Turn on thread page Beta

Animal testing -Right or Wrong? watch

  • View Poll Results: Is animal testing 'right'?
    Yes, completely
    17
    14.66%
    Yes, for cosmetic purposes only
    0
    0%
    Yes, for theraputic purposes only
    55
    47.41%
    No, never
    44
    37.93%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I was just wondering what the general consensus of TSR is on the subject of animal testing.

    I'll attach a poll (hopefully...)

    Personally, I'm completely okay with it as long as it's for therapeutic reasons, but I'm dead against it for cosmetic reasons...



    EDIT: whoops, could only manage to spell therapeutic right the once...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    it also depends on whether the animal is abundant or endangered
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welleducated)
    it also depends on whether the animal is abundant or endangered
    True, and there are perhaps a whole hoard of other potential variables that I unfortunately cannot include in one poll...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I'm in favour of it for therapeutic purposes but only because there doesn't seem to be another reliable way of testing. I'm going to be working in a lab eventually (well, hopefully!) so I can't really be totally against animal testing! I would like to see another way of testing for them though.

    I don't like the idea of testing cosmetics, all I can see when I hear that is the picture of the rabbit with its coat burnt off by chemicals And it's not necessary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The interesting thing is that no one objects to testing microbes (eg.bacteria), even though they too are living things.
    On what basis do we determine which species are mor important than others and which are expendable?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I am completely against animal testing although i can understand why some people do agree with it's use for scientific research. Using animals for the benefit of our vanity is totally outrageous in my opinion, and i cannot understand the reasoning or excuses for it. It shocked me comletely to learn that not one breakthrough in the cure for AIDS has come through animal testing and yet it continues to happen. Please dont be fooled by the propeganda surrounding it, do some research and im sure you will be shocked. xx
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'd rather they tested it on animals than me.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I don't agree with it if the animal 1.) feels preventable pain and 2.) for cosmetic reasons.

    Sometimes, tests do need to be carried out on animals.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welleducated)
    The interesting thing is that no one objects to testing microbes (eg.bacteria), even though they too are living things.
    On what basis do we determine which species are mor important than others and which are expendable?
    Microbes have no nervous system so can't feel pain. You also kill loads of microbes every time you cook food or wash your hands.

    I am against animal testing for cosmetic purposes but until someone comes up with a better alternative I'm for it for therapeutic purposes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    There isn't really a viable alternative until the drug is safe enough to be tested on human volunteers, and growing humans in a lab to test on them would have too many ethical concerns.

    Most of the old shampoo poured into a rabbits eyes and such isn't done any more, it's quite strict form filling when you want to use animals in testing, it really has to be necessary and with things like shampoo and such, the effects are already so well known testing like that isn't really needed.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It's wrong full stop. Why should animals be the ones that are tested on? They use animals because it's cheaper than other ways. Disgusting.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I disagree with it. It's an abuse of dominance to test dangerous/harmful drugs and other products on animals. If we did it on slaves people would moan, but we as humans are horrifically speciesist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No I do not agree with animals being tested on full stop. Who exactly has given the human race the right to chose to do this? They owe us nothing. We have no right to hurt/kill other living things.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by opinionscount66)
    No I do not agree with animals being tested on full stop. Who exactly has given the human race the right to chose to do this? They owe us nothing. We have no right to hurt/kill other living things.
    Who ever negged you is a douche.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Well.. if scientists don't perform tests on animals they'll have to resort to humans.. im sure there's more paperwork involved in that.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think that it is ever 'right' but more necessary as alternatives (ie computer simulations) are not accurate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Like Deep Thought from Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Lets just make something completely clear here, if we were not to test certain medication and other medical and psychological processes on animals then they would be tested on humans instead. Such animals that the medicines are tested on are rats and other things that breed easily that have a higher population that humans. Unless those that're inventing medicines saw a success in the potential medicine then it would not be tested at all.
    By testing on animals we have learnt so many things about humans, we're not much different to them...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snooki)
    Lets just make something completely clear here, if we were not to test certain medication and other medical and psychological processes on animals then they would be tested on humans instead. Such animals that the medicines are tested on are rats and other things that breed easily that have a higher population that humans. Unless those that're inventing medicines saw a success in the potential medicine then it would not be tested at all.
    By testing on animals we have learnt so many things about humans, we're not much different to them...
    At the expense of animals and the benefit of humans. Would you agree a bit selfish?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by S129439)
    At the expense of animals and the benefit of humans. Would you agree a bit selfish?
    I understand that if a fly annoyed you you wouldn't hit it?
    at the expense of a fly and the benefit of humans.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.