Animal Testing?

Question

What are your thoughts on animal testing. Is it right to preform cosmetic and medical tests on animals. Do the human lives that were saved count more then the animals lives?

Answer 1

WHen you think about animal testing you must think about the alterantive.

If we just tested in a petri dish, cyanide is just as potent a cure as penicillin. In fact cyanide kills all cancer cells. How do you tell which is better. Well you must try them in an animal model. Cyanide kills alll patients along with the cancer and bacteria so it is not a good medicine.

What if a drug that stopped bloating and extreme craving that we want to use it to help pregnant women. Do we not need to test it on pregnant animals to see that it does not cause birth defects. You bet ya cause 5 generations of mutant babies is too high a cost to pay compared to 50 lab rats.

People are so short sighted. Science requires proof and that proof cannot come from direct human trials in the early stages. In the early stages they must use animals.

Answer 2

products labled, "not animal tested," are.

peta is not a reliable source for biomedical research information.

i don't think many people would appreciate cosmetic formulations that cause allergic reactions

what exactly are these "break through" drugs that weren't animal tested for toxicity/efficacy/dosage? because i'm pretty sure EVERY biomedical break-through owes it's success to appropriate animal testing.

the trouble merk and pfizer had with their drugs has partly to do with public push for drugs going to market faster (the average amount of time it takes for a drug to go to market is 20 years). not that i propose to make excuses for those companies--because they did muck it up really bad.

an animal model is much more likely to mimic a human drug response than a petri dish of cells ever would.


i believe appropriate, responsible research and testing is the OBLIGATION of any person or company wanting to release drugs/cosmetics/medical devices to the public. people that say these things can be tested only with cell lines or computer models are wholly mis-informed. yes, these methods are used to predict the performance of the product and help REDUCE the amount of animals used for testing but will never completely replace an animal model--hell, what do you think those simulations are based on; a computer model is only as good as the information used to generate the program.

the use of animals in teaching, testing, and exhibition is highly regulated. yes, there may be shady research going on somewhere in the world--but the same can be said about ANY industry in the world: from pedofilic religious leaders to corrupt law inforcement to lying politicians...but they will get caught; as responsible members of society it is our OBLIGATION to watch out for unscrupulous indivuduals--no matter their occupation--and bring attention to them so that approriate disciplinary actions are persued.

do human lives saved count more than animal lives? think about this the next time you, or someone you know, have to see a doctor or visit a hospital for whatever reason...and you tell the doctor to only give you treatment that has not been animal tested, i guarantee that will give you a cotton ball--you can't even have a band aid, the adhesives used were animal tested.

Answer 3

I think testing cosmetics on animals is not justified but I see no alternative to testing medicines on them before starting human tests. Tests on cultured cells does not give enough information to go directly to testing on humans. It is regrettable and certainly ethically dubious to test toxic doses of drugs on animals but I suspect there are few humans who would volunteer to take their place.

Answer 4

i dont think animal testing is warranted in cosmetic cases or in medical cases. animal systems (especially like rats or mice) have completely different reactions than humans. you could never tell 100% if a birth defect would be caused in humans by testing on mice, thats rediculous. there have been hundreds of "break through" drugs found for mice and rats but never panned out to working on humans. it is dangerous to assume that other animal systems are the same as ours, look at all the defective drugs scandals lately from drugs that were deemed completely safe ie. vioxx and celebrex. and its a lot more than 50 rats that have to be killed for studies, the experiments often have to be repeated hundreds of times to be deemed a valid result

Answer 5

i personally am highly against everything animal testing stands for. if you dont know why go here www.peta.com they keep dogs in closed containers with as many as 20-40 puppies. they completly abuse them, all to test a new shampoo.

they need to find a new way to save lifes over humans,
without killing animals.

Answer 6

I think animal testing is cruel, and uncalled for. I did a term paper on it, and after researching everything, i really realized how bad it is, and how badly they treat the animals.