Can someone name a few things which has increased the human lifespan that used animal testing?

Question

Can someone name a few things which has increased the human lifespan that used animal testing?

Answer 1

All pharmaceuticals.

Answer 2

Developmental psychologists have a number of methods to study changes in individuals over time.

In a longitudinal study, a researcher observes many individuals born at or around the same time (a cohort) and carries out new observations as members of the cohort age. This method can be used to draw conclusions about which types of development are universal (or normative) and occur in most members of a cohort. Researchers may also observe ways in which development varies between individuals and hypothesize about the causes of variation observed in their data. Longitudinal studies often require large amounts of time and funding, making them unfeasible in some situations. Also, because members of a cohort all experience historical events unique to their generation, apparently normative developmental trends may in fact be universal only to their cohort.

In a cross-sectional study, a researcher observes differences between individuals of different ages at the same time. This generally requires less resources than the longitudinal method, and because the individuals come from different cohorts, shared historical events are not so much of a confounding factor. By the same token, however, cross-sectional research may not be the most effective way to study differences between participants, as these differences may result not from their different ages but from their exposure to different historical events.

An accelerated longitudinal design or cross-sequential study combines both methodologies. Here, a researcher observes members of different birth cohorts at the same time, and then tracks all participants over time, charting changes in the groups. By comparing differences and similarities in development, one can more easily determine what changes can be attributed to individual or historical environment, and which are truly universal. Clearly such a study can be even more resource-consuming than a longitudinal study.

Additionally, these are all correlational, not experimental, designs, and so one cannot readily infer causation from the data they yield. Nonetheless, correlational research methods are common in the study of development, in part due to ethical concerns. In a study of the effects of poverty on development, for instance, one cannot easily randomly assign certain families to a poverty condition and others to an affluent one, and so observation alone has to suffice.

Answer 3

Any medicine that you have ever taken, or any surgery you have ever had, were tested on animals before they were used on humans.  The benefits of animal research on the human condition are countless.  Being a scientist, I truely wish there were other ways to do things, and someday there may be.

Answer 4

If I infer the point to your question, then the fact that animal testing has been used to promote human welfare is irrelevant. And doesn't justify its continued used. Many more products have reached the market that were subsequently found to be harmful to humans, though not to the animal models. Also techniques are available today that were not available in previous generations, aided by computer models.

In a reverse of this logic, there are products that were not put on the market because they caused detriment to animal models, though the same reasoning applies. Often those products were given in 1000's of times the does any human would consume or be exposed to.

The only 2 sources of reliable testing are and have always been - humans and time.  

Answer 5

Polio vaccine is one of the biggest things, followed by treatment of diabetes with insulin, treatment or rabies, anthrax, arthritis, whooping cough, leprosy, rubella, and measles.  I'm also aware of some anesthetic products and heart disease control medications that got their start in animal testing.