Animal Experimentation

[Mariya1234]

For many centuries people have experimented on animals. Experiments on animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Although in principle it is more important to reduce human suffering that to prevent animal suffering, in practice it is possible (and absolutely right) to keep animal suffering to an absolute minimum. Past experience has shown what invaluable advances can be made in medicine by experimenting on animals, and that live animals are the most reliable subjects for testing medicines and other products for toxicity. Human beings share about 99% of their genes with chimpanzees and only slightly fewer with other monkeys. There are indeed new issues raised by the advent of genetic engineering and 'transgenic' animals; these, like all animal experiments should be closely monitored so as to minimise animal suffering. What is often overlooked in this debate is the subject of veterinary medicine. Is it morally acceptable to experiment on non-human animals to develop products and medicines that benefit human beings?

[TheSarge]

Is it morally acceptable to experiment on non-human animals to develop products and medicines that benefit human beings?

Yes.  By all means.

[TheSarge]

[Lord Undies]

Is it morally acceptable to experiment on non-human animals

There are no other kind of animals.  What a gigantically stupid way to phrase a loaded question. 

Let's try it another way:  Is it morally acceptable to deny non-animal humans the benefits achieved from utilizing animal species in research and science?

[mamacags]

I experimented with a non-human animal once.  It was in college so that doesn't count, right?

[DixieBelle]

I experimented with a non-human animal once.  It was in college so that doesn't count, right?

Nah. it was college

[Lord Undies]

I experimented with a non-human animal once.  It was in college so that doesn't count, right?

Right.  Those interactive giraffes were really just wallpaper and Lucy was still in the sky with diamonds. 

[Wineslob]

For many centuries people have experimented on animals. Experiments on animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Although in principle it is more important to reduce human suffering that to prevent animal suffering, in practice it is possible (and absolutely right) to keep animal suffering to an absolute minimum. Past experience has shown what invaluable advances can be made in medicine by experimenting on animals, and that live animals are the most reliable subjects for testing medicines and other products for toxicity. Human beings share about 99% of their genes with chimpanzees and only slightly fewer with other monkeys. There are indeed new issues raised by the advent of genetic engineering and 'transgenic' animals; these, like all animal experiments should be closely monitored so as to minimise animal suffering. What is often overlooked in this debate is the subject of veterinary medicine. Is it morally acceptable to experiment on non-human animals to develop products and medicines that benefit human beings?

Why would it not be? Please explain.

[thundley4]

I have no problem with animal experimentation for medical research, but some of the things that they do for the make up/cosmetics industry can turn even my stomach.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Civilization is judged by hhow it treats those weaker than itself.

If pain can be avoided, there is genuine benefit and the pain inflicted is never gratuitous, than OK.

I doubt there is much benefit derived from animal testing cosmetics and the absence of animal testing doesn't seem to be an issue so I'd petition--not legislate--that a company cease animal testing and hope to appeal to their business sense, but shooting a farm animal so a green beret medical candidate can test his skills is fine by me.

[JohnnyReb]

Just remember that Hitler was big on animal rights and protecting animals.

I guess the Jooooooos didn't qualify as animals.

[MrsSmith]

I have no problem with animal experimentation done as humanely as possible for medical research.

I had a huge problem with PETA's photo shoots, however.  Torturing an animal for political capital should be a crime punishable by death.

[asdf2231]

When the dickheads at PETA and ALF start lining up to volunteer to take the place of monkeys and rats in research studies I will take them seriously.

Till then they can nosh my Johnson.

[Mr Mannn]

I have no problem with animal experimentation for medical research, but some of the things that they do for the make up/cosmetics industry can turn even my stomach.

There is a reason for such research--a tissue sample cannot wince in pain.
Cosmetics are chemical substances applied to the body's biggest organ, our skin. New products are new chemicals. Chemicals react to each other and created unexpected chemical results.

The fact is women are going to use cosmetics. That isn't going to change.

The choice here is: do 200 rabbits go blind, or do we release untested chemicals and let 20,000 women go blind?
I know idiots who would choose letting innocent women go blind.

Animal testing is an unfortunate reality of life. If you want to cure disease or sell a new product, you need to test on animals.

The animal rights nuts want to regulate testing right out of the country--being still necessary it will move to 3rd world countries where there are NO regulations and anything goes. But animal rights people don't think any further than our borders.

Meat is brain food. Too many animal rights nuts are vegan. If they would eat a burger once in a while, their arguments would be better.

As for me, I ensure at least one animal dies for every meal.

[RobJohnson]

For many centuries people have experimented on animals. Experiments on animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Although in principle it is more important to reduce human suffering that to prevent animal suffering, in practice it is possible (and absolutely right) to keep animal suffering to an absolute minimum. Past experience has shown what invaluable advances can be made in medicine by experimenting on animals, and that live animals are the most reliable subjects for testing medicines and other products for toxicity. Human beings share about 99% of their genes with chimpanzees and only slightly fewer with other monkeys. There are indeed new issues raised by the advent of genetic engineering and 'transgenic' animals; these, like all animal experiments should be closely monitored so as to minimise animal suffering. What is often overlooked in this debate is the subject of veterinary medicine. Is it morally acceptable to experiment on non-human animals to develop products and medicines that benefit human beings?

All testing should be done on humans & I strongly suggest you voulnteer to further this important cause.