For example testing antibiotics and vaccines on animals even though they are meant for humans.
2007-03-12 22:33:13 · 15 answers · asked by christine j 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Medicine
If they save human lives then I'm all for it.
I am against testing of cosmetics on animals but that is a whole different argument
2007-03-12 22:35:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Personally I would test them on violent criminals. Animal testing doesn't necessarily work as a human clinical trial recently proved. The drugs passed the test on animals but then almost killed the human guinea pigs.
It is morally wrong to inflict suffering or even death on any animal (and no Im not a vegetarian) it is a necessary part of medical science to develop medicines and treatments
2007-03-13 22:32:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Animals are being sacrifices in different ways to save human lives. We eat animals and we kill them for many reasons. So, I don't think that it is wrong to test drugs on animals before introducing it on human being.
Sometimes, it looks bad and unethical to some humane and kind people for this sort of tests but there is no alternative except testing those upon human being which is more unethical and inhumane. So, we are to bear all these just as we have no better alternative upto now. Let us, hope that one day we would get some better ways of testing drugs so that we don't inflict the animals.
2007-03-13 05:51:12 · answer #3 · answered by The Falcon 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
if people were to come forward for testing then it wouldn`t be an issue the fact is it needs to be tested on something and rats and mice are i think only genetically only 2% different so animals it is! look at it this way if they could come up with a cure for cancer tomorrow and said that they can only do it by using animals for testing would you say that it was cruel and not allow it or potentially save the life and suffering of millions of people!? i`m against animal cruelty but there is a vast difference between this and some kid tying his lab to a tree and beating it with sticks!
2007-03-13 07:45:07 · answer #4 · answered by SARNIE 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is a good idea, particularly at first, presumably different animals are affected in different ways, but at least you can be reasonably sure before testing it on humans.
Enough aspirin will also kill a human being
2007-03-13 05:45:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
alot of drug companies pay people to test drugs after the animal tests...but of course...it's a risky job for the participants...some have signed thier lives away....testing animals is a good start...the kills millions of cattle and chickens every day in the name of food...a few rats won't hurt i guess...good luck
2007-03-13 05:44:46 · answer #6 · answered by Michael K 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While I do think that sometimes it is cruel, it is better than not developing better drugs. I think most of the PETA people would change their views if their mom/dad/husband/wife/children were dying of a disease and a doctor said, "We could save him/her if only we had this new drug but the testing was outlawed so you are sh__ out of luck."
2007-03-13 05:42:44 · answer #7 · answered by baldisbeautiful 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Human medicines should be tested on humans. Why should other creatures suffer because we think we own the place?
Why do we always seem to think our s*** don't stink?
2007-03-13 11:49:12 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't see anything wrong with it. Mankind has used animals for an infinite number of things - this is just one more.
2007-03-13 05:45:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its cruel and unnecessary. And it doesnt work. For example Asprin kills rats!!
How can you find out how a drug is going to work on an animal? They have totally different systems to humans
2007-03-13 05:35:43 · answer #10 · answered by OriginalBubble 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋