This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
No, it is cruel.
Can it? Depends on what you find morally acceptable and the difference in value to life of humans compared to animals.
Should a few animals suffer to save potentially millions of humans?
It's the train track dilemma basically.
Should a few animals suffer to save potentially millions of humans?
It's the train track dilemma basically.
Yes. However this very much depends on a variety of factors.
For example, if it something such as cosmetics, then of course it shouldn't be tested on animals.
However, if we're looking at an experimental pill, then it is vital it is tested on animals first before humans. Otherwise there could be incredibly dangerous side effects, that could lead to humans being in a vegetative state, or killed. Something that could have been avoided if given to rats.
For example, if it something such as cosmetics, then of course it shouldn't be tested on animals.
However, if we're looking at an experimental pill, then it is vital it is tested on animals first before humans. Otherwise there could be incredibly dangerous side effects, that could lead to humans being in a vegetative state, or killed. Something that could have been avoided if given to rats.
in psychology, they justify animal testing i think, if im not mistaken, with the cost benefit analysis, meaning that the death, suffering of the sample of animals is outweighed by the advantages and progress in research that would potentially benefit the population or something. not that i entirely agree but that is one argument
(edited 3 years ago)
It can be, although that doesn’t mean it always is (for example, animal testing of cosmetics at doses far greater than those humans would use is cruel and pointless, animal testing of a vaccine with rigorous and respected ethics guidelines is probably justified on utilitarian cost-benefit)
I personally think we need to respect animals more generally, and have higher ethical requirement of benefit before using them in experiments and eating them/using them in industry (and yes, I’m vegetarian) - after all, who are we if we ruthlessly exploit other species?
I personally think we need to respect animals more generally, and have higher ethical requirement of benefit before using them in experiments and eating them/using them in industry (and yes, I’m vegetarian) - after all, who are we if we ruthlessly exploit other species?
We as human beings are cynical, as with every other species. Our innate biology, at the end of the day, is to survive and pass down our genes. When you consider 'climate change', 'greenhouse gases', 'extinction', it's not because we necessarily care about making the world a better place, it's simply because these things will wipe us out. So we have begun to pay attention to them. Not for the sake of biodiversity, for the sake of continued existence.
I don't see it as animal cruelty. When it comes to a matter of survival for the human race, we, as with every other species, would do all in our power to continue our existence. I'm not saying this disease will cause extinction, but it would kill millions of human lives. The benefit seems clear.
I don't see it as animal cruelty. When it comes to a matter of survival for the human race, we, as with every other species, would do all in our power to continue our existence. I'm not saying this disease will cause extinction, but it would kill millions of human lives. The benefit seems clear.
Original post by Anonymous
No, it is cruel.
Agree!
It is cruel but there is nothing we can do about it.
I mean, in the shortest amount of words I can answer your question with a question.
Is it the greater of two evils?
Is it the greater of two evils?
Original post by racheal43
...
A million animals can die or suffer if it leads to human life being saved.
Original post by chocolate_fan
Yes. However this very much depends on a variety of factors.
For example, if it something such as cosmetics, then of course it shouldn't be tested on animals.
However, if we're looking at an experimental pill, then it is vital it is tested on animals first before humans. Otherwise there could be incredibly dangerous side effects, that could lead to humans being in a vegetative state, or killed. Something that could have been avoided if given to rats.
For example, if it something such as cosmetics, then of course it shouldn't be tested on animals.
However, if we're looking at an experimental pill, then it is vital it is tested on animals first before humans. Otherwise there could be incredibly dangerous side effects, that could lead to humans being in a vegetative state, or killed. Something that could have been avoided if given to rats.
Original post by becausethenight
It can be, although that doesn’t mean it always is (for example, animal testing of cosmetics at doses far greater than those humans would use is cruel and pointless, animal testing of a vaccine with rigorous and respected ethics guidelines is probably justified on utilitarian cost-benefit)
I personally think we need to respect animals more generally, and have higher ethical requirement of benefit before using them in experiments and eating them/using them in industry (and yes, I’m vegetarian) - after all, who are we if we ruthlessly exploit other species?
I personally think we need to respect animals more generally, and have higher ethical requirement of benefit before using them in experiments and eating them/using them in industry (and yes, I’m vegetarian) - after all, who are we if we ruthlessly exploit other species?
I'm completely against animal testing for cosmetics and when I buy makeup, hair products etc always make sure to go for brands which aren't tested on animals. I'm a committed vegetarian and disagree with a lot of the ways animals are treated so my natural instinct is to be uncomfortable with the whole idea of animal testing. However, I can see the necessity of it in cases of vital, life saving research. I still don't like the idea of it but until science/ technology advances to a point where there's a better way of doing things I accept it as a necessary evil. I've never been convinced by the arguments of some of the more hardline animal rights supporters who talk about 'speciesism' and claim that human life is no more valuable than any other species. When it comes down to it I value human life more than say that of a mouse or a rat so I can see how it can be justified on those grounds.
Easily.
I am convinced that we are a generation of people who must put an end to animal testing.
I absolutely agree with you.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
