I was learning about animal testing in ICT, we watched some videos and saw some pictures. I thought it was sick and horrible but do you people at AG think its right or wrong?
And it is MOSTLY because of research... research leads to expansion.. expansion leads to the destruction of nature... and destruction on nature = bye bye earth.
That seems a bit one sided/appocolyptical of you. What about:
research leads to knowledge; knowledge leads to better living standards(for example); better living standards leads to longer life; longer life leads to less research = Happy Earth
And anyways I think that testing cures for currently uncurable diseases is a good idea. Cancer, AIDS, etc, these are great. It can save lives, and arnt Humans above Animals?
But perfumes, and shampoo which arnt as important, expecially when there done in an intoxication amounts, is just wrong.
And whoever said that a few people will die, so what, What if those few are your parents, brothers and sisters, or your best friend? Would it be more important? Or would you show the same amount ampathy... (however you spell it, opposite of 'empathy...'
I agree that it is wrong for some perfume or somehing to be tested on animals, but for life saving drugs, a human could die testing it or a rat could, i'll take a rat anyday.
Animal testing shouldn't continue when it isn't needed - like with eyeliner and stuff - but for medicines, there really isn't an alternative. It's bad to test animals, but worse to test humans, so if we have to pick the lesser of two evils in a situation, then so be it.
i think its horrid but...you dont want to be putting out bad medicines out to the public which could kill many people and even in testing it would kill humans which i do think a humans life is more important than a rats which is really mean to say but its the truth
Whether its right or wrong, we need to survive and if someone's working on treating Cancer by giving it to Rats -- It might be necessary for the better existence of the human race.
by Armed_Blade
I was thinking the same thing too long ago cause i had a discussion about those testings and everybody seemed to have the same opinion about this thing.Humanity needs something better in order to continue existing but whenever it's unessesary,animal testing should be avoided
I think that life- saving drugs and vaccines should be tested on animals (verminous ones, like rats, obviously not endangered ones). Cosmetic testing is just wasteful.
I have no idea why you or I learnt about vivisection and the deplorable points about it in ICT, lol, I thought it was stupid.
Anyway, on with the topic, ahem. I support animal vivisection when it's exploring the effects of pharmaceutical substances because it help the development of our science and can save human lives at relatively little expense. The reason I support it is because unlike many animals, like dogs and mice, we have emotions like love and sadness, and happiness and anger which (and I could be flamed for this) gives humans a more authoritative and important stature. Whilst the dog or mouse might feel pain there's no way it's thinking pensively, worried for the development of its family, recalling happy memories - humans would do that, whether it be because they were taking a drug with unknown outcomes or if they were dying from some incurable disease.
Cosmetics on the other hand are not worthy of taking a poor little mouse's life. Cosmetics are not a necessity to human scientific development, and locking up a dog for a year just so you can smother it in foundation is both inhumane and stupid. Cosmetics are futile and not necessary - and so animals should not die under them circumstances.
I think what they should do is instead of testing animals test death row convitcts (it better than the death penalty). [quote]now there's an idea. now if someone commits a murder and gets the death penalty the judge can say, "you will be sent to testing then death!!"
[/quote]
and it'll give testers a human test subject. meaning that it's a better human anilog then what ever animal their using.(btw, humans are animals, plus i think testing on animals is dead wrong.)
and it'll give testers a human test subject. meaning that it's a better human anilog then what ever animal their using.(btw, humans are animals, plus i think testing on animals is dead wrong.)
but the goverment will think its "inhumane" or something like that. but it would work/:
