For or against animal testing?

Im just curious actually whos for and whos against animal testing? what you all think i would like your opinions and why for science project tata x

I've tested a dog before. I asked it 10 questions about nature and the only one it got right was "What is the outer coating of a tree's trunk called?"

Good one Ed LOL!!!!!!

LOL Ed!

This is hard subject really... I think it's wrong.. especially for stuff like lip sticks and shampoo's.
But when it comes to the big stuff like cancer cures. I'm a bit mixed..
I mean the animals are bred for testing and when it's done professionally, they are well looked after..
So i don't know. I'm mixed

No, I'm against it. For the stupid stuff, I have seen. Unless it's for cancer research, I'm against it.

Is typing in upper case also capital punishment?

I am against it

Against. If you wouldn't or couldn't test it on people, who are we to say animals are worth less and then use them for experiments? We are truly the bullies of the planet.

I don't care...

Will discussing it help animals from dying under the knife or syringe...Whatever you call it...

I'm all for it, done as humanly as possible of course and only for reasons of health, and not beauty.

We have the ability to look at the larger picture when it comes to this subject. Many people think animal testing is cruel, but i guarantee, if they needed medicine to save themselves or their loved ones, and the doctors had to test it on a dog or cat first, they'd soon change their tune.

Animals are not as important as humans, end of story.

If you don't believe that, then stop buying them to either eat or domesticate.

You are quite right.

Kevin Murray, but when you say that are not as important...There is where I challenge you.

Historically speaking I would say that humans always treated the other as less than humans or should I say animals, with slavery coming into it and let us not forget the Holocaust.

So to say that animals are below us, would be an understatement...I say that we are below them.

Rats.. sure.. but like dogs and stuff .. no

Against it.

Animals are not below us in anything but intelligence. If you value intelligence above all things, so be it. I value compassion, loyalty, willingness, genuinity, etc. Animals are not cruel in a way that humans are. In that sense, they are above us.

Testing should be done on HUMAN criminals, not animals. Animals don't deserve that kind of treatment.

As for domestic pets...many animals have been bred to live in homes, cared for by humans. My pets are all rescue pets, taken in from horrible conditions--life threatening. I do not consider taking care of my animals, who have no knowledge of fending for themselves in this human dominated world, inhumane or 'wrong'. Each one of my pets is offered freedom, but do not take it. That's called respect and understanding, not obedience caused by fear.

My pets are my family. I am there for them, and they are there for me.

As disturbing as I find it, and I would never personally be able to be a direct part of it, I can't say I'm against animal testing for medical purposes. IF it is done as humanely as possible. Think of it this way- 100 animals die in order to save a hundred thousand people. It's logical.

However, we have no right to test cosmetic products on animals- it's not something we need. An animal should not suffer because we are so superficial that we need to look pretty.

Coincidentally- I'm doing a project on this right now.

Why should animals die for humans? Where do you justify that? Take advantage of the weak and innocent, yeah? That's nice.

I can't believe we are seriously debating whether or not animals are equal in worth to humans!

If some madman put a baby human and a baby mouse in front of me and gave me a gun and told me to pick one to shoot, no other choice...I'd kill the mouse without a second thought....and if any of you think you would actually have to consider it...then i think you are messed up in the head.

No offence......perspective..use it or lose it.

This isn't really about holding babies and mice hostage. It is about our moral obligation towards the other inhabitants of this planet. Just because we are more intelligent does not mean we have the right to kill or harm an animal. So if it is okay to test on them, why make it illegal to abuse them? If animals are so worthless we should be able to treat them however we wish.

Excellent answer Carrie...

I guess in Kevin's logic if he were to choose between George Bush and a rare white lion...

Who would he choose? Hmm....

Hm...that is a tricky one Noir..very tricky...I guess I'd have to work out whether or not i actually think George bush is human...and, well, he is almost certainly a demon...so, that places him below any animal.....

Carrie. I am not talking about whole species of animals being made extinct because of humans, or animals being made to suffer for our amusement, like bull fighting and other cruel sports.

I am talking about the small sacrifice of one species for the larger benifit of another.

What I find interesting is how people get upset, or more upset depending on the type of animal being tested on.

If it's mice, people might think it's not very nice to do that. If it's insects, people don't care, generally..but anything bigger...say a rabbit, or a sheep..or God forbid, a random animal we humans have domesticated, like a God or cat...and suddenly everyone is up in arms!

I don't like the idea of animal testing, but like I said, i'm in favour of it because I rather like being alive, and I like my loved ones being alive, and anything that can prolong that within reasonable means, it worthwhile.

I get your point kevin and I think that your last post was better than the one where you compared saving a baby or a mouse. It was a little dramatic to me.

I realize that when it comes to medicine people think all ends justify the means, but I personally just do not like the thought of it. People can volunteer for testing, animals can't.

And whether they are suffering for our well being or our amusement, the fact that we make them suffer at all just disgusts me.

I do get what you are saying though.

^ I agree.

Kevin, should a mentally retarded or disabled person be sacraficed for a healthy human being? Maybe your answer is yes. Anyway, humans are naturally evil--animals are not. I wouldn't shoot a baby or a mouse, but if I had to choose between my sister and a goat...I'd choose my sister. Kidding. I'd shoot the goat, yeah...but if I could choose between shooting a mouse in the head or a random criminal, I'd shoot the criminal (depending on the severity of his crime(s) I guess). Anyway, this analogy is ridiculous.

Animals should not have to suffer for humans. Humans should suffer for humans. I'd like to see you be abducted by aliens and tested on, because you are the less important species. That's fair, right? No. Aliens should test on their own god dang species!

Sorry if none of that made sense, I just woke up.

Human volunteers and convicted criminals should be tested on, NOT animals...ever. My animals are my family, their brothers and sisters shouldn't have to suffer for me. Mmm, ok. I have a feeling none of that made sense.

Shia shia.

We're sick if we don't even take the fact that animals have been here longer, are not naturally sick minded, have emotional or personality diseases which cause wanting to be cruel, and don't harm our environment. we're practically ruining this Earth, if we want to take the other species along with it, then go animal testing, good job. Why should an innocent animal, whatever the size, have to be tortured because we're too selfish to test these projects on other humans, who don't deserve to be here, and are in prison? i'm going with Jane, i'd much prefer to see criminals tested on than animals which have a chance of dying or becoming ill from these tests.

I've seen on the news about the dissecting of ants legs, and the pain they go through, and I'd rather not see it again.

I'm fully AGAINST -any- animal testing, unless it's for their good, and not ours. So many animals are much more beautiful than we are, without being mentally ill, and we're the confusing complex humans who can't settle to not have the answers, so the people without any form of heart or organ in their chest take it out on them. It's not fair, they should have more rights than we do, but because we're so egotistical and power driven, we can't settle down and leave what we don't know.

Unless it's for animal health benefits, or solving something that can help them, I'm against it. I don't see why pigs wearing make up or mouses growing ears on their back so another rich woman can go out without having her hair down is allowed, it's not acceptable, and it should be stopped.
x

Yes indeed.

I think you anti testing people are living in an overly idealistic world, one where things happen by magic and no one has to suffer for it.

You'd happily stand by and reap the benifits of animal testing whilst also crying out it's evils. And of course one of your main arguements is that humans are evil and animals are innocent!

Ha, have you watched any nature programs recently!...animals are really cruel to each other, not just for survival..many animals play with their prey before killing them, apparently because they enjoy it...they eat their young, eat each other....rape each other etc etc.

I suppose you think, because radiographers have proven that tree's feel pain, that we should not take or have anything to do with drugs, such as Penicillin?

Oh Golly Gee...We are not suppose to cry about the evils of animal testing...Oh Golly No....!

FYI Kevin, we are animals...Or haven't you known that...

Let me give you a hypothetical:

If we were at the bottom of the food chain and let's say Mice were at the top...And they were testing on us rather on them without a second consideration do you think it is acceptable?

Ofcourse you would say, that is a silly hypothetical question...But it rings true...!

I am all for the advancement of science, but we shouldn't use animals to further that science...And besides...

If you actually changed the channel you would see that humans have done things a million times worse...

Now like I said in my original post...Does it matter if we argue and bicker over animal testing, it is already been done, it is done behind our backs and unless we change certain laws we cannot change what is done to them.

Against.

Unless its for a good cause .. i'm against it. and even if it is for a good cause, it better be a damn good one.

If it's absolutely neccassary I say do what needs to be done using animals, especially for something that is crucial for us as humans. Animals shouldn't be harmed period, but who would you rather have get tested your cat or a family member?? I think we all agree

But what if your cat is one of your family members to which I think millions of people have come to know their cats as...

Well you know what I meant, lets be serious. I'm only saying if it were absolutely impossible to avoid the testing, who would you rather get tested.

Well in all honesty, I would rather have none of them be subjects of testing....Because both of them have a place in my heart....And I would consider my cat as one of the family, and I won't allow my family to be tested.

I never said ALL animals were innocent, i just MEANT they're defenesless. plus it's not like 99% of them are psycho. and no I'm not living in a sugarcoated world, I never said I thought it didn't happen, I said it didn't HAVE to. I wonder if a lot more people would react if they took a newborn baby and put it into one of those labs and the scientists did the tests they do to animals; animal testing is wrong, animals should be free, just like 99% of humans are allowed to be. I never said that animals can't be cruel too, because I know they can. I never said the earth is a fairytale and I should think before I speak because animal testing IS going on, I'm only saying that it SHOULDN'T which was the question in this thread.
x

Karl, in your example...I would submit myself to the testing, saving my animal and family member. Problem solved. Volunteers should be tested on, not animals.

Kevin, you make another ridiculous point. Trees!? We're talking about the animal kingdom, not trees vs. animals. Animals vs. animals you craphead, get that straight. Humans are animals!

And what was that business about penisilin? Can that testing be done on animals, or ONLY trees? If only trees, your example is utterly meaningless. You tell me.

Peace out!

Against

Stormborn?...Craphead!

Wow, nice, never been called that before. Smart.

We are all animals, and as such, just like other animals near the top of the food chain, we have the right, by the power born in us, to use other animals as we see fit. This is the law of nature, the law of the jungle.

I don't see anyone complaining about eating animals? Can I get a show of hands, from those who are anti testing, of who is a Vegan?

To the person who suggested I think humans born with physical impairments are less worthy of life, and then went on to say that I'd shoot them over a normal person, get stuffed. That was a really scummy thing to say, really scummy.

That was me, and it was a question not a suggestion. So you say animals are less than humans because of their lesser intelligence, but humans with mental impairments are not less because they are still humans? That does not add up. We are all truly animals, and if intelligence is on what you base your ideas of heirarchy, rethink your anger in response to my thoughts.

Calling you a craphead was a form of immaturity which yes, I posses, and I do not regret saying it.

You might want to edit out your cuss words above^ "Go fuck yourself"--Oh yeah, that's much better than craphead...

"We are all animals, and as such, just like other animals near the top of the food chain, we have the right, by the power born in us, to use other animals as we see fit"

you say this, and then there's humans going onto bears lands in the woods knowing there are chances of getting hurt, and then the animal is shot afterwards. but whatever.
obviously i'm wrong and you're right.
x

We are all animals, and as such, just like other animals near the top of the food chain, we have the right, by the power born in us, to use other animals as we see fit.

Wow I saw this show called Racism: A History on BBC Three, and I found that scientists back then had the same logic, as you only with ethnic minorites....Their hypothesis was that ethnic minorities especially the black man was more of an animal than a human, therefore it was perfectly ok, to treat him as such and torture him.

I may be digressing a bit, but I believe that there will always be scapegoats....To the advancement of society and science. Before it was humans (Ethnic Minorities), today it is the animals.....Tommorrow it will be the inhabititants of various other planets....