Current science and technology makes it obsolete to be testing products on animals, but every day many animals are tortured for our vanity, beauty, etc... Disgusting....
2007-02-23 17:57:12 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Other - Social Science
There are several factors.
Genetically, humans are near identical to many species
(factor in)
Humans have to be found to test products
(factor in)
humans must be paid money, whereas animals...
Never can sue in court.
always volunteer.
Since this sad planet is revolved around money, this is the sad cycle it succumbs itself to. The bottom line is that as long as it is "cheaper ", "more convenient" and "highly economical", to test products on animals before using them on humans, the world will not cease in the practice.
2007-02-23 18:12:22 · answer #1 · answered by Sansprenom 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As it happens, very few cosmetic products are now tested on animals. Most cosmetics are made up of materials that are either proven safe or are GRAS - generally regarded as safe. This is why a certain chain of cosmetic shops can say they don't test on animals. Most of the others don't either, to any great extent or at all.
As for other some animal testing, it's because of TINA. - there is no alternative. Anyone who tells you there is is a liar or does not know what they are talking about.
2007-02-23 18:10:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well,they need to test their products on something and I think better animals then humans.Right?I mean what do we expect them to test our products on.I myself am againt animal testing because there are certain things that dont need to be tested yet still are.There are some pretty incredible cures we found for all sorts of human problems and part of it came from animal testing,now im not saying scientists should torture innocent creatures for some really dumb reasons like what you see on anti-animal testing websites.Maybe you should check some of those out sometime.
2007-02-23 18:15:25 · answer #3 · answered by NeVaDiva 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i'm no longer conscious that there are constantly risk-free ideas to animal attempting out. as an occasion, if my toddler by threat ingests a lipstick from my handbag, how do i know if she's poisoned herself if this elegance has by no skill been examined on an animal? Do I basically take a wild wager and want she'll be ok? i think of no longer! Or if I by threat get a sprint mascara on my eyeball while i'm utilising makeup in the previous a job interview, do I basically anticipate i would be ok and not flow blind, as now and back exceeded off in in the past circumstances while attempting out wasn't required? back, i think of no longer! Or think i could desire to take a tablet by way of fact i've got been ill. Do you think of i want to be the "guinea pig" who first tries it out? as quickly as greater, i think of no longer! No, i like animals as a lot by way of fact the subsequent individual. however the hassle-free certainty is that i like human beings greater. I additionally know a sprint something approximately history, approximately what used to happen while issues weren't examined previous to sale to human beings, and what the ideas could be to no longer bothering to attempt products in the previous advertising them. and that i do no longer safeguard those ideas. That stated, i'm no longer confident that that is definitely had to maintain specific standards as they exist now. as an occasion, the 50% rule. If ingesting an entire lipstick isn't poisonous, I see no reason to proceed stuffing try animals full of lipsticks until eventually their stomachs or intestines burst -- until eventually 50% of the try matters die horribly in this way -- just to fulfill this man made ordinary. we are able to have humane and functional try standards, i think. yet i'm in want of attempting out. yet i'm no longer confident that there is each physique nevertheless wide awake on the FDA. at present, they have dropped the ball on a great variety of serious drugs and made some exceptionally undesirable judgements. So getting their approval isn't any longer sufficient to convince me that something is a sturdy deal. Sorry.
2016-09-29 13:25:07 · answer #4 · answered by ilsa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They rather hurt lab rats then have their products released and then be sued for botching their skin, bodies, etc. To get approval for release, products must be deemed safe, that's why they test on animals.
2007-02-23 18:00:43 · answer #5 · answered by Melanie P 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Allright then, let's test them on humans. Would you care to volunteer? Then your sacrifice for animals will help others see reactions to systemic breakdown that technology does not predict, without harming those who who consume the products. Sorry, but I did not rise to the top of the food chain to be second guessed when it comes to my safety, or anyone else's.
2007-02-23 18:06:47 · answer #6 · answered by jimmyd 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
because it's cheaper!!!the only way to fight this is TO STOP BUYING THESE PRODUCTS!!!!!i ask if the products are not tested on animals and buy them!!!if they don't say whether they are tested on animals,i will not buy them!!and i tell the owner of the shop why i'm not buying that product!!!!it's a pity that thousands of animals suffer for our vanity!!!
STOP buying these products!!
STOP buying fur coats!!!!
2007-02-23 18:18:01 · answer #7 · answered by ....FED UP............ 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
sorry your are wrong as there is no technology that can duplicate the human body, and how it will react to certain chemicals and procedures, If it were not for pigs, dogs, mice, sheep, rabbits we would not have half of the cure we now enjoy, yes it is sad that animals are used, but humans do not volunteer for such experimentation. and rightly so.
2007-02-23 18:05:24 · answer #8 · answered by rkilburn410 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
cuz people are mean and heartless. It's only OK, I believe, when the testing will lead to VERY important health outcomes...even so, that's a stretch, because the animals wouldn't benefit from OUR being healthier.
2007-02-23 18:00:10 · answer #9 · answered by christina rose 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because they care more about their product, money and investments, than life, God's creations, and animals.
2007-02-23 18:09:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋