should animals be used in experiments?

NO NO NO NO NO.

Animal testing is horrible, and should be stopped. Why do scientists have to test the effects of nicotine and caffine on animals when we already know their effect on humans?

Why do we need to extract pre-natal kittens from their mother, inject their spinal cord with a chemical and replace them in their mother's womb, only to kill them when they're born to see the effects of the chemical on their natal growth? Why should rabbits have sections of their fur shaved off and their skin scouraged so they can test chemicals, nail polish remover, or cosmetics on their flesh?

Animal testing is cruel.

i love animals

but then people will argue "what do we test things on"??
if we can't use animals what do we test our drugs and stuff on?

i have to debate this topic at skool

Alot of animal testing has to do with its effects on human skin. We already know that we can grow human skin in a lab setting, so why not grow some skin grafts and test on those?

Well, I don't know this for sure. I bet many of us have used animal-tested products w/out knowing it.

You'd better believe it. Want to see? Here's PETAs compiled list of companies that test on animals:

Allergan, Inc.
Arm & Hammer (Church & Dwight)
Bausch & Lomb (Curél, Soft Sense, Clear Choice)
Benckiser (Coty, Lancaster, Jovan)
Block Drug Co., Inc. (Polident, Sensodyne, Tegrin, Lava, Carpet Fresh)
Boyle-Midway (Reckitt & Colman)
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (Clairol, Ban Roll-On, Keri, Final Net)
Calvin Klein Cosmetics, (A division of Unilever)
Carter-Wallace (Arrid, Lady's Choice, Nair, Pearl Drops)
Chesebrough-Ponds (Fabergé, Cutex, Vaseline)
Clorox (Pine-Sol, S.O.S., Tilex, ArmorAll)
Cover Girl (Procter & Gamble)
Dana Perfumes (Alyssa Ashley)
Del Laboratories (Flame Glow, Commerce Drug, Sally Hansen)
Dial Corporation (Purex, Renuzit)
DowBrands (Glass Plus, Fantastik, Vivid)
Elizabeth Arden, Inc. (A division of Unilever)
Helene Curtis Industries (Finesse, Unilever, Suave)
Jhirmack (Playtex)
Johnson & Johnson
Kimberly-Clark Corp. (Kleenex, Scott Paper, Huggies)
Max Factor (Procter & Gamble)
Olay Co./Oil of Olay (Procter & Gamble)
Pfizer, Inc. (Bain de Soleil, Plax, Visine, Desitin, BenGay)
Playtex Products, Inc. (Banana Boat, Woolite, Jhirmack)
Reckitt & Colman (Lysol, Mop & Glo)
Richardson-Vicks (Procter & Gamble)
Sanofi (Yves Saint Laurent)
Schering-Plough (Coppertone)
Schick (Warner-Lambert)
S. C. Johnson Wax (Pledge, Drano, Windex, Glade)
SoftSoap Enterprises (Colgate-Palmolive)
Vidal Sassoon (Procter & Gamble)
Warner-Lambert (Lubriderm, Listerine, Schick)
Westwood Pharmaceutical

Yes, animal testing has saved millions of humans lives as it has helped medical advances. I cannot think up of a specific example, but I'm sure it has. I think the reason why people find it "cruel" is because they don't like the idea of cute furry little creatures getiing harmed. I'm sure no one would complain if insects were used for tests 'cause they're ugly little things. But what's the difference? They're both living things aren't they?

Animal testing is indeed cruel. Oh, I can't imagine the pain they must suffer from all this.

i know it is really cruel

you dont want to know what vivisection is

Oh .... I do. I wrote a 15 page paper on it last year for my freshman composition class. It sucks.

A monkey with lipstick on makes me laugh.

And animal testing isn't only done with cosmetics, they also use them for lots and lots of medicines. Skin grafts can't give you medical information when dealing with the mind and such.

And PETA is a terrorist faction.....creating all that civil disrest and "awareness". They're just plain old evil-do'ers

I'm against this whole animal testing thing as well.. but I'll argue the other side (and bs considering I know nothing about the topic) just for fun and practice

Alright, for those of you against animal testing, how else would we make sure a new vaccine or procedure or something is effective?

I'm for animal testing for certain things i.e. cancer drugs and thing that will be helping our society, but not for vain things

An animal's system is not exactly like ours.

I dont see how injecting something into a cat or a pig is going to help us understand how it would react in our own systems.

Its not exactly like ours, but some are very similar

exactly only 2 chromosomes make us different from some animals

Monkeys.....well...Chimps, Orangatang(sp), and Gorillas

But i think that it has to be done....people may not like it...but i mean if it wasnt for animal testing then we wouldnt kno as much as we do about animals and how they react to different things

with advances in genetics, it really isn't that necessary to test on animals. grow some human tissue and test on that. the only problem is cost.

Animal testing is cruel.

Most people that argue for things like the war in Iraq and the death penalty (about how some innocent people get convicted), use the following argument: "We must sacrifice for the welfare of others". So if that's true, then surely the sacrifice of a few animals to save thousands of human lives isn't a bad thing at all.

i dont knoe but umm... all i can say is sad that the animals die..-_-;; they might have a family too...sniff it's like taking someone and killing them

Then why are we using animals that arent similiar to us in some tests, like rabbits, pigs, dogs and cats?



Why do we need to know what the effects of nicotine or caffiene are on animals? I don't see any cats smoking a marboro or a rabbit with a coffee running around.

noooo!!! why would you want to test on animals? animals and humans are different... if you wanted to test... test on a HUMAN!

it is not the same thing at all. Animals are not people. I really don't care for animals i mean if someone tortured them then i would get upset or somthing because that isn't right but anything i don't care



rabbits are similar to us. they have 44 chromosomes

Pigs ARE similar to us, pig organs are sometimes used in organ transplants because they're so similar


That would be the more.. moral approach I guess.. but realistically, its just not feasible because few, if any human would willingly volunteer for some untested product they might die testing

unseen they suffer
unheard they cry
in agony they linger
in loneliness they die

stop animal testing

I know its not very moral you could say, but what else can we do?

Read my post above

I completely agree.

On one hand it is animals dying on the other hand it is finding cures for cancer and other diseases. i think people out weigh animals

Yes, its kinda like survival of the fittest, in order for our species to survive and combat these illnesses, other species must die, heartless I know, but its reality

people that protest against animal testing always seem to use pictures of cute furry little animals. I think that's to get false sympathy.

What about big scary ones? My hunting dog that can tear you to shreds in minutes is an animal just like that cute little abandoned cat on the corner.

Is that question directed at me? What I'm saying is, why don't they use pictures of big scary animals or dirty ugly ones to promote animal rights? - it's because people won't feel as much sympathy for those kind of animals being mistreated. That's reality.

But I like my scary hunting dog.

but would you like some one else's scary hunting dog? Damn, I'm going way off topic...

Comrade Red's Hunting Rule #1: Dog good, Kalashnikov better .

i dont think that animals should b experimented on b cuz its animal cruelty which is wrong, instead they should probably use these one substitutions (i forgot wat its called) that has human skin cells in it n will react to chemicals like human skin realli does.

but what if we're testing other treatments? things not just pertaining to the skin? then what?

and Minda.. what was that whole episode with the hunting dog?

a few?
millions would be a better number

---

support your opinion with facts or resonable arguments

I said that I'd choose a Kalashnikov over a hunting dog any day.

Mikhail Kalashnikov is the designer of the AK-47, AKM, and AK-74, among other things. I just like saying "Kalashnikov" better than "AK".

It's cruel alright, to use animals for expiriments. However, to see humans suffer because we cannot find test subjects for treatments is a bit crueler.

If a death of an animal can go towards betterment for science of health, then I suppose it's worth the sacrifice.

BUT, there are disturbing people who would very much like to see animals suffer. I've read articles about people who eat monkey brains while they are alive! Now that's cruelty.

no, if they need to experiment with the product then find some other way.....how would u like pple comin to ur home, yankin you out of bed and put experamental stuff on to you???

What if it's not 'products' but on a drug that could be the cure for aids or cancer?

We have 46...

IMHO, that kind of view on animals is too extreme in the sense that you do not consider that animals can feel pain and suffer as humans do.

In fact, many animals have maternal love that most human mothers pale in comparision. They can cry, they can certainly feel.

We're the alpha species. Better to test on some animal then some human.

I agree, but these tests must serve a purpose that's worthy of the life of an animal.

Alright, lets take a rat who's born and kept only to be tested on. What's it's life worth to you?

Each life has its own worth.

That rat that's being tested on may turned out to be the one rat that will carry the cure to whatever sickness that's being studied.

That rat's life will worth the lives that will be saved. After all, if it weren't for that rat, all those 'saved' people wouldn't stand a chance.

Now that is a little extreme, but life shouldn't be taken lightly.

NO NO NO NO

thats torture.... wat if it would be humans that r tested on.... have u seen any animal testing pictures.... its horrible my friend did their research project on it and its not a good thing to see