Animal Testing/Abuse/cruelty

I think that animal testing is necessary for medicines, but not for cosmetics. I think it is wrong to test something unneccessary on animals, especially when there are other ways of testing cosmetics. I do not use any make up tested on animals.

Medicines is a different matter, as people will die without the medicines, and the animals are bred for it anyway. Until there is an efficient, safe, reliable alternative, I will continue to use medicines tested on animals.

I dont like testing on chimps, but it may be neccesssary, and in that case then I will reluctantly be convinsed.

^^ I agree with you for the most part. If it's medecine and completely necessary, then I say go ahead. But hair products and such that can harm the animals is taking it way too far! Animals weren't bred for cruelty for human's own pleasure.

ChipmunkOnKetamine:

I think that animal testing is necessary for medicines, but not for cosmetics. I think it is wrong to test something unneccessary on animals, especially when there are other ways of testing cosmetics. I do not use any make up tested on animals.

Medicines is a different matter, as people will die without the medicines, and the animals are bred for it anyway. Until there is an efficient, safe, reliable alternative, I will continue to use medicines tested on animals.

I dont like testing on chimps, but it may be neccesssary, and in that case then I will reluctantly be convinsed.

Humans are different from other animals in terms of medicine though. What works on say, a rat, may not work on a human.

yeah true , I have few things from the body shop

jack daniels.:

ChipmunkOnKetamine:

I think that animal testing is necessary for medicines, but not for cosmetics. I think it is wrong to test something unnecessary on animals, especially when there are other ways of testing cosmetics. I do not use any make up tested on animals.

Medicines is a different matter, as people will die without the medicines, and the animals are bred for it anyway. Until there is an efficient, safe, reliable alternative, I will continue to use medicines tested on animals.

I don't like testing on chimps, but it may be necessary, and in that case then I will reluctantly be convinsed.

Humans are different from other animals in terms of medicine though. What works on say, a rat, may not work on a human.

that's why medicines are tested on humans after they pass the animal trials. I know that what works on an animal might not work on a human, but I think it is better to test the medicine on the animal before you test it on a person, because a person is more likely to do something amazing, than a rat is. A person might discover the cure for cancer, a way to stop global warming, the cure for Alzheimer's, whereas a rat is most likely going to sit there chewing grain, and having baby rats.

im undecided, even more since ive been told that the animals they use in labs are treated really well, and they make sure that they are as happy as they can be.. but they would still obviously be happier if they weren't in the labs in the first place. i think they should use the animals but only if its absolutley necessary and going to be beneficial in the future.

Honestly, I don't get how it makes people happy knowing they're wearing someone's skin or eating someone's flesh. I know, some need it to live. Like the poor. I guess at that point, (poverty), we can make acceptions. But for the rest of us, what's bad about becoming a vegetarian? If cannabalism is "ewww" then why isn't eating an animal?

And I guess when we tell people "But....that's a poor raccoons skin", they go 'ya, must've hurt' but it's waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy more than that. They don't crawl up behind animals, feed it lollipops and shave it's skin..
they take teh animal by either it's face or tail and slam it to the ground till it can't bear pain or isn't stable anough to run away when they kill it.

Harsh much?

I think it is crucial to separate medical animal testing from the rest of the issues in this thread. Because its a matter of value. Human versus animal.
The debate on the value of human lives versus animals lives is a much more sophisticated debate than for example debates on seal clubbing or cosmetic testing or animal cruelty.

Having said this, I support medical animal testing. And no scary photos of dying monkeys in the world could change that fact. The fact that I support the cause doesn't mean that I'm saying that medical companies should do whatever they want there needs to be ethics involved there too.
Saying that "medical animal testing is wrong!" and showing a picture of a hurt animal is like saying "medical science is wrong!" and showing of a picture of a painful amputation done 80 years ago.
Medical science has improved, and so will the testing, if we let it.

I am always going to support testing medicines on animals, and I am always going to refuse to buy other products tested on animals. I think that if you can save lives, tehn it is worth the loss of how ever many animals that are bred basically to be killed. I don't agree with the LD-50 test (explained here), because I think it is unneccessary, and cruel, because now, there are algorithms, and computer programmes that can work out dosage, from far fewer animals.

Lovesick Melody.:

^^
But that's bringing up a completely new topic, are insects considered animals?
Is it still humane to test products on them?

It wouldn't work because it would have a FAR different effect on them than it would to humans, like bug spray for example, we can come into contact with it but the bugs can't. Also you can't really test cosmetic products on small insects.

The Rumour:

im undecided, even more since ive been told that the animals they use in labs are treated really well, and they make sure that they are as happy as they can be...

Whoever told you that is lying, sorry to be quite frank. :[

This is not living comfortably.

This is a very mild picture. I searched up Animal Testing on photobucket, and when I came to page 5, I was disgusted.
I am not even going to talk about it, I'm not even going to link it since it displays graphic pictures of abused animals.

But they are not always in comfortable living conditions.

But do you have evidence of when that Beagle picture was taken? I've not seen that particular picture before, but I repeatedly see a lot of old animal testing pictures being used over and over. I can't vouch for other countries, but in the UK there are really strict conditions on any animal testing now. Scientists how to account for every single animal used, every little mouse, explaining why each one is important, they really have to justify their reasons for doing that experiment well. And they have to use the absolute minimum amount of animals possible.

My teacher did her phd on stress on animals going to slaughter, and she had to apply for an animal testing licence just because she was taking blood samples from the animals.

I'm just saying that conditions for animals in testing has greatly improved, it has to, it can't go against public opinion, and the public nowadays will not stand for unecessary cruelty. Not that I'm saying it doesn't go on occasionally. I've seen the toher side of it too.

I'm against cosmetic testing (isn't that banned here now anyway?), animals shouldn't suffer because we are so vain. But for the moment I'm still ok with medical testing on animals. We've been able to make amazing advances from this sort of work. If something new is discovered, I don't personally believe computer models can work out the dangers yet. How can they if it's new to science?

Lovesick Melody.:

^^
Are you willing to kill dozens of animals just find some cure?
Are we so important that we should put our lives before those who cannot speak?
Are we so superior that we can flaunt our power?

Yes I am, it could save thousands, possibly millions of lives in the future. It already has saved

And I hate these sorts questions, because you can't answer them without looking like a hypocrite!! I don't look at these things an emotional way. I was training to become a zookeeper, I try to look at things in a more detached way, cos you don't want to get too attached to your animals (I do get very attached to my pets though!)

I don't think we are more important or superior than any other animal on the planet, we all have the same right to live here and to live how we would naturally. But I see no reason why humans shouldn't use our abilities to help our species? I mean, people are doing this medical research to help save the lives and suffereing of people they don't even know and will never meet, I think that is a pretty amazing thing in itself. You do not find any other species of animal helping others of it's species without expecting something back in return.

The vast majority of animals used are domestic, they wouldn't even exist without us, and they couldn't exist now without us either.

This does not mean I think we should carry on using animal testing indefinately though.

Can I ask similar questions of you?

Are you willing to let thousands of people suffer or die to save a few cuddly animals?

What if a member of your family was ill? There is a new potential cure, but it's new to science, and there are no computer models that can tell you how the substance will react in the human body? Would it be ok to use animals then?

Do you refuse to use medical treatments that have been tested on animals?

Most lab animals in my country are better treated than a lot of live stock. There is a word for your post Lovesick Melody: Propaganda.

Heybaberiba:

There is a word for your post Lovesick Melody: Propaganda.

Just because it may be in conflict with what you believe it doesn't mean it's automatically propaganda. All she was doing was expressing her side of the coin.