this is for school work , please tell me your reasons for and against for both animal testing and human testing
2007-11-21 22:51:16 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Medicine
How else are we supposed to figure out if meds work or are dangerous?
I absolutly agree with medical animal testing. Its not like these animals are pets. They are bred for this specific reason. Its kinda like eating meat. I would never slaughter my pet for food, but I do eat meat.
As far as human testing, this is necessary too. This is what clinical trials are for. I have participated in several through my cancer treatment.
If they didnt test meds before they were given out widespread, there would be a lot more deaths from meds that didnt work they way we thought they would
2007-11-21 23:20:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Animals feel pain too. Its just the fact that you are testing on a living thing and they cant do anything about it. If anyone really needs makeup or shampoo bad enough that they really need to test on animals, then they can go get tested on. And if it is for drugs, why would you test on an animal that isnt human? You can only get true results if you test on humans.
2016-05-25 00:13:24 · answer #2 · answered by marti 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well what the alternative, jusr release a pill and hope nobody dies?
Animals are used for intial testing when it deemed too dangerious for humans. Unfortunately, the animals don't volunteer. They also can't communicate when somthing is wrong, so a bad test can result in death much more easily.
After that Humans as asked to volunteer, usuallly for financial consideration, for closely monitored drug trails. This type of testing is much safer as medical checkup and close monitoring are all part of the protocol. It also help that human generally are aware of problem that may asire and can seek medical help on their own.
2007-11-21 23:22:46 · answer #3 · answered by Brian K² 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Humans should be tested because humans can at least decide if they want to participate in the experiment. It would be under their own free will. Animals, whose systems are different than ares, could be seriously harmed and they have no idea what's going on. They can't speak so we can't know what pain they're going through but if they had a voice they would object to the barbarity of testing unnecessary items(cosmetics) on helpless creatures for our own selfish gain.
2007-11-21 22:59:08 · answer #4 · answered by blondie_cheerangel 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
first of all humans and animals are different. period. i wish someone would just point that out. second animal testing is cruel and again....i don't see how you can compare apples to oranges.....how many drugs in the past 5 years have past FDA approval only to be pulled once they figure out what it does to humans?
now human testing. ...i would really get into trouble here, so i will be diplomatic. i believe everyone has free will and if they chose to be a guinea pig then that is their choice. while don't agree with the marketing strategies of the drug companies to recruit the guinea pigs.....i would prefer this over animal testing....they have no say in the matter
2007-11-23 02:58:46 · answer #5 · answered by bella36 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its not like their gonna test them on endangered species. After they test the animals, they test the humans.
2007-11-22 03:55:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Animals first and humans next.
2007-11-22 01:54:33 · answer #7 · answered by J.SWAMY I ఇ జ స్వామి 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
they should be tested on animals first to determine their actions on living subject , and if safe, they should then be tested on humans to find out their exact actions on the human body.
2007-11-22 01:01:15 · answer #8 · answered by smile 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That is cruelty to animals. As for human testing, I don't think anyone would agree to being a guinea pig.
2007-11-21 22:56:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Ask the lawyers in the Vioxx case....
2007-11-24 04:04:54 · answer #10 · answered by Pangolin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋