2006-12-15 08:49:45 · 14 answers · asked by LoVE LiFE 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
do you think the laws they have brought in are fair/good/ right? for example, no monkey can be tested on,etc, you have to have as little pain as possible...
2006-12-15 08:51:54 · update #1
I am for animal testing, with some limitations.
If it's for pharmaceuticals or other life-saving products that wouldn't be released if not for animal testing, I'm all for it.
But animal testing isn't a pretty thought, and it shouldn't be used for just everything - there's plenty of shampoo already, and if you can't come up with something new that you know is safe for use on humans without trying it out on an animal first - well, guess it's your loss.
Furthermore, for some things, I think the testing procedures should be more open. For example, if people have terminal cancer or AIDS, and there's someone working with a product that could either make their life better or cure the disease, why shouldn't they be allowed to test the product. They will die from their disease regardless, so any attempt is better than none at all, and if they made the decision to join the test group, then I think they should be allowed to make that choice.
2006-12-15 09:54:37 · answer #1 · answered by JenV 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why are you simply asking Jews? We're no longer a few style of cult in which each person is meant to suppose and act the equal. Some Jews don't approve of animal trying out and a few do. Negative part: Animals are harm and tortured for the pride of people whilst it is performed for beauty study. Positive part: Animal trying out can be utilized to gain knowledge of approximately human sicknesses and cures however ONLY if the animals are dealt with humanely.
2016-09-03 17:15:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say test everything on the animals first. Damnit they are not people and don't deserve to be treated as such. They are animals and there is a reason we are at the top of the food chain. We are smarter and our brain functions in different ways. We need to test on animals so as to cut down the potential problems for humans, you know, us.
I'd bet everything I had if it were reversed and say the monkeys were running the asylum, then they'd test their new drugs on every human in the world before using it on one of their own. We are the only beings on the planet who would find something like this to be cruel. Survival of the species is the key and unless you are ready for human testing, which I'm not necessarily against either, then shut up and let the doctors do their work. Its your a** they are trying to save.
Oh but the little bunnies are so cute, piss off. They are here to make sure we survive. That's the beauty of being at the top. Thanks and have a nice day.
2006-12-15 08:57:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
we need animal testing because, at present, there are no perfect alternatives to it. computer simulations are just that... simulations. human testing is not viable for everything, but some psychological research is carried out on prison populations, where it's easy to keep a consistent environment. if and when computer simulations are developed that can mirror exactly the human experience, i am confident our society will use those instead of animal testing.
many activists will tell you that animal testing is not perfect either, and they're absolutely correct. but at this point in time, humane animal research is the best available option for conducting biomedical research. people who do inhumane research end up in prison. the world is not full of mad scientists doing cruel experiments just to say they did them.
2006-12-18 02:23:14 · answer #4 · answered by rive_sud 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a toss up. On one hand it could save people's lives or make life easier. On the other hand it's cruel. Like cutting off bunnies eyelids to test shampoo. How sick is that? Infecting chimps with Aids? They used to use chimps in crash tests to see how affects the body. I mean really, how is that right? So... I guess I'm against.
The laws aren't that great. Like in England you can test on a small monkey but not great apes. So what's the difference? Here in the states they can test on dogs, rats, etc. I'm sure some laws help but not all.
2006-12-15 08:53:42 · answer #5 · answered by Jasmine 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Everyone is against animal testing until it saves their life or someone they love's life. One of the heads of PETA is diabetic and the methods keeping her alive were derived from animal testing. Talk about a Hypocrite.
I'd just like to see all the above posters refuse animal-tested medical treatment when their hypocrite-coward-***-lives are on the line.
2006-12-15 08:54:38 · answer #6 · answered by arcaemous 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm against it. Animals are not our's to test on! Why the hell do people think animals are disposable. Pain or no pain, it's WRONG!
Human testing on volunteers.
2006-12-15 08:52:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Against.
After the animal is dead ok, but other wise, it is cruel.
They can't test humans without consent.
2006-12-15 08:56:01 · answer #8 · answered by dal5055@sbcglobal.net 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm against it, animals should be free not caged up and used for theses purposes
2006-12-15 08:58:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Against. These animals have feelings and why should they suffer for our benefit? Thats ridiculous.
2006-12-15 08:52:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋