66 replies to this topic

[FreedomOverdose]

I thought I should make this debate a bit more different:
If you are for animal testing post in blue If you are against animal testing, post in red


Context:
For many centuries people have experimented on animals. There are two main reasons for doing this: first, to find out more about the animals themselves, and, secondly, to test substances and procedures to see if they are harmful (with a view to deciding whether or not they can be used on human beings). In the second category fall cosmetic products as well as medicines and surgical techniques. There is a growing consensus that it is not acceptable to test cosmetic products on animals. This debate is about whether we should experiment on animals for scientific and medical purposes. The debate about the pros and cons of animal experimentation (or 'vivisection') is one that elicits very strong emotions: animal rights activists have resorted to trespass, violence, death threats, and hunger strikes in their single-minded (and sometimes illegal) mission to end this practice.



I don't think that it should be ok to test products on animals. Animals don't get a choice, whereas humans do. Humans can get paid to do it if they want to as well. Animals go blind, some go through severe pain and it would be torture for them. A lot of experiments are tested on animals like rats and mice, rats and mice are nothing like humans! So how do we know that it will have the same effect on people? I think this is not acceptable and it should be stopped.

What are your thoughts?

[Lightning73]

You are absolutely wrong that mice are nothing like humans, mice share 99% of the genes humans do and are there for perfectly suited for testing on. Furthermore the reason mice are used most is because of their low cost, size and because it's easy to take care of them.

I think some animals should be allowed to test on, because almost every product ever produced would not have been there without it. I am however against the suffering of the animals.

[salamangkero]

I believe that animal testing is a vital part of product manufacture. I mean, if we did not test vaccines on animals first, the human population would rapidly dwindle... although I'm not sure that's altogether a bad thing. However, I do not favor animal testing for products are trifle as cosmetics. They are shallow, pointless and completely non-essential products the human society will be able to live without.

I suppose it also depends on the type of animals. If we tested vaccines on mice, then that would have been perfectly fine since mice are easy to breed (rabbits, even more so) and maintain. If, however, we start talking about tests done on endangered species, then you probably won't find me taking it all quietly.

All in all, I'd say, animal testing should be done only for certain animals (those that are easy to breed and maintain in captivity) and also only for certain products (those that are meant for non-trivial purposes)

[FreedomOverdose]

I think you didn't understand me well. Of course that animal testing is vital, but not for cosmetics products for god's sake!!!!

[Bluebear]

Actually the cosmetic industry do need something to test the products on. How would they know the consequences of using them, allergies and such things?

Do not misunderstand me. I am against animal testing.

Why do the animals need to suffer because we want to look pretty? Even though there are many of some certain animals, and companies breed them only for this purpose; why? It does not matter how many there are, it is still horrible and should not happen! The problem is testing the products. They need to do it. It is either animals or some poor little kid that just need a job.

I remember something about them testing for example mascara on a type of animal that do not cry - so they can see the reaction. Let me glue your eyelids open and stuff some black disgusting "mascara" on your eyes and see if you like it. Yummie.

There must be a better way to test products, because this is just horrible. There are companies that do not test on animals... at least the finished product. But I wonder: what do they test on then?

[Lightning73]

You are forgetting the fact that the only reason some of these creatures are alive is because they are bred to be used for animal testing. Without they wouldn't even exist.

[FreedomOverdose]

and many more other species are dying for making leather cover for our cars :|

[iGuest]

I am for animal testing, we have found many cures for many different diseases that have helped people.

[iGuest]

Against !!A Debate On Animal TestingFor animal testing I'm against for lot of reasons : Because it's auribel for animals and he is torturing. I think the animal is same of me and you ! Imagine you are torturing too ?! Is not possible ! I'm OK withe PETA ! Imagine you in a cage ? You are OK withe thats ?! Me no ! The animal don't support thats ! AND ANIMAL DEAD ! Thats it's auribel. I think thats is very aurible for the people... Imagine you whit this teste ?! It's crazy !! And is very very dangerous for animals ! And for human ! Is not the same reaction ! I don't think that it should be OK to test product on animals. I think is not possible and it should be stoppedSo I finish...

[iGuest]

I think that animal testing shouldn't be banned because humans have people who love them.

I'm not saying animals don't but in a way no-one will volunteer to get a product tested on them, because someone might mix two chemicals that have never been mixed before which might create a chemical reaction which can harm us or even kill us. I'm sure no-one will volunter to die because there is a 50% chance of death.

-reply by Gunes

[iGuest]

even tho some animals can share the same genes, there are still too many differences to get a clear idea of how chemicals will react in or around HUMANS.Even with medical reaserch there has been many cases of medications helping animals such as dogs, cats, mice, rabbits and even mon-human primeates that worsened human's conditions or even KILLED them. THE POINT IS ANIMALS ARE DIFFERENT. TOO DIFFERENT TO ACCURATLY DETERMINE IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE MEDICATIONThe point is that even tho there are some differences its not enough to determine what can kill us or what can cure us

-reply by xXMCRAngel2107Xx

[networker]

The way I feel is that animal testing should be legal only
for medical purposes.As for cosmetic companies, I disagree with this
completely.It really is superficial and shallow to test and basically
torture animals for the sake of beauty.

[Arv_M]

I personally dislike the testing of any human products on animals. It seems to me, very cruel and unusual that we would capture an innocent creature from it's home, and inject it with diseases and then experiment with cures. I believe that federal, state and local prisons should be able to take convicted psychopathic, sociopathic criminals and lend them to medical facilities for testing. Now, if there is any possible proof that the human being may be innocent, the operation should not be allowed to take place. This should only happen when there is significant proof that the criminal is guilty.

This to me, seems a lot more fair than taking innocent apes from the jungle and torturing them.

[miladinoski]

Definitevly NO! 

Animals are living beings and if the nature didn't made them enough smart so they can't say if they like something or not and they should have the rights for them to not be used in experiments that are not crucial for humans (like cosmetics, proving unimportant theories etc.)

So, in the end, they should not be abused but they can and should be used to test new vaccines or antibiotics. 

Edited by miladinoski, 12 December 2008 - 08:01 PM.

[iGuest]

Mice are worthless animals that lead to the death of over a billion people a few hundred years ago. These mice in the wild, by their own accord, breed to huge unsustainable numbers to create infestations. These of course eat anything and everything so they all end up dying and only 2 mice them remain to build up another infestation and so on, this cycles happenes around every 10 years across the globe...

So what if we breed a few in cages at least they wont starve like their wild counterparts. The testing may be cruel but oh well, why don't the people who defend these rodents focus their time on things that matter for example the advancement of the human race - which is exactly what the people who are testing on the animals are doing. 

If you don't like animal testing then don't use the drugs prescribed by your doctor, don't use makeup, don't use shampoo, conditioner or any other bath product, this will decrease demand for medicine and research, therefore slowing the rate of testing on animals. You cant be a vegetarian and complain about animals being killed just to go and eat meat yourself.

Yours and your ancestors lives have been saved by the use of drugs which were only possible through animal testing. 

Anyone who wants to disagree with this should go and find something to do with their lives, maybe stop some real atrocities by campaigning against the war in gaza instead of complaining about rats being tested on which both you and I know invaluable in the medical world

You're never going to make a difference because you're wrong and you know it.

Thankyou and goodnight,

Terry Tibbs

[iGuest]

/txtmngr/images/smileys/smiley7.Gif Animals are like human, though.  They eat  and sleep.  They also need shelter and LOVE.

[iGuest]

can you imagine your dog getting very sick and you want to find a cure for him so you decide that it is ok to test on your mom or aunt betty, becuase they seem to be the most compatabile to your dog. does that sound o.K with you?

I would just like to point out that animals have a very different body chemistry than us humans, our metabolism, or immune system doesnt work like theirs. Eaamples: cats cant have ibprofin becasue of a chemical that they produce cant digest it, (but we can)  Dogs cant have chocolate becuse its is very toxic to them (but we can). There are some diseases out in this world that humans can catch but animals can not. Example: dogs can contract  the provovirus but it can not be contracted to humans or other animals but dogs. Humans can contract hepititus and pass on to one another but no animal can contract it

I just pointing out that animals feel pain too and God (yes I said God!) put them here for a reason and I can tell you that he didnt put them on this earth to have us test on them, for our own benifit.

[iGuest]

Easy reponse. Would you prefer these painful possibly mutilating test, of drugs or other products be tested on a human? would you prefer seeing a human die in place of an animal that can be replaced... Reproduced.-reply by F red A lex K evin E dger nameKeywords: animal testing debates

[iGuest]

Informed?A Debate On Animal Testing

Look, CURELTY to animals is wrong, right? Hve any of you people in red actually been to a medical research center that uses animals? I've seen testing at Henry Ford (I know a vet tech there) and the people who work there do everything in their power to help these animals. If they weren't used for MEDICAL testing, they would be put down. Shelters give the hospital animals that haven't been claimed or micro-chipped. Would you rather this dog to be out down with no purpose in life, or be step to curing cancer.Rats have saved more lives than 911. It's nnot the research that bothes me, its the treatment of these animals. It's enough they may have to experiance pain, but to live a miserable life in a dirty smelly cage? BUt medical research isn't like that. Cosmetics are unimportant and should not be tested on animals. Pay a human. But in the end, if a dog is saving someone's life and it would be put down anyway, which would you choose? Medical research on animals is not perfect, but I think its more sensible than euthinasia on that animal.

 Emma, 13 yrs.

-reply by Emma

[iGuest]

Do we really need another mascara or lotion? is it worth thousands of animals rotting away and dying early painful deaths? the answer (in case your conscience is enept) is NO!  I understand that these animals don't have a home but that doesnt mean that we can just abduct them and use them as our little lab project! Animals and humans are not the same! but they DO feel pain like us they DO feel lonely, they DO want to live! So lets boycott products that test animals together so hopefull in the future animal testing will be extint instead of another spesis on animals!

-reply by An_eye_for _an_eye

 

[iGuest]

animal testingA Debate On Animal Testing

Although animal testing has its negatives it is important to the; doctors, patients, and people because, The use of animals in medical research and safety testing is a vital part of the quest to improve human health…… Without animal testing, there will be no new drugs for new or hard-to-treat diseases.So, I strongly believe that animal testing is a scientific process of testing products and medicine on animals. However, a lot of people have negative feelings about animal testing, because what happens in animal testing is that some of the animals that are being tested on may or may not die in the process of being tested on these commonly known products like; Cover Girl©, Neutrogena©, Suave©, Vicks©, Lysol©, and Clorox©. These products all have been tested on animals so when people use them they won’t be harmed during the use of the products.I want people who think they know ALOT OF about animal testing to read thisWithout animal testing we would have to the Blue Babies Blue...Helping babies with heart defects. Without that discovering who the heck knows were we would be in the medical stages. And that was tested on animals trying to see how giving these poeple knew hearts so that they can have babies without it doing it to there babies. So really Animal testing has made its possible everyone should be thankful. For the medicine they take like VICKS which is an animal testing product or CLOROX,Lysol(wipes,liqid,disenfect)So, if your really against animal testing an u use one of these products your all hypocrites.

-reply by trina

 

[iGuest]

a debate on animal testingA Debate On Animal Testing

Replying to FreedomOverdose

I am very against animal testing of any kind. Recently I am against "Mars" brand of candy. For example they produce m&ms, Dove chocolate, Starburst, Skittles, Snickers, etc. They do animal testing that is completely unessasary. There was one test that was explained that they inject some sort of coco into a mouses heart make them swim through water with white paint mixed into it. They have to get to a platform, and if they make it there they just end up getting killed anyways. Now can you tell me why that test is needed? is any human going to be injecting coco into their heart and going for a swim in some white paint? didnt think so. Animals are not like humans. Why test on them when they cant tell you what is going on? they cant talk. They have different bodies. I'm one of the biggest animal lovers on this earth. I couldnt let anyone test on my rabbit or my dog, inject coco into my hamsters heart, make a coat out of my chinchilla or harm my love bird. If you have a pet and are for animal testing. Look at them and tell them that you wouldnt care if they were tested on. Animal testing is terrible, and one of the things that gets me raging mad and sick to my stomach.

-reply by Holly

[iGuest]

I am for it!

Ever since we find lot's of medicences to cure diffrent kinds of cancer- But if you are not willing to take out a life out of animals just to save your own life, well tough luck, you die and I live! There are two main things that the animals doesn't have what humans got, they are soul and concious. The people who are against it, stop being so emotional! You people eat chickens, well; at a chicken farm the chickens are stuffed and crampy in the cage and then they'll be slaughterd so you can just eat it. This is much worse than animal testing! Just think about it for a momment.

[iGuest]

I am a strong believer in not doing test on animals. In this generation and day and age, we have the technology so that we don't have to test on animals. Don't get me wrong, I do believe that we have made some progress with the use of animal testing, but little progress. It is Disgusting to note that less then 2% of all human illnesses, known to men, are on record in the animal kingdom, and yet we use them to find cures to self inflicted, that have been invited upon us with unhealthy and restructured living and eating habits. Animal testing cost the American public over $136 Billion annually.

Another fun fact is drugs that pass animal test end up harming or killing humans about 61% of the time. Also, when animals are testing on, they not only test for Medication, but also many other things including external and internal injury's. When an the scientist want to test and see how the flesh of the animals skin reacts to certain beatings, they don't give the animal anything to help sooth the pain.The scientist hit, beat, cut, smash the animals body, break the bones, and leave them in a small cage to suffer.

I, of course, do not think that we should test on humans, but there are other ways. America is so very much advanced in technology that there are whys we can do this all with computers, or ever make models so that they can torture the models. For example, with tools from molecular biology biochemistry and analytical pharmacology, Pharmagene conducts extensive studies of human genes and how drugs affect those genes or the proteins they make. We are far past the use of animals to test on, we know the results of drugs now on humans, so there is no need to test on animals, and I am a strong believer in the fact that it should be stopped.

-reply by Rebecca Kay

 

[iGuest]

animal testingA Debate On Animal Testing

I think it should be done.. Because without animal testing we would still have blue babies and they would die because people wouldnt know what to do or how to operate the babies heart. And only because of the heart operation that were done during the testing on dog's heart we could ever achive that. Alot of dogs died and I realize that they felt big pain but they didnt die for nothing they died to saved millions of people in the future. But yeah I disagree with testing animals for the cosmetics and stuff. I only agreed if it is nessesery, because animals have alot of oragans that are very similar to human's oragans. And sorry for alot of mistakes my spelling sucks really bad.

-reply by igor