Peta is into protecting animal rights and in my view, value animals more than human beings. I suggest we do medical research on their members rather than animals because, we wouldnt want to hurt the animals now, would we?
2006-09-29 10:49:26 · 9 answers · asked by theprophet556 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Medicine
No: two extremist points of view do not add up to a moderate one. I'm sure there is a middle ground. Extensive, unecessary, tortuous medical research doesn't advance medical science. Humans and animals are different. And much of the work being done is barbaric and outdated. The methods don't yield results. PETA members feel the need to point out the wrongs being done and they need to feel they are doing something about it. And medical research needs to be done, but not necessarily on animals or people. There are other more advanced methods. It makes more sense to test a new drug on a subject for whom it is intended...a sick human, rather than on an animal...a different species...who has been purposely infected with a human disease.
2006-09-29 11:01:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why not? Use prisoners.
I joined Peta... People Eating tasty Animals.
2006-09-29 17:57:09 · answer #2 · answered by Mazz 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Drug companies have an seemingly infinite source of funding. Wouldn't it be more ethical for the drug companies to *pay* volunteers to participate in studies rather than to force an animal to be the guinea pig? It is not like animals can rationalize that what you are doing to them is for the good of society.
2006-09-29 20:55:14 · answer #3 · answered by Diamond404 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great idea! I've always felt there must be a better use for PETA members than just consuming and spewing back garbage.
2006-10-01 14:59:04 · answer #4 · answered by Donald W 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LOL! Not a bad idea, but first you must consider who the research would be done on. Do you really want results of medical tests based on Pamela Anderson???
2006-09-29 18:02:39 · answer #5 · answered by GreekChick 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes. Would it be better to use unsuspecting humans like test subjects or the buying population as a whole to find out that some strange reactions happens if "fill in the blank" is gotten in the eyes... etc etc
2006-09-30 00:18:26 · answer #6 · answered by Larry L 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree.
PETA sends me all kind of crap to get me to donate.
I can't imagine sending money to help animals & plants when there's so many charities that help people out there.
2006-09-29 17:58:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pamela Anderson is a twit. Doesn't she care that silicone is becoming extinct because of her?
2006-10-01 15:01:55 · answer #8 · answered by ebonyruffles 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they would probably volunteer if you said it was either them or the animals, then everyone would be happy.
2006-09-29 17:56:05 · answer #9 · answered by Jamie Lee 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋