how do you feel about scientific research done on animals to benefit humans?

i hope that sounded right.... i'm really tired so bleah...

I think people should not do anything on another living creature that they would like to do on themselves.

If the research is necessary then I'm all for it i.e. AIDS, Parkinsons, Hepatitis, stupidity, etc. cures. However if it's to test the safety of cosmetics or something equivalantly dumb I oppose.

Go for it.

Of course I don't want animals to suffer. But it beats the hell out of experimenting on humans and besides:
If the human race has no need for a species of animals, it disposes it.

Now I'm not a cruel bastard, but for example..that mouse with an ear on its' back? That was just great. The mouse gets food n shelter (also after the ear was removed) and the kid got a new ear. Pesonnaly I don't see the problem to that. Cloning organs is still in its infants shoes..and as long as it isn't sponsored..there's hardly another option for a further increase of medical knowledge.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said that in order to stirr a cloning debate. As long as its' only organs and skin tissue..what's the big deal? I don't see the point in cloning a hole sheep, or human if it ever gets that far ( which I hope not) it's just that organ donors are rare.

Reminds me of some story I heard about the Nazi regime..as cruel as some experiments on humans (and a lot of twins might I add) may have been..those actually helped in the understanding of some medical breakthroughs. Now since this is so horrific..I say go with the animals.

I never had pets. I value human life over animals. I don't understand the bf of my sister saying that he rather wants a puppy than a baby...


I agree with case..and edge..to a certain point..cause some things just need to be researched and better on an animal then on a human...



then again..perhaps on some deathrow criminals...
*shakes head* nah..

Hope that that kinda brings to mind my point of view..not sure if it comes across the way I wanted it.

It can sometimes be helpful but even on chimps the reaction to substances can be different than on a human.Its more risk management than exact science.

Kant would say.. Hell go for it.

Actually according to Kant its perfectly alright to sit in a corner and hammer at a squirrel in order to torture it.... the only thing he says is that it might harm a human who might not like the sight of the blood.

I personally cant stand for any sort of animal cruelty. only exception is that if testing on an animal can save a humans life or other animals.

Gandhi said something about people who treat animals kindly are the ones that prosper the most and I dont think any country has more animal and nature rights activists that the USA and we are doing pretty well.. well atleast until bush showed up. The worse animal rights in the world are in places like afghanistan. Ofcourse this isnt set in stone.. its an interesting observation though.

I go with Edge on this. I see no difference between humans and animals, whatsoever.

No difference whatsoever? Would you kindly eloborate (edit: eloberate? rofl, that just made me laugh for some reason! I knew it was misspelled)? Perhaps you meant something other than what I'm reading...

I can point out several, even non-obvious, differences between animals and humans.

I think I know what you meant, but just to be sure, would you please explain yourself?

Lol. Certainly. Ok, aside from the morphological standpoint, humans and other animals are just living creatures. How can you discriminate?

Certainly, white people and black people look different, duh. But discrimination, as we know, goes against our logic; we're all just humans. How can we discriminate? Take that another step, we're all animals, how can we discriminate?

I can discriminate because I don't have to watch my mother die from hypoxia during one of her seizures because she can be given a drug that at some point was tested on something small and furry to determine its safety and potential uses.

It's a matter of priorities, and frankly I don't rate a guinea pig anywhere near my family in importance.

Are plants alive?

of course they're alive. whether or not they have feelings or not is a matter of opinion though personally i don't believe they do.


as for animal experimentation, i'm against it in any form whatsoever, even in medical research. as far as i'm concerned if you want to find out if something works on humans, test it on a human. my mum has had cancer for seven years and luckily is in remission now, but i still don't condone the use of any medications tested on animals. i'm at the extreme end of the spectrum, i think, as i value animal life over human life, and i don't expect many people to understand that but it is my choice.

and before anyone starts on "well if you want it tested on humans why don't you volunteer for it" i have. i've voluntarily been a lab rat for several different things, from cosmetic products to antibiotics and antivenins. most of them hurt like fucking hell and i'm damn glad it was me going through that pain and not a rabbit/cat/chimp etc.

Would you condone testing on an Afghani citizen? how about a homeless Afghani?

Your family means more to you than a guinea pig... ok, and that justifies torturing the guinea pig how?

Yes, they are; and ideally, I wouldn't kill plants either; we can survive quite well off of plants that have already died; living plant's fruits, etc.

You just earned some respect from over here if thats true

No, humans have a higher potential than guinea pigs. If testing fulfilled their potential then of course I would no matter what origin.

You have a lot of self hate don't you? No offense meant.

I don't agree with animal experimentation for cosmetic purposes or garden insecticide products, but if someone I cared about was ill, I would have to agree with animal experimentation for the possibility of a cure.

Basic research on physiclogical, pathological and therapeutic processes still require animal experimentation. People want to see progress in medicine.

I've heard of people who get paid to let scientists test new drugs on them. Cwazy.

*bumpy humpy*

I have tried to comment on some of the posts i just didn't quete because the my post would get to long i think......

I think i will have to agree with some of the people here esspeacially those who are against scientific research done on animals or whatever you want to call it.
One of the reasons is because most of the reseach done on animals is pointless. There is a test used for testing the leathal dose of some new Food coloring product, etc. it is called the LD50
where you have some number of animals x and the product passes the test if more than 50 procent survive the test.
But for the course of helping our ill. Well then i think most us agree that it is as red meat says risk management and that is questionable because if we test parsley on parrot to see is it was healthy for people to eat we would learn that all the parrots died...
Another example is sheep they can eat arsenic by the kilo without getting any ill effects....
But that was my 2 cents about reseach done on animals


Should accept animals pain equal to humans?

This argument have been used by slave traders. When people said that we should take the pain of the slaves serious. Then the trades said that "we shouldn't take the slaves wellbeing into consideration because there was so many none slaves. Whose wellbeing was not taken into consideration
This argument have also been used by racists. I think you are able to see how.

Another argument i would like to kill of is that it is practical for humans to eat meat. All the korn that is used to feed animals with could feed 10 times that many people as the meat can.....
This debate reminds me a lot about Mill when he was arguing for the rights of woman.

About plants
I don't see why taking plants wellbeing into consideration can end up with not taking animals wellbeing into consideration.
Im not saying that we should not take plant wellbeing into consideration just that not doing it does not imply that we dont have to do it with animals

Mind you all.. I was stating my viewpoint towards testing for medicational purposes...

NOT towards cosmatics, that's just dumb.