How do you feel ablout animal testing?

Question

I am doing a debate on this topic and need info and opinions personally I do not belive in some of the ways they hurt animal but I need info.

Answer 1

If you have ever been to the pharmacy and bought something, you can't be against animal testing. Everything on the shelves have been tested on animals. It's mandated by the FDA. It's the law. This is necessary to protect consumers from fraudulent/impure products that don't work, or worse yet, do more harm than good.

If animal testing wasn't mandated by the FDA, none of the companies would ever do animal testing. It's expensive, and it's a hassle for them. They only do it because the government tells them to do it.

Answer 2

im kind of divided on this, i dont believe that animals should be unnecesarily hurt or killed by humans, so i dont mind if the testing is for important medicine, but cosmetics testing should be banned, who would want to kill a animal just so they can look nice?
i have some arguments for u depending on which side of the argument u are on:

if you are against animal testing, u could say that the effects a product could have on an animal are different than the effects it could have on a human. i used that argument in an essay, it worked well, you cant FOR CERTAIN tell how a chemical effects a certain organisim unless you tested on the exact organisim, it cant be exact unless it is the exact human being with the exact DNA who will use the product, much less an animal, sure you can estimate, that is what scientists normally do, take a educated guess which is accurate most of the time, but that does not always work. sometimes even FDA aprovved drugs can malfunction.

Answer 3

Animal testing is ethically and morally necessary. The most unethical act I can imagine would be injecting into a human being a chemical substance with completely unknown and possibly lethal side effects, when those side effects could have been discovered in advance by sacrificing a few guinea pigs or rats. If any medical personnel were to give a human patient a substance that had not been thoroughly tested on animals, that medical worker should be held legally responsible for any serious complications the patient might experience as a result.
.

Answer 4

I know this question will definitely get a ton of answers. I was actually thinking about this on the way home from work last night. I was thinking that the basic argument is "don't hurt animals, hurt humans!"
I think that when people jump on the PETA bandwagon, they're just doing it because they saw some gross bloody picture of something dead and that has a big effect for persuasion. You have to realize that products can't be put on the market if they haven't been tested and if you aren't going to test something it'll have to be people or animals. So personally, I'm okay with a pig trying out some Pepto Bismol before me.

Answer 5

Animal testing is essential in some cases. Have you ever taken asprin or any other type of medication. If you have then you should know that all those drugs are tested on animals before going to market. Pesticides and insecticides are also tested on animals so if you eat anything other than organic fruit and veg you are agreeing to the testing (passively).
However there are many other less important organisations that also test on animals so it depends on how much testing you are willing to accept and for which causes.

Answer 6

It depends on the type of testing. Most medical/scientific testing on animals is essential, relatively harmless and/or humane. As long as it is done in a humane and ethical fashion (not "Lets inject windex into this mouse's eyeballs just to see what happens"), I don't have a problem with it. The only animal testing I really object to is cosmetic. Why should a rabbit have lipstick shoved into its eyes just so that someone somewhere can consider themselves slightly more attractive?

Answer 7

I think it is used to develop a better life for humans through these procedures we can enhance our own pratical daily lives. Most products are used on animals as they represent 99.9% of our dna say for instance monkeys therefore most medical advances wopuld never have occured if animal testing was not carried out. It can be evil and mallicous sometimes however we need to develop mankind and I personally oppose it but like most initiatives it does carry some advantages if animal testing is done for no purpose and will not improve human lives then it is a waste of time. If it is done improve human standards it can be very helpfull.

Answer 8

Have you googled this topic? I did a research paper on Animal Experimentation when I was in 8th grade. Check out the book 'animal liberation' by Peter Singer. Go to the library and get a few books because you will have to site your sources.

As for how I feel about it......I'm against it for trivial things such as makeup and cleaniing products and foods, but for certain things, I suppose they have to do it. Although there are alternatives to animal testing these days..........Too bad they couldn't do it on people who are sentenced to life in prison or something. Like if the prisoner was willing to for perks.

Answer 9

I know it sounds harsh - but if they don't do testing on animals - then they would have to do it on humans instead. Would you rather a mouse be put through tests or your own child? Especially when that testing may be on a cure for cancer that may save your child someday.
Also, I notice that a lot of shampoo companies "Do not test on animals" - for instance, Bath and Body Works. Oh my! Heaven forbid a lab rat have nice smelling soft hair! That stuff seems like a waste of time to me.
Good luck to you.

Answer 10

That's always a tough question. We don't want animals hurt, but we want our children to be safe. It should be done, but as humanely as possible.

Peta is a horrible group who care more about a tiny bug than about our own children. Many people didn't know that Peta kills more animals than any other organization. They're a bunch of hypocrites who should be run out of business.

That said, the issue is one of priority. It's like saying we don't want to kill animals or plants, but we want to eat them. Someone has to make the decision.