Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Do you think its wrong?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    no
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    yes absolutely

    why cant we just use consenting humans
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on what they are being used to test, how they are being treated and several other factros. I don't thin no it is definitely wrong and likewise I don't think it is definitely right.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    for the most part no, I think all medical testing is necessary. However for certain cosmetic products I think it is unnessecary. A famous example would be pouring shampoo into rabbits eyes to see how much it hurt them, I understand why it would have to be done with the first few brands but after that it must be quite obvious which chemicals burn the eyes, and so it isn't necessary to do with new brands products unless the chemical formula is radically different which...it never is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Moral for the testing of medicine, immoral for the testing of cosmetics
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not all for it and I'm not completely against it, it depends on circumstances surrounding the testing.
    Offline

    13
    whilst I don't agree completely on animal testing I feel that humans shouldn't be exposed to potentially harmful things. a human life in my eyes is more important than that of a different species whether it be a rat, rabbit or a monkey. i think that some level of testing has to be done on other animals but probably not to the extent that it is.

    especially when it coems to drug testing I would much rather the researchers and developers for the drug find out at a stage where they make a rodent such as a rat extremely ill than do it to a human being.

    i don't think cosmetics should be tested on animals but things such as drugs and medical aids should be trialed on animals to ensure they are safe. there isn't too much dangerous stuff in cosmetics and its all teh same stuff that's been used before so tehre shouldn't be any real need to test on animals and could straight to human testing.

    the testing itself i think is ok in some cases but the condistions in which some animals are kept during testing is a disgrace and frankly disgusting. I personally feel that more needs to be done to ensure test animals if they are going to have them have good lives as if they were in the wild, because how can you get a good test on something if its being forced to adapt to conditions results aren't going to be 100% reliable, you need to see how it works in a real every day world in which the human would be living.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So do you guys think that we should test our products (either medical or cosmetic) on prisoners given life/death sentences?

    This isn't a troll, I honestly think we should.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Varciani)
    So do you guys think that we should test our products (either medical or cosmetic) on prisoners given life/death sentences?

    This isn't a troll, I honestly think we should.
    that's disgusting

    we should only test on humans who've consented
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's completely fine, as long as it's not on cute animals.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    no
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shaniqua)
    It's completely fine, as long as it's not on cute animals.
    who gets to decide what's cute and what's not? so many cute animals are just misunderstood by the general population.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Use murderers, rapists, paedophiles and the like to test everything...


    they deserve it...animals do nothing to harm us
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, it is wrong. There's a very pertinent saying that people who advocate animal testing say it's worthwhile because animals are similar to us, but when asked why it's not wrong, they say because animals are different to us.

    The most important fact is that nobody should be able to inflict indescribable pain, suffering and torment upon an innocent animal who has no way of defending him or herself. It's sickening.

    Even if you're heartless and don't care about animal welfare, animals will not react in the same way as humans to a product. For example, chocolate is lethal to dogs, but not to humans. Animals can eat some things that would prove toxic to us. Just look at the trials fiasco a few years ago - the drug had passed the animal testing stage yet proved nearly fatal on humans.

    Medicines should be tested on convicted murderers and rapists - that way, we get accurate results that actually mean something, and we save the lives of innocent animals. If somebody has killed someone, they've forfeited their right to life, and if we're paying for them to be kept in prison, we may as well get some use out of them.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    For cosmetic products, yes, but for medical purposes... I wouldn't be here if not for animal testing, so it would be rather hypocritical of me to condemn it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I think cosmetic testing on animals is wrong because there are alternatives now where they can use skin cells in petri dishes for testing. I've actually been looking up make up companies today as I'm thinking of changing for this reason. Medical testing on animals is necessary imo though or only consenting humans should be used.

    Btw, for those of you interested here are some companies that don't test on animals or have strong anti animal testing policies:

    Chanel products
    Bobbi Brown
    Urban Decay
    Hard Candy
    Barry M
    Liz Earle
    Lush
    Marks and Spencer
    Sainsburys
    Co-op
    Beauty without Cruelty
    Avon products
    Esteé Lauder
    Dermologica

    (If any of the above are wrong, please correct me! Some sites have offered conflicting advice )
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rocious)
    who gets to decide what's cute and what's not? so many cute animals are just misunderstood by the general population.
    we're talking about Tarantulas and arachnids in general I assume?

    I love spinny, fluffy, cannibal and little dude.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Rocious)
    who gets to decide what's cute and what's not? so many cute animals are just misunderstood by the general population.
    She makes a good point - although i doubt that is her opinion, the majority of people only complain about 'cute' animals like rabbits, mice, but don't care less about reptiles, rats.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Rocious)
    yes absolutely

    why cant we just use consenting humans
    lol no.

    For example, our approach to looking at the function of genes is to get a mouse, knock out a gene, and see what happens. This has lead to great advances in understanding diseases like cystic fibrosis and cancer.

    Simply not possible any other way, and the choice is, use animals or have no medical advancement from now on.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

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.