English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have to prepare a presentation on above randomly chosen topic. If you guys have any ideas besides the obvious please help...

2007-02-06 10:06:01 · 8 answers · asked by Lisa 2 in Science & Mathematics Zoology

8 answers

Not me. There are lots of answers to this question, but all of them are obvious. You'd have to be a PETA radical not to admit knowledge of at least a half-dozen ways cruelty to animals benefits mankind. It doesn't mean that doctors and medical researchers are cruel people; it only means that they consider humans to have a higher value than animals do, so it's better to make a mouse suffer from an experimental drug or cancer treatment than to risk the untried on humans, or leave humans without tested remedies.

2007-02-06 10:23:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It can't! The use of laboratory animals to test hypotheses about drugs, human metabolism and psychology need not be any more cruel than the slaughter of millions of domesticated animals for our meat supply. If you consider the latter is cruelty then it does have a benefit. The whole question hinges on what you subjectively accept as animal cruelty.

The animals going up the ramp to the slaughter house never complain so it must not be cruelty.

2007-02-06 10:44:36 · answer #2 · answered by Mad Mac 7 · 0 0

If you are talking about the general public that abuse their pets, etc., there is no benefit-at all. It may temporarily benefit the person doing it-raising their blood pressure when so angry, etc. to cause health concerns, but it doesn;t help the animal at all. As for animal testing of products we people use, I'm sorry, but if rats can help us to not get hurt by some product that could be dangerous for us before being refined, sorry, but the rat can get tested on. Hope this helps you. Take care.

2007-02-06 10:12:49 · answer #3 · answered by SAK 6 · 0 0

I think you have to define animal cruelty first. To me, testing drugs on animals in hopes of curing a disease in humans is not cruel, but it may be so to others.

If you are talking about hunting for "sport", I don't see a benefit. Killing something purely for the sake of killing it isn't sport.

If you talk about bullfighting, then again I think it is cruelty.


There needs to be a higher purpose, to stop disease, food. Some people have a differnt threshold as to what constitutes cruelty. For some, eating animals is cruel.

2007-02-06 10:34:58 · answer #4 · answered by Sam Fisher 3 · 0 0

Better medicines, food sources, knowledge of the effects of various chemical compounds on mammals, safer consumer products, new funny looking breeds of dogs/cats that rich elitists can carry around in their coach bags. Not sure which ones are the obvious ones but that is all I could come up with at the moment.

2007-02-06 10:16:32 · answer #5 · answered by Chris B 1 · 0 0

you're making each and every of the standards a in charge animal proprietor ought to. those poor domestic dogs being bred by means of uneducated human beings giving them "dressmaker" names will basically be stopped whilst the wide-unfold public stops procuring those canines. purely as a results of fact a Hollywood character has made them a manner accessory would not make it actual. The outdated adage, 'you get what you pay for' relatively applies right here a lot to the suffering of the animals. relatively than spend the funds from an outstanding breeder, human beings get the coolest deal domestic dog and are often stunned whilst the vet expenses start up. there is no actual thank you to end the BYBs of the international different than by means of preparation. Bob Barker spent years attempting to get the message out. i would not pick to make certain rules exceeded requiring puppy vendors to neuter their animals yet maximum in charge vets motivate it it strongly, the two for the well-being of the animal and to avert out of control breeding. i'm confident that there are some accessible that ought to declare that it relatively is purely too costly to circulate to a breeder. an outstanding breeder is familiar with extra relating to the lineage of their canines to determine a wholesome, properly-tempered better half than do the persons making their funds mutually as a undeniable breed is a warm commodity. i'm the right age to undergo in ideas whilst the recognition of Lassie and Rin Tin Tin had the two Collies and German Shepherds being bred by means of uneducated vendors which ended in lots of risky and sick-tempered canines giving the two breeds a undesirable attractiveness for years. lower back, it relatively is as much as sensible puppy vendors to place an end to those poor domestic dogs being further into the international by means of no longer buying from the BYBs. in case you won't be able to discover the funds for a purebred, undertake from a safeguard. a minimum of you're no longer helping a situation marketplace,

2016-12-17 10:56:04 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

UMMMM well i dont agree with it but ummm i guess it helps then get rid of stress idk i just awant 2 points

2007-02-06 10:13:46 · answer #7 · answered by baller chick 2 · 0 2

IT CANT!!!!! ANIMAL HATER!!!

2007-02-06 10:13:10 · answer #8 · answered by Reach for the Stars! 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers