test on animals, but at the moment, it's necessary and I don't think it will really change. Not enough people are willing to put themselves under so much pain or even death even for a lot of money, and it may be harsh to force it on animals but think about the people who are ill with cancer, or rare diseases, given the opportunity, would you deny them medicine if it required testing on animals?

[britishboy]

I think it's definitely wrong to test on animals, but at the moment, it's necessary and I don't think it will really change. Not enough people are willing to put themselves under so much pain or even death even for a lot of money, and it may be harsh to force it on animals but think about the people who are ill with cancer, or rare diseases, given the opportunity, would you deny them medicine if it required testing on animals?

For medicinal purposes, yes testing on animals is okay. But only that. No cosmetics or anything.

then test the meds for humans on willing and well informed humans

The mimal amount of animal resting as possible when it's needed, and to make sure suffering (if there is any) is kep to a minimum.



the reality is for animal testing is that animals are cheap so yes we should use them, they're mice for god sake, we pay the poor to test on them but apparently thats better than testing on mice?

as for animal research I know the horrors, animals dissected while fully aware of everything, kept in terrible conditions and purposefully injured/ infected to test on them, but think of this, nobody will waste resources on that if there wasn't potential benefits for us

[CharlieHorse]

Animal testing is sometimes necessary.
I think pets are fine. My dog loves me :)

[Seemyheart]

Testing animals is wrong. they suffer if the thing being tested fails... it makes me sick because im an animal lover and wouldnt ever imagine doing that to my pets, nor anyone else's

[britishboy]

Testing animals is wrong. they suffer if the thing being tested fails... it makes me sick because im an animal lover and wouldnt ever imagine doing that to my pets, nor anyone else's

1) They're nobody's pet
2) It benefits us
3) They're cheap
4) They're replaceable

[Cygnus]

1) They're nobody's pet
2) It benefits us
3) They're cheap
4) They're replaceable

They also feel pain and suffer, I doubt you would like to be in their place, treat others how you would like to be treated, that applies to animals too.

[Jevon]

I can understand keeping animals as pets but I find it wrong to test stuff on them...but I highly recommend preserving their natural habitats as best as possible

[Seemyheart]

1) They're nobody's pet
2) It benefits us
3) They're cheap
4) They're replaceable

It's still a life! regardless if its animal or human. life isnt cheap, its a valuable thing, that shouldnt be considered "replaceable" because no life is simply replaceable. it benefits us at what cost? so many animals have died because of those "beneficial tests".
Sorry if I'm being...extreme...but this is one topic I can't seem to ever be gentle in stating my opinion.

[britishboy]

They also feel pain and suffer, I doubt you would like to be in their place, treat others how you would like to be treated, that applies to animals too.

I can understand keeping animals as pets but I find it wrong to test stuff on them...but I highly recommend preserving their natural habitats as best as possible

It's still a life! regardless if its animal or human. life isnt cheap, its a valuable thing, that shouldnt be considered "replaceable" because no life is simply replaceable. it benefits us at what cost? so many animals have died because of those "beneficial tests".
Sorry if I'm being...extreme...but this is one topic I can't seem to ever be gentle in stating my opinion.

I found these on the net, they're all correct
Animal research works because:
Animal testing has helped to develop
vaccines against diseases like rabies,
polio, measles, mumps, rubella and
TB
Antibiotics, HIV drugs, insulin and
cancer treatments rely on animal
tests. Other testing methods aren't
advanced enough
Scientists claim there are no
differences in lab animals and
humans that cannot be factored into
tests
Operations on animals helped to
develop organ transplant and open-
heart surgery techniques
Animal testing is morally right
because:
Human life has greater intrinsic value
than animal life
Legislation protects all lab animals
from cruelty or mistreatment
Millions of animals are killed for food
every year - if anything, medical
research is a more worthy death
Few animals feel any pain as they are
killed before they have the chance to
suffer

[Yugen]

I believe medical research makes an exception, but other to that it's just wrong. And even then I don't agree with some of the practices.

[Nellerin]

the reality is for animal testing is that animals are cheap so yes we should use them, they're mice for god sake, we pay the poor to test on them but apparently thats better than testing on mice?

as for animal research I know the horrors, animals dissected while fully aware of everything, kept in terrible conditions and purposefully injured/ infected to test on them, but think of this, nobody will waste resources on that if there wasn't potential benefits for us

Then you don't understand much regarding the testing. 90% is for "projects" that have no real goal and are simply in order to see what will happen.

Plus, the medical testing experiments fail more than 50% of the time in humans and in some cases, end up hurting us.

I say, no testing on animals.

[britishboy]

Then you don't understand much regarding the testing. 90% is for "projects" that have no real goal and are simply in order to see what will happen.

Plus, the medical testing experiments fail more than 50% of the time in humans and in some cases, end up hurting us.

I say, no testing on animals.

projects aren't good? look at research into the Axolotls regeneration properties, everyone objects because it is like torture, but it is not, there is always a purpose and it is an animal, who even cares? it's not like the animal is endangered

[Harry Smith]

projects aren't good? look at research into the Axolotls regeneration properties, everyone objects because it is like torture, but it is not, there is always a purpose and it is an animal, who even cares? it's not like the animal is endangered

Sigh much?

Torture has a purpose doesn't it? You can't justify the means with the ends. Animal testing is paramount to torture in some cases but as usual you ignore the truth to suit your own agenda. Animals become endangered through the actions of humans-such as hunting, testing and poaching.

You ask who cares? I think the majority of the people on this thread care if you have a look, so there's the answer to your question.
I say, no testing on animals.
but I find it wrong to test stuff on them
Testing animals is wrong. they suffer if the thing being tested fails.

Why do you have a need to come out with such narrow minded crap?