If you are against testing new drugs on animals. What do you think of this?

Question

Drug Companies are sending Doctors to India to test their latest potions on unsuspecting villagers......
Nobody explains to the poor sick illiterates that they are in danger of suffering serious side effects. Many have died as a result, allegedly.

Nothing is being done partly because a lot of money in 'Back Handers' is give to the local chiefs.
Also, how does one prove that, death was caused by an experimental drug, when the body was cremated almost immediately?
I say again. These people are not being told that they are guineapigs.

Answer 1

THAT IS DISGUSTING, BUT IT IS THE FAULT OF ALL THESE ANIMAL RIGHT CAMPAIGNERS AS WELL AS THE DRUG COMPANY'S. THEY DO NEED TO TEST THE DRUG'S BEFORE WE CAN TAKE THEM, SO ANIMAL RIGHT PEOPLE WHAT DO YOU VALUE MORE THE LIFE OF A RABBIT OR A HUMAN BEING.

Answer 2

I have absolutely no doubts about the depths that some people will go to to turn a profit but you know this as a fact allegedly because..? I particularly like the "unsuspecting villagers" and "poor sick illiterates" bit - it sounds like the plot of an Indiana Jones movie and I'm going to vote for tootsies answer because it resonates, and fits in with the whole ambiance of the situation

Answer 3

I dont doubt there are drug companies that will abuse people in developing countries, however, if a company did do this and it was made public, they may lose their license to produce their drugs - a big risk not always worth taking. Yet, if this is the case, then clearly it is both morally and ethically wrong to inflict suffering like this. Also, using animals is also morally wrong, it is the case where we as humans belive we have dominion over all creature and we can do what we like to them, and this is unnacceptable.

We as humans still prefer to abuse our bodies, treat ouselves as through we are indestructable, and then to demand medical help when it all goes wrong. For this, we use animals in the search for answers. There are no real answers since our technology is not yet developed enough to enable us to avoid using anything for drug testing.

Thankfully, we (in the UK) are slowly moving away from animal testing, and using human volunteers (mostly the scientists who develop the drugs in the first instance). Yet ther still remains some animal research which I belive will eventually stop.

Answer 4

Sick...remember 'low tar cigarettes' being tested on dogs in the mid-seventies.
There was a scream about participants (homo sapiens) who were tested in London some time ago...these people were not poor sick illiterates, just people who saw it is an easy way to secure a wee bit of dinero. Of course if it all went well, everyone would be praised - but it resulted in suffering...and the ones who suffered were not questioned on their purpose to take part.

Answer 5

I don't agree with that at all. People who volunteer for drugs tests get the information on what side affects might occur, and get paid, which is why they do it, but to try them on unsuspecting villagers is against human rights. Although I don't like testing on animals, testing on poor unsuspecting people is even worse.

Answer 6

Oh..no! This is wrong. They should tell the ppl what they are doing and let them chose if they want to do it or not. Even still, it's wrong because they are sick and poor and most likely will agree to it because they have no other hope.

What is being done about this?

Answer 7

That's awful. They should just use convicts. Some of them are druggies anyway.

Answer 8

That's really sad, how can we make a difference? Please tell me!