Please give me the advantages and disadvantages of animal experimentation.?

Question

Please give as many ideas as you can. Your ideas are much appreciated. Thank You!

Answer 1

~Advantage: you can't kill people.
Disadvantage: Animal rights groups hound you all the time.
Advantage: testing on machines gives artificial results
Disadvantage: You've got to feed them, shelter them and keep them somewhat clean.
Advantage: It's fun
Disadvantage: It would be more fun with people.
Advantage: You don't have to pay them.
Disadvantage: You can't make them work for you to get the next fix or treatment.
Advantage: When one succeeds, one can cure cancer in rats.
Disadvantage: Too many rats.
Advantage: If (when) they die, you toss them in the oven or on the scrap heap.
Disadvantage: Using people, you could party at the wake.
Advantage: With animals, you can breed new samples with the same genetic make-up. Thanks to the Reconstruction Congress, you can't breed people anymore.
Disadvantage: Rats tend to breed like, well, ... rats. Too many specimens can spoil the soup.
Advantage: You can sell unused dogs, cats, rats and monkeys to Chinese restaurants.
Disadvantage: Oversupply of Chinese meats might run the horse steakhouses out of business.
Advantage: One might discover miracle cures which could cure countless diseases and prolong life indefinitely.
Disadvantage: One might discover miracle cures which could cure countless diseases and prolong life indefinitely.

Answer 2

Advantages Of Animal Testing

Answer 3

The principal advantage is the ability to conduct a trial when an organism is needed and it could be dangerous. Lots of pharmaceuticals are tried out on animals long before they are considered for human tests.

Disadvantages: animals don't always have a compatible physiology to test something meant for people. For example, in the 1970's, some lab experiments show laboratory mice getting cancer when given doses of saccharin. Since it was being used in diet drinks at the time, this caused a major scare, even to the point that saccharin use was banned in Canada. However, no case of humans getting cancer from saccharin ever emerged.

I could delve into the philosophical arguments, but this should be sufficient for your question, at least from me.

Answer 4

What a question your going to get swaped with anti-animal test supporters.

Reasons against and there only one according to ALF philosphy (sp)
It it morally wrong to make an animal suffer.

Reasons for accoring to certain medicial prossfessions.

It is a fall back to see if a new drug/compound is toxic or dangerous for animals and if so should be then be tested on humans.

Drug testing on animals in general, some believe that it produces results some believe that these tests are a waste of time as an animal model is not the same as a human model.

Answer 5

I don't think that really there are many advantages look how many drugs get passed and then have to be recalled because gasp... we are not like the animals they used to test it on.

I think the only one that maybe has half a good use is surgery experiments but now they can make models on computers that show us what happens.

But still I think that we could replace them all with death row inmates and child molesters and such.

Answer 6

Well, laboratory scientists announced this week that they were no longer going to use rats in their experiments, that they were going to switch over to using lawyers instead. They gave three reasons for the switch.

1) There are a lot more lawyers than rats.

2) The lab personnel have a tendency to get attached to the rats.

and 3)There are certain things that you simply cannot get a rat to do. Lol. Sorry for the joke answer, it's one of my favorite jokes and I thought it might fit in here. Hope everyone else supplies you with some good input. Take care. UCSteve

Answer 7

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/aygxI

All life needs to be respected but no animals should not have the same rights as humans. It would go against everything in our animalistic nature to treat them as equals. I am an animal lover, I think circuses are cruel, hunting is fine as long as you eat what you kill and are not wasteful and as far as medical testing, only if it is something that could dramatically improve or save human lives. I do not support testing on animals for makeup and other superficial reasons.We are at the top of the food chain but we should not abuse that power! (Animals are people too!) lol

Answer 8

One of the big things is that people don't have to die before a product gets to market. I know this sounds sad, but in our cultures we value human life more than animals and want to make ourselves better by developing medicines that work and are not dangerous (hopefully). The medicines are then tested on animals that are biologically very similar to us (such as rats and monkeys) and then if deemed safe, used on volunteer humans. A good movie to watch about companies not testing on animals, and directly testing on humans is "The Constant Gardener." It's a real sad movie.

Answer 9

let's look at this in the form of martial arts. It's said that the way that pressure point tactics were discovered was from prison officials in ancient China, trying out theories on prisoners. See, nobody really cared about the prisoners, so what better subjects to experiment on, right? So they'd bring in a prisoner, strike him in a spot or several spots, and write down the results. If it killed him, they'd write down the sequence as a killing technique. If it didn't, they'd write it down as something to not bother with again or modify. Whatever organs were affected, they'd write them down. But often times, if the prisoners weren't killed from the studies, they were mamed for life, or wished they were dead, and no, they didn't have a choice.

Pros:
The Chinese learned a LOT about pressure points...healing, hurting, maming, killing, etc...and b/c of the studies, we today may know how to use them, too, in self defense & healing (accupuncture).

Cons:
Would YOU like to be one of the prisoners? They weren't volunteers, and sometimes not even justifyably imprissoned.

Answer 10

You've hit upon another practical use for lawyers! They are much closer to the genetic makeup of humans than rats are, the scientists won't become attached to them, and there are some things that even a rat won't do.