Is animal testing ethical?

Question

yes or no, and to what extent? (from mice to cats to monkeys)?

Answer 1

Nobody on this site can tell you what you believe is ethical or unethical. If you have no idea, do some research on BOTH points of view and decide for yourself. I personally do not believe in animal testing, but what you believe is what you believe, and should not be disputed.

Answer 2

It is ethical, provided that:

the experiment has a significant point

the animal is not subject to pain

no more animals are used than necessary

Practically none of the advances of medicine could have happened without animal testing.  

Answer 3

Have you ever use ANY medication? if so, then you pretty much support animal testing.

We shouldn't be cruel in our testing, but come on... if you had any kind of medicine or even types of food, you are using the advantages of medication

If you really want to support non-animal testing, don't take ANY medication... and then you give campaigns. that's why those ignorant people make me sick.

We should first confirm our stuff, then test on smaller animals. And right before we administer it for humans, we should run it through with monkeys just in case.

THE REAL QUESTION IS... should we risk a human's life or a monkey's?

Answer 4

All animals are conscious beings, we all experience the world from a very unique viewpoint - our own. We all consider our own lives to be of the upmost importance and fear our own demise. We all feel pain and experience emotions, to some degree. Therefore we all have the right to our own lives, to be free from suffering and to be able to make our own choices. When humans take animals and torture and kill them against their will, that is denying them of their birth rights, the worst thing you can do to another living being.

The 'your child or your dog' threat is a false dilemma. With excellent alternatives available it can be both. With vivisection being such a barbaric and poor scientific method, both humans and non-humans suffer.

Non-human animals are not good models for the human animal, and as drugs become more complex, the gap only widens. A psychological variable was found to be the polar opposite in mice and rats. If two species which appear so similar are so different in such subtle ways, how can we apply those findings to humans?

Animal tested drugs have led to ill-health in many humans and also death. I can't remember the name of it now, but an animal tested Alzheimer's drug was released and killed thousands of people world-wide before being taken off the market and hushed up, all due to animal testing. An interesting study recently compared the validity of animal experiments to the flipping of a coin. Animal testing was about as good as complete guesswork... it takes so many experiments to build up even half-decent data, causing so much suffering and death.

There are many alternatives available. I got a letter in the post today from the Dr. Hadwen Trust for non-animal medical research detailing new computer simulation methods and ways of cloning non-aware human tissue to test on. These methods have been proven to be far more effective than vivisection, but testing on animals is cheap and most scientists just want to make a quick buck.

Vivisection is an out-dated and cruel practise, and the death count (for non-humans AND humans) will only rise until people wake up and say no to medical vivisection.

Of course, testing on animals for cosmetics and toiletrees is equally and more obviously completely immoral. Rabbits are having nasty chemicals poured into their eyes every minute just for another uneccesary brand of cleaning fluid.

There are non-animal tested products out there, certified by organisations such as the BUAV. Just look for their logo on products if you want to reduce the demand for animal testing to stop the abuse.

Animals are ALWAYS subjected to pain in experiments and

NO animals are neccesary when alternatives are available.

Answer 5

Yes.  And it think it was Dennis Miller who said it best.

"If hooking a monkey's brain up to a car battery will save 1 person from AIDS in 10 years, I got 2 things to say... red is positive and black is negitive".  Something like that.

Answer 6

no. it is not ethical at all. no matter which animal it is its still an animal. a living breathing thing. things shouldnt be tested on humans so why should it be any differennt with animals?

Answer 7

yes, people dont think about it but over half of to days medicine would not be here today if it was not for animal testing.

test your blood sugar so you dont end up dead, or save a monkey?

treat cancer, or save a rat?

do you really have to even think about it?

Answer 8

no. Testing should be done on convicted criminals. This would give a much more accurate description to what was being tested would do to humans.

Answer 9

No. Honestly, why must we test on unwilling animals.

Answer 10

No its not ethical at all, how could they think that the effects of a poduct on a mouse or cat would be the same to a human. Torturing animals is illegal yet scientist do it every day. I think animal testing to some extnt is ok, if the animal is not harmed in any way it is fine but i would anly allow this to be done for medical purposes, not just to make another hairspray or chocolate bar.

Animal testers should die, or maybe we we should use them as the "gunie pigs".

and yes, i would rather a person die than any animal.

Answer 11

No way.  Products shouldn't be made at all if they have the potential to be dangerous and need testing.  It's not ethical in the slightest to torture animals.  It's not their fault humans are so dumb.