Should Testing on Animals Be Banned?

by Fef Posted 2012/08/20 18:00:00

Related Topics: Animal Testing, Animals, Pets, Animal Rights

1,600 votes
Read all 1,607 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	955 votes	60%
	No	645 votes	40%

BLOGS.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK reports:
Animal welfare charities reacted angrily to news in July that the number of animal experiments rose to a record high in Britain last year - but is the research necessary or ethically justified?

+43

Add a comment above

Picasso's Cat 2012/08/19 13:50:21 (edited)

Yes

+37
We should test prisoners on death row, they are human and the test results would be more accurate. And they can communicat with the testors.
If they die during the testing, who cares, they are killers, child molesters and worse.
We could start with charles manson.

I'll bet that alone would be more of a deterrent to crime than any other deterrent, so crime would go down, a win-win situation to the overall problem.
>> See Replies

More polls by Fef

Leona Hill to Dave 007 2012/08/28 16:47:23

No, use hardened criminals.

reply
♥K14 to Leona Hill 2012/08/31 12:06:36 (edited)

That alternative is Flawed - For (at least) 3 reasons:
1) There aren't enough
2) They aren't consistent, so results wouldn't be comparable
3) A good percentage of them are innocent, so you're advocating torturing random innocent bystanders.

And since we've agreed you want to test on random humans, you might as well go for societies rejects. For example, The homeless. Or even better, orphaned children. Nobody would miss them.

Isn't it strange that you think you can take the moral high ground when you want to torture children?

reply
Atiya 2012/08/25 22:40:36

Yes

+3
Yes. It should. No question. Computer simulations, cloned skin, etc., etc., are more accurate and more ethical. Animals don't react the same way as humans. And if there's a test that can't be done with a computer simulation or cloned tissue, you have to remember: by saying that scientists cannot come up with a solution when faced with this problem, you are doing nothing but insulting human ingenuity. Animal testing tortures and kills animals and kills humans too. Why is this debate still going on?

reply
Cat Man to Atiya 2012/09/27 05:42:10

Finally, a voice of reason.

reply
Luna Wren 2012/08/25 21:38:52

Yes

+1
Animals shouldn't be used in testing. But using humans isn't an option.

reply
Dave 007 to Luna Wren 2012/08/26 11:50:24

Then who or what?

reply
Syl to Dave 007 2012/08/28 13:42:56

Laboratry-grown tissue with human DNA. The only reason they don't is because it's more expensive than using animals.

reply
Leona Hill to Dave 007 2012/08/28 16:49:36

What many people don't know is there are many robotic machines being created for testing that work better than torturing animals.

reply
♥K14 to Leona Hill 2012/08/31 12:07:28

+1
lol

reply
Leona Hill to ♥K14 2012/09/04 17:05:03

Thank you. I'm glad you find me amusing.

reply
♥K14 to Leona Hill 2012/09/04 22:25:40 (edited)

+1
And I'm glad you were amusing - I needed a boost that day.

reply
Luna Wren to Dave 007 2012/09/29 22:30:57

You know, I honestly don't have an answer for that. But I bet neither do most others with the same opinion, but I could be wrong.

reply
DICK 2012/08/25 07:17:29 (edited)

No

There already doing on people,,here joe small amout of ddt.arsonic .hydrogen cayanide,well joe what would you do.Hell is ask'ed no that poison,then why are you smoking it...These and thousand's done every day. The tuskegee syfilist experiment 400 was to see what organ's died first and worst, these are the men you think are honest.What i know would you jump out the window. Al for the instinct of greed,75.ooo toxins in 60 years. aurtism up 57% in 4 year's,that was a year ago. The rats are lauphing

reply
☆stillthe12c☆ 2012/08/25 05:41:45

No

+1
It is better than experimenting on us.

reply
megan to ☆stillt... 2012/08/29 03:21:53

+1
why?

reply
☆stillt... to megan 2012/08/29 03:34:42

good question. I use to work for an eye care company. They use rabbits to test products for gentleness. Rabbits can not blink, so they make a good subject to do the test on. As far as I know they only had one product that damaged the eye of the rabbit. That would have been far worse if it had damaged someones eye other than a rabbit. In this case the rabbit lost part of its vision as it scared the outside of the eye. Would not want to do that to a human. I no that that sounds bad but they need to try out drugs. Especially treatment for cancer. I wish they did not need to do it and they could be perfect every time, but they can not.

reply
megan to ☆stillt... 2012/08/29 10:45:33

why a rabbit and not a human?

reply
☆stillt... to megan 2012/08/29 16:36:57

So you would rather mess-up a humans eye for 60 or more years of their life than and eye of a rabbit for a couple of years?

reply
megan to ☆stillt... 2012/08/30 00:17:38

no, there are other options. This is not humans vs non humans.

reply
☆stillt... to megan 2012/08/30 01:12:53

I know it asked if the use of animals should be banned and my answer is no.

reply
megan to ☆stillt... 2012/08/30 01:47:26

well my answer is equality.

reply
☆stillt... to megan 2012/08/30 02:06:26

So you want animals to be counted as equal to us?

reply
megan to ☆stillt... 2012/08/30 02:43:19

yes.

reply
megan to megan 2012/08/30 02:43:36

equal consideration.

reply
MissDiva 2012/08/24 23:27:21

Yes

+1
OBVIOUSLY! How is animal testing fair? If anyone can answer that question, please reply because I want to know why people would be okay with this.

reply
qq4x to MissDiva 2012/08/26 13:41:34

+1
Animal testing is Fair because the animals are bred for testing. If there was no animal testing they wouldn't even have existed.

Also, i value humans more than people, that is why i am an omnivore, but not a cannibal.

reply
jabo to MissDiva 2012/08/28 13:07:54

Simple. Because animals are not humans.

reply
megan to jabo 2012/08/29 10:46:10

humans are animals

reply
♥K14 to megan 2012/08/31 12:09:36

Well done - Humans are animals. This does not make all animals equal to humans.

reply
megan to ♥K14 2012/08/31 23:41:45

dogs are also animals but not all animals are dogs. That makes dogs equal to humans :)

reply
♥K14 to megan 2012/09/01 15:02:19

Canis lupis vs Homo sapiens...
That's a different species and genus. In fact, you have to get all the way up to class to get them to match.

reply
megan to ♥K14 2012/09/02 01:19:39

equal, ethically. Like you should be charged with murder for killing either.

reply
♥K14 to megan 2012/09/02 09:37:21

I disagree that they're equal ethically, but I do think there should be much harsher punishments for harming/killing animals outside of a lab environment.
For example, the person that shot one of my cat was simply asked not to do it again.

reply
megan to ♥K14 2012/09/04 00:00:28

The person who shot your cat should not be a free man for 20 years to life.

reply
megan to megan 2012/09/04 00:02:43

And animal experimenters are damn lucky I dont believe in the death penalty.

reply
Jeatt 2012/08/24 04:50:19 (edited)

Yes

+4
There is virtuallly no testing being done on animals that can't be done using computers. The amount of suffering these animals go through is extreme and certainly inhumane. It is unecessary and gruesome. At the risk of being cliche, I'll end with a favorite quote:

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." - Mahatma Gandhi

reply
skunkmomma to Jeatt 2012/08/27 05:47:37

+2
Well said.

reply
♥K14 to Jeatt 2012/08/31 12:10:32

+1
Do you honestly think computer programs can give the same results as testing on live tissue?

reply
Jeatt to ♥K14 2012/09/02 02:34:19

I don't think it, I know it. It's a proven fact that many labs use today.

reply
♥K14 to Jeatt 2012/09/02 09:38:24

Computer Programs can simulate the reactions between chemicals, they can't simulate an accurate reaction from a living organism.

reply