Print

[mozza]

mozza

Animal Experimentation

http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=7 <----- All u need to know


Animals are leaving breathing things just because they are less superior does not give us the power to indanger their lives even if it was for the good of humans.... Animals are like humans they eat, breath and feel. What is the point of testing chemicals that could kill on animals, maybe if we didnt there would be no disease cure, thats a major point but look how many poor creatures die in this process, Putting animals in danger is unprohibited in my books

[skully]

skully

Re: Animal Experimentation

As much as I may agree. Put yourself in a possition wher eyou might have had a desiese or something (not that I can think of a time animal testing cured a human desiese) Would you still say no to animal testing if they told you doing some tests on a chimp would save your life?

I believe they are like humans too. But I believe a human life is more valuable. Maybe it sounds cruel to some people. But I dunno why. I just think we humans have more cappacity to learn, and feel and think. We could make a bigger difference in the world then an animal.

Now. Ask yourself another question. If there was a desiese that could be cured by some testing on animals. That would kill the animal, or give it a terrible desiese. Would you do it? It would probably cure many humans. It's just the same for hunting. We hunt and kill animals every day so we have food to eat.

But I do disagree with testing things on animals that have absolutly no dramatic plus side to humans. Like makeup or shampoo and other crap. Only if it will dramaticly improve living for us, or save lives.

We may be human. But we're still animals.

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Animal Experimentation

I honestly don't care about animals, and as long as they're dying/being tortured/whatever in a way that might further humanity; Go for it

[Alex2539]

Alex2539

Re: Animal Experimentation

I'm for it for the most part. Things like cosmetic testing and stupid experiments like that ought to be banned, but medical testing could easily improve the quality of life for everyone on Earth, and even be adapted to animals themselves, if all we need to do is kill a puppy and some lab rats. As far as I'm concerned if you're vain enough to need new makeup that has so many chemicals a monkey needs to test it first, you deserve to have your face burned. If it's for the betterment of life on Earth though, then screw the monkeys now to save everything later.

One thing that ought to happen though is the increase of human testing. When scientists are reasonably sure that a product won't kill a living being, then they ought ot ask for human volunteers, inform them of the risks, and administer as required. After all, it's meant for people, who else better to test it on than a consenting one. It's that or we stick with our furry friends.

"They say 'Don't sweat the little things!', but in the end, the little things are all that matter..."
--Alex2539

[skully]

skully

Re: Animal Experimentation

I'm for it for the most part. Things like cosmetic testing and stupid experiments like that ought to be banned, but medical testing could easily improve the quality of life for everyone on Earth, and even be adapted to animals themselves, if all we need to do is kill a puppy and some lab rats. As far as I'm concerned if you're vain enough to need new makeup that has so many chemicals a monkey needs to test it first, you deserve to have your face burned. If it's for the betterment of life on Earth though, then screw the monkeys now to save everything later.

One thing that ought to happen though is the increase of human testing. When scientists are reasonably sure that a product won't kill a living being, then they ought ot ask for human volunteers, inform them of the risks, and administer as required. After all, it's meant for people, who else better to test it on than a consenting one. It's that or we stick with our furry friends.

Or instead of taking volinteers. Test on people in death row.

We may be human. But we're still animals.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Animal Experimentation

http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=7 <----- All u need to know

Please fix your spelling. There are rules about that...

Animals are leaving breathing things just because they are less superior

1. "Less superior" does not make sense.
2. That's an opnion, not a fact.

By some people's views, animals are equal to human beings.

Animals are like humans they eat, breath and feel.

Some do feel less than humans, though.

What is the point of testing chemicals that could kill on animals, maybe if we didnt there would be no disease cure, thats a major point but look how many poor creatures die in this process, Putting animals in danger is unprohibited in my books

There are laws about animal testing, though. Also, all animals do die eventually. Death isn't a bad thing. It happens to everyone.

I honestly don't care about animals, and as long as they're dying/being tortured/whatever in a way that might further humanity; Go for it

What makes humans better, in your opinion, then? Please back up your argument, otherwise it isn't really a debate...

I'm for it for the most part. Things like cosmetic testing and stupid experiments like that ought to be banned, but medical testing could easily improve the quality of life for everyone on Earth, and even be adapted to animals themselves, if all we need to do is kill a puppy and some lab rats. As far as I'm concerned if you're vain enough to need new makeup that has so many chemicals a monkey needs to test it first, you deserve to have your face burned. If it's for the betterment of life on Earth though, then screw the monkeys now to save everything later.

One thing that ought to happen though is the increase of human testing. When scientists are reasonably sure that a product won't kill a living being, then they ought ot ask for human volunteers, inform them of the risks, and administer as required. After all, it's meant for people, who else better to test it on than a consenting one. It's that or we stick with our furry friends.

Or instead of taking volinteers. Test on people in death row.

There are human rights laws. Or, at least, there are in the rest of the world apart from America. Maybe they could do it in America, since you people have no human rights...

It still seems against the Geneva convention, though.

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Animal Experimentation

http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=7 <----- All u need to know

Please fix your spelling. There are rules about that...

Animals are leaving breathing things just because they are less superior

1. "Less superior" does not make sense.
2. That's an opnion, not a fact.

By some people's views, animals are equal to human beings.

Animals are like humans they eat, breath and feel.

Some do feel less than humans, though.

What is the point of testing chemicals that could kill on animals, maybe if we didnt there would be no disease cure, thats a major point but look how many poor creatures die in this process, Putting animals in danger is unprohibited in my books

There are laws about animal testing, though. Also, all animals do die eventually. Death isn't a bad thing. It happens to everyone.

I honestly don't care about animals, and as long as they're dying/being tortured/whatever in a way that might further humanity; Go for it

What makes humans better, in your opinion, then? Please back up your argument, otherwise it isn't really a debate...

I'm for it for the most part. Things like cosmetic testing and stupid experiments like that ought to be banned, but medical testing could easily improve the quality of life for everyone on Earth, and even be adapted to animals themselves, if all we need to do is kill a puppy and some lab rats. As far as I'm concerned if you're vain enough to need new makeup that has so many chemicals a monkey needs to test it first, you deserve to have your face burned. If it's for the betterment of life on Earth though, then screw the monkeys now to save everything later.

One thing that ought to happen though is the increase of human testing. When scientists are reasonably sure that a product won't kill a living being, then they ought ot ask for human volunteers, inform them of the risks, and administer as required. After all, it's meant for people, who else better to test it on than a consenting one. It's that or we stick with our furry friends.

Or instead of taking volinteers. Test on people in death row.

There are human rights laws. Or, at least, there are in the rest of the world apart from America. Maybe they could do it in America, since you people have no human rights...

It still seems against the Geneva convention, though.

I never said humans were superior; But as we are the ones in control of them, and we obviously (for the most part) care about ourselves more than other species; I'm all for animal testing.  Its not a thing I have a strong view on though, I dont really mind either way so much

[Alex2539]

Alex2539

Re: Animal Experimentation

There are human rights laws. Or, at least, there are in the rest of the world apart from America. Maybe they could do it in America, since you people have no human rights...

Yeah, that's the problem - if a living being can consent, it should be allowed to. What might be interesting though would be to take the death-row inmates who are about to be executed, but rather than zapping them or injecting them, test some random drug on them. If they die, it's all the same to the justice system in the end and the scientific community has a body to examine and learn from. If he survives, then all the better since it's a working drug. They could then be killed anyways, or let go for their contribution ot science. However, it's very unlikely that any state will allow this sort of thing to be passed, especially since it's potentially torture to administer an unknown treatment to an unwilling patient.

"They say 'Don't sweat the little things!', but in the end, the little things are all that matter..."
--Alex2539

[Tetyle]

Tetyle

Re: Animal Experimentation

We could make a bigger difference in the world then an animal.

No. Not THE world, your world. Human civilization, not Earth.  Yet another look at the close minded selfishness and ignorance of a human being.  I'm not trying to be stuck-up, I just don't know how else to put it.

My opinion on Animal Experimentation?  Using other animals for cosmetic, shampoo, etc. testing is a waste of time and money.  If your making it for a human being, you should test it on one, too.

As for drug testing, in my opinion, is also a nicely sized air bubble.  If you need (which, if your testing a brand new drug) precise, accurate results, then you might want to test it on it's intended consumer.  I doubt an event will ever arise that can be cured through animal experimentation, but I don't know that.

[Who are the brain police?]

Who are the brain police?

Re: Animal Experimentation

I think its wrong that we still have to test on animals in this day and age surely there are alternative ways to test these things, or maybe just get human volenteers to do it because its not for animals its for us so we should test it if it kills us so what its the risk we took.

• 

[Benito]

Benito

Re: Animal Experimentation

As for drug testing, in my opinion, is also a nicely sized air bubble.  If you need (which, if your testing a brand new drug) precise, accurate results, then you might want to test it on it's intended consumer.  I doubt an event will ever arise that can be cured through animal experimentation, but I don't know that.

Indeed, alot of things that help us kill rats for example and things that help animals would be bad for us, its never conlusive really.

And the thing about animals feeling less, some are bound to feel more, I mean if your talking in terms of pain for example, some things will relly alot more on touch to get around so perhaps its more sensative.

I ♥ Open Girlfriend (What!? I didn't add this.. must have been Solly!)

• 

[Uisff Gjohfsfe Qfuf]

Uisff Gjohfsfe Qfuf

Re: Animal Experimentation

Well, there are two basic, fundamental schools of thought here, and I think, ironically, both of them support animal testing. (Although, only for medical purposes.)  With medical animal testing, more humans will be saved than animals hurt. I know these are ridiculous figures, but let's assume that animal testing will save one thousand humans, and kill one hundred animals. With a bit of very basic maths:

First school of thought: Humans are better than animals. So, we've just saved a thousand brillo humans, at the cost of a hundred less brillo animals. Bargin.

Second school of thought: Humans and animals are equal. Well, if they're equal, a human life has the same value as an animal life. So, with some algebraic substitution, you've just saved a thousand human lives at the cost of a hundred EQUALLY human lives. Bargin.

I suppose you could feel that animals are superior to humans... But that's a bit weird. Each to his own, though.

Of course, all this cosmetic crap on animals should be disallowed. Unfortunately, it won't be.

[Moon_child]

Moon_child

Re: Animal Experimentation

Its sad it happens but I don't care anymore we can't stop it. Why being bothered with this then?