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

I am against all animal testing for cosmetics. But i'm not sure what to think about medical research. for example, i'd much rather have spots than having medicine that killed defenceless animals. I'm still unsure about the saving lives aspect, why should we kill to save? Please give me some ideas! thanks much...

2007-02-18 01:28:10 · 6 answers · asked by Beeth 1 in Science & Mathematics Medicine

6 answers

I sit on the fence with this one, why?

Don't need testing for cosmetics because surely we've got enough lipsticks and eye shadows that work now ??

But, we need to for medicines, unless some of us wish to volunteer. I hope drugs for cancers can be developed from this. Cancer is something that you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy. Maybe drugs should come with a picture of a rabbit on it and if you don't support animal testing, then you can't have the drug. Bit nasty if you're dying and this would save your life.

2007-02-20 10:17:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I Have Done Animal Research Many Times, I have Said, "Close Enough for Study", and "Better an Animal than A Human Being". This, In My Mind, Can Be Seen as a Justification, it's Not as if I didn't Have Questions, but Still the Basic Premises Are True.

2007-02-18 03:35:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I'm dead against animal testing, yes it may be of benefit in the short term but it's not going to get us anywhere in the long term. if we keep making new drugs, curing more illnesses the diseases will just evolve to get worse and worse until there comes a point when we're all dead before we have found a cure. sickness is never going to go so whats the plan, keep making animals suffer? also, just to let you know that even if a product is not tested on animals it may fund testing, for example part of the profits the company called glaxosmithklein make goes directly into animal testing for cosmetic products. this company make ribena, lucozade,lemsip and toothpastes so if you care don't buy them, don't be fooled by the fact that they also make medicines because that's not what they test. the company also made an antidepressant which got perscribed to teenagers when it wasn't suitable and killed lots of them

2007-02-18 02:21:30 · answer #3 · answered by okapi 3 · 0 0

I thought of that as well... I only use cosmetics not tested on animals, too.

Now, for medical research...
I guess that in SOME cases, they could test ON A CERTAIN species of animals, and only in a very humane way.
What they are doing now, with the dogs, pigs, monkeys, rabbits... it is just beyond imagination of any sane person and utterly cruel.
These animals should be seen as heros, not locked in small wire cages, having bones deliberately broken and viruses injected and skulls split open.
They are social beings, smart, too, and only a stupid and cruel race like humans can not see that.

Also, loads of diseases and illnesses we humans suffer from - WE have inflicted them upon ourselves. Because of our lifestyles. Because an average person eats 5kg of meat per month. Because we don't get enough exercise. So WHY do the animals have to pay for this?!

2007-02-18 01:37:43 · answer #4 · answered by M 6 · 2 0

Unfortunately we live in a world where the mind set of most people is that animals have no rights and they can therefore be exploited in any way we see fit.

I like forward to the day when the aliens arrive.

If they treat us like we treat other less intelligent lifeforms on this planet, ie. hunt us, factory farm us, experiment on us, then we are in real trouble!

2007-02-18 01:38:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I ain't putting no lipstick or rouge on these bassett hounds....

2007-02-18 05:52:07 · answer #6 · answered by conx-the-dots 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers