A Debate On Animal Testing

[FreedomOverdose 0]

I thought I should make this debate a bit more different:

If you are for animal testing post in blue If you are against animal testing, post in red

 

 

Context:

For many centuries people have experimented on animals. There are two main reasons for doing this: first, to find out more about the animals themselves, and, secondly, to test substances and procedures to see if they are harmful (with a view to deciding whether or not they can be used on human beings). In the second category fall cosmetic products as well as medicines and surgical techniques. There is a growing consensus that it is not acceptable to test cosmetic products on animals. This debate is about whether we should experiment on animals for scientific and medical purposes. The debate about the pros and cons of animal experimentation (or 'vivisection') is one that elicits very strong emotions: animal rights activists have resorted to trespass, violence, death threats, and hunger strikes in their single-minded (and sometimes illegal) mission to end this practice.

 

 

 

I don't think that it should be ok to test products on animals. Animals don't get a choice, whereas humans do. Humans can get paid to do it if they want to as well. Animals go blind, some go through severe pain and it would be torture for them. A lot of experiments are tested on animals like rats and mice, rats and mice are nothing like humans! So how do we know that it will have the same effect on people? I think this is not acceptable and it should be stopped.

 

What are your thoughts?

[Lightning73 0]

You are absolutely wrong that mice are nothing like humans, mice share 99% of the genes humans do and are there for perfectly suited for testing on. Furthermore the reason mice are used most is because of their low cost, size and because it's easy to take care of them.

 

I think some animals should be allowed to test on, because almost every product ever produced would not have been there without it. I am however against the suffering of the animals.

[salamangkero 0]

I believe that animal testing is a vital part of product manufacture. I mean, if we did not test vaccines on animals first, the human population would rapidly dwindle... although I'm not sure that's altogether a bad thing. However, I do not favor animal testing for products are trifle as cosmetics. They are shallow, pointless and completely non-essential products the human society will be able to live without.

 

I suppose it also depends on the type of animals. If we tested vaccines on mice, then that would have been perfectly fine since mice are easy to breed (rabbits, even more so) and maintain. If, however, we start talking about tests done on endangered species, then you probably won't find me taking it all quietly.

 

All in all, I'd say, animal testing should be done only for certain animals (those that are easy to breed and maintain in captivity) and also only for certain products (those that are meant for non-trivial purposes)

[FreedomOverdose 0]

I think you didn't understand me well. Of course that animal testing is vital, but not for cosmetics products for god's sake!!!!

[Bluebear 0]

Actually the cosmetic industry do need something to test the products on. How would they know the consequences of using them, allergies and such things?

 

Do not misunderstand me. I am against animal testing.

 

Why do the animals need to suffer because we want to look pretty? Even though there are many of some certain animals, and companies breed them only for this purpose; why? It does not matter how many there are, it is still horrible and should not happen! The problem is testing the products. They need to do it. It is either animals or some poor little kid that just need a job.

 

I remember something about them testing for example mascara on a type of animal that do not cry - so they can see the reaction. Let me glue your eyelids open and stuff some black disgusting "mascara" on your eyes and see if you like it. Yummie.

 

There must be a better way to test products, because this is just horrible. There are companies that do not test on animals... at least the finished product. But I wonder: what do they test on then?

[Lightning73 0]

You are forgetting the fact that the only reason some of these creatures are alive is because they are bred to be used for animal testing. Without they wouldn't even exist.

[FreedomOverdose 0]

and many more other species are dying for making leather cover for our cars :|

[iGuest 3]

I am for animal testing, we have found many cures for many different diseases that have helped people.

[iGuest 3]

Against !!A Debate On Animal TestingFor animal testing I'm against for lot of reasons : Because it's auribel for animals and he is torturing. I think the animal is same of me and you ! Imagine you are torturing too ?! Is not possible ! I'm OK withe PETA ! Imagine you in a cage ? You are OK withe thats ?! Me no ! The animal don't support thats ! AND ANIMAL DEAD ! Thats it's auribel. I think thats is very aurible for the people... Imagine you whit this teste ?! It's crazy !! And is very very dangerous for animals ! And for human ! Is not the same reaction ! I don't think that it should be OK to test product on animals. I think is not possible and it should be stoppedSo I finish...

[iGuest 3]

I think that animal testing shouldn't be banned because humans have people who love them.

I'm not saying animals don't but in a way no-one will volunteer to get a product tested on them, because someone might mix two chemicals that have never been mixed before which might create a chemical reaction which can harm us or even kill us. I'm sure no-one will volunter to die because there is a 50% chance of death.

-reply by Gunes

[iGuest 3]

even tho some animals can share the same genes, there are still too many differences to get a clear idea of how chemicals will react in or around HUMANS.Even with medical reaserch there has been many cases of medications helping animals such as dogs, cats, mice, rabbits and even mon-human primeates that worsened human's conditions or even KILLED them. THE POINT IS ANIMALS ARE DIFFERENT. TOO DIFFERENT TO ACCURATLY DETERMINE IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE MEDICATIONThe point is that even tho there are some differences its not enough to determine what can kill us or what can cure us

-reply by xXMCRAngel2107Xx

[networker 0]

The way I feel is that animal testing should be legal onlyfor medical purposes.As for cosmetic companies, I disagree with thiscompletely.It really is superficial and shallow to test and basicallytorture animals for the sake of beauty.

[Arv_M 0]

I personally dislike the testing of any human products on animals. It seems to me, very cruel and unusual that we would capture an innocent creature from it's home, and inject it with diseases and then experiment with cures. I believe that federal, state and local prisons should be able to take convicted psychopathic, sociopathic criminals and lend them to medical facilities for testing. Now, if there is any possible proof that the human being may be innocent, the operation should not be allowed to take place. This should only happen when there is significant proof that the criminal is guilty.This to me, seems a lot more fair than taking innocent apes from the jungle and torturing them.

[miladinoski 1]

Definitevly NO!?

 

Animals are living beings and if the nature didn't made them enough smart so they can't say if they like something or not and they should have the rights for them to not be used in experiments that are not crucial for humans (like cosmetics, proving unimportant theories etc.)

 

So, in the end, they should not be abused but they can and should be used to test new vaccines or antibiotics.?

Edited December 12, 2008 by miladinoski (see edit history)

[iGuest 3]

Mice are worthless animals that lead to the death of over a billion people a few hundred years ago. These mice in the wild, by their own accord, breed to huge unsustainable numbers to create infestations. These of course eat anything and everything so they all end up dying and only 2 mice them remain to build up another infestation and so on, this cycles happenes around every 10 years across the globe...

So what if we breed a few in cages at least they wont starve like their wild counterparts. The testing may be cruel but oh well, why don't the people who defend these rodents focus their time on things that matter for example the advancement of the human race - which is exactly what the people who are testing on the animals are doing. 

If you don't like animal testing then don't use the drugs prescribed by your doctor, don't use makeup, don't use shampoo, conditioner or any other bath product, this will decrease demand for medicine and research, therefore slowing the rate of testing on animals. You cant be a vegetarian and complain about animals being killed just to go and eat meat yourself.

Yours and your ancestors lives have been saved by the use of drugs which were only possible through animal testing. 

Anyone who wants to disagree with this should go and find something to do with their lives, maybe stop some real atrocities by campaigning against the war in gaza instead of complaining about rats being tested on which both you and I know invaluable in the medical world

You're never going to make a difference because you're wrong and you know it.

Thankyou and goodnight,

Terry Tibbs