[Debate #1] Is Animal Testing Justified?
by
Hacktivism
February 26, 2015 at 9:02 AM UTC
I might do one of these debates every once in a while, depending on how this works out. They'll all be on more serious issues that the world should know about. Please do not flame on other people's posts.
I've always had an interest in biology and medicine, and one of the most controversial topics in the medical field is whether animals should be used to lab testing. So today's question is:
Is animal testing justified and necessary?
I'll give my own opinion at a later time, since I'm supposed to be sleeping and can't write a quality paragraph in a few minutes.
For medicinal and scientific purposes only. While I'm pretty against the idea in the first place, if it saves innocent lives then yes it is justifiable.
Seeing animals tested on really pains me. It's like testing new drugs on other humans, see if they die or not. Would you sacrifice your last breath to save the entire human race if a decease broke out? I sure would. Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes. I am always against it, but I can see the justice if it's for medical reasons, to save innocent lives.
To save humanity, to save life.
These areas of discussion can strongly upset others, though.
Seeing animals tested on really pains me. It's like testing new drugs on other humans, see if they die or not. Would you sacrifice your last breath to save the entire human race if a decease broke out? I sure would. Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes. I am always against it, but I can see the justice if it's for medical reasons, to save innocent lives.
To save humanity, to save life.
These areas of discussion can strongly upset others, though.
You can't really say "are". There is a lot of opinions of how people was created, but no proof. We have to belive what we think is the right. If you "think" that is how Humans were made I respect that, but there should never be a fact for nothing we cant prove.
And yes I read the whole post ^-^ Would just like to chare these words of mine.
Yes, as Howsie said, for medical and scientific purposes only. I don't think it's necessary when you're testing a harmful sunscreen on a dog. I also don't mind the testing when it's done on 'infected' animals.
If the animal isn't severely hurt or killed, then yes. HOWEVER, if the animal is changed and then released back into the wild, then no. For example, changing an animals DNA and then having it reproduce might result in a change in the species, including potential risk for the offspring to have a genetic disease or illness that might end up wiping out the species if that child then carries it out, allowing the disease to spread until it reaches a point where things like cancer and death become more common. I cannot stress this enough. Don't put your test subjects back into the world. I hate field testing for lots of things (like cosmetic products, antibiotics, etc) due to the risk of injuring other people and animals.
All in all, if you've pretty much fucked up the animals entire way of life, you'd might as well kill it when you're done.
I think it has to be done. Honestly, this is the sick truth, but twenty rats are nowhere near the equivalent value of a human life. However, I do agree with the fact that if an experiment does go wrong that the "failed experiment" should not be let back out into the world.
If the animal isn't severely hurt or killed, then yes. HOWEVER, if the animal is changed and then released back into the wild, then no. For example, changing an animals DNA and then having it reproduce might result in a change in the species, including potential risk for the offspring to have a genetic disease or illness that might end up wiping out the species if that child then carries it out, allowing the disease to spread until it reaches a point where things like cancer and death become more common. I cannot stress this enough. Don't put your test subjects back into the world. I hate field testing for lots of things (like cosmetic products, antibiotics, etc) due to the risk of injuring other people and animals.
All in all, if you've pretty much fucked up the animals entire way of life, you'd might as well kill it when you're done.
You cannot change the DNA of an animal in a way that makes it's offspring have that DNA, doing so would likely kill the animal and cause cancer.
You can't really say "are". There is a lot of opinions of how people was created, but no proof. We have to belive what we think is the right. If you "think" that is how Humans were made I respect that, but there should never be a fact for nothing we cant prove.
And yes I read the whole post ^-^ Would just like to chare these words of mine.
There is a difference between opinion and validated fact.
No they shouldn't, we are NOT the animals being tested, no matter how much evidence we may or may not have, we do not know if what we are doing to what ever anima is hurting them.. We could be injecting something that gives them an excruciatingly painful disease or causing them to fall ill and drop dead. That isn't fair. Just because not all animals are as "intelligent" as us it doesnt mean they don't deserve to freely roam this earth like we do. I say leave animals alone, apart from when we DEPEND on them to survive (such as getting food) and we decease them in a non painful way, as that is pretty much part of nature. But grabbing an innocent, unsuspecting animals and jabbing needles and guzzling chemicals into it is inhumane and unfair. My opinion.
It's a very sick and inhumane truth, however it is the truth and will remain the truth for time to come. Is it unfair? Yes. However, animals outside of the human race are not born with the potential humans are. This may sound cruel but once again, it is the cold, hard truth. A lab rats life is less valuable than a human beings. Also, money comes into play. It is much cheaper to pick up a batch of six rats then it would be six willing human beings. Everything goes back to money and personal gain, which is why making animal testing obsolete with what we have now is nowhere near a reasonable answer.
Woah guys and girls.. Generally you don't go around jabbing needles full of pain into animals, you'd analyse it in a lab to predict what it's effects would be. If something is a known carcinogen for example, you wouldn't bother using it on an animal, because you know it wouldn't work on humans.
Contrary to popular belief, scientists know about the chemicals they study.
You cannot change the DNA of an animal in a way that makes it's offspring have that DNA, doing so would likely kill the animal and cause cancer.
There's a little thing called natural selection and I don't want it to turn into "artificial selection". If an entire species is going to go extinct because of our urge to be scientifically advanced passed the point that we are right now, then it bothers me. If it's our entire race vs another species entire race, they can go ahead and kill it off because I'd rather we all live than some less advanced species. I just don't want change that ruins an animal's way of life.
Seeing animals tested on really pains me. It's like testing new drugs on other humans, see if they die or not. Would you sacrifice your last breath to save the entire human race if a decease broke out? I sure would. Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes. I am always against it, but I can see the justice if it's for medical reasons, to save innocent lives.
To save humanity, to save life.
These areas of discussion can strongly upset others, though.
Lol, did you ever read The Maze Runner series?
If you haven't, do because I think you will like it xD
Seeing animals tested on really pains me. It's like testing new drugs on other humans, see if they die or not. Would you sacrifice your last breath to save the entire human race if a decease broke out? I sure would. Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes. I am always against it, but I can see the justice if it's for medical reasons, to save innocent lives.
To save humanity, to save life.
These areas of discussion can strongly upset others, though.
Are you suggesting that dyslexic people are less developed than your average human? Because that seems kinda insulting to people with dyslexia comparing them with apes. My cousin has dyslexia and gets straight 80%+ marks and all he needed was a little help to "treat" it a bit ("treat" in quotations because you don't actually "treat" it). All it does is rearrange the letter order of words, for example it would change "Insulting" to "Suntinling". Please look up what your talking about before making such a seemingly ignorant comment. dyslexia does not inhibit the functionality of your brain in any way besides screwing up the letter order of words.
If you did not mean so, apologies, but that comment pretty strongly suggests that dyslexic people are " challenged", which would be very ignorant, insulting to some and incorrect. I suggest you watch the wording you use before making such comments in the future to avoid such confusion. ("Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes.")
Also, Humans are no more developed than Apes, so that is also incorrect.
@OP
Only for medical and serious scientific purposes. If you have to severely injure the animal, kill it, or alter it without breeding, no.
Are you suggesting that dyslexic people are less developed than your average human? Because that seems kinda insulting to people with dyslexia comparing them with apes. My cousin has dyslexia and gets straight 80%+ marks and all he needed was a little help to "treat" it a bit ("treat" in quotations because you don't actually "treat" it). All it does is rearrange the letter order of words, for example it would change "Insulting" to "Suntinling". Please look up what your talking about before making such a seemingly ignorant comment. dyslexia does not inhibit the functionality of your brain in any way besides screwing up the letter order of words.
If you did not mean so, apologies, but that comment pretty strongly suggests that dyslexic people are " challenged", which would be very ignorant, insulting to some and incorrect. I suggest you watch the wording you use before making such comments in the future to avoid such confusion. ("Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes.")
Also, Humans are no more developed than Apes, so that is also incorrect.
@OP
Only for medical and serious scientific purposes. If you have to severely injure the animal, kill it, or alter it without breeding, no.
Sorry if I sounded offending. I sincerely didn't intend it.
There's a little thing called natural selection and I don't want it to turn into "artificial selection". If an entire species is going to go extinct because of our urge to be scientifically advanced passed the point that we are right now, then it bothers me. If it's our entire race vs another species entire race, they can go ahead and kill it off because I'd rather we all live than some less advanced species. I just don't want change that ruins an animal's way of life.
I don't really see how species being wiped out is related to animal testing in any way, could you please elaborate?
Seeing animals tested on really pains me. It's like testing new drugs on other humans, see if they die or not. Would you sacrifice your last breath to save the entire human race if a decease broke out? I sure would. Humans are animals, we are just more, developed. Shall we say? Imagine testing on a really dyslexic kid. That's what we're doing when we experiment on animals, such as apes. I am always against it, but I can see the justice if it's for medical reasons, to save innocent lives.
To save humanity, to save life.
These areas of discussion can strongly upset others, though.
Found what you said about "a really dyslexic kid" quite mean, it's like you compare them to a lab rat and think of them as 'lower species' than people without dyslexia... Sorry if you meant this in a different way. ANYWAY, I think that testing on animals IS in humane, but must be done, how else are we eventually going to find a cure for some of the major diseases in life? US, human beings, are at the top of the eco-system, therefore letting us do what we like to the world, this cannot be changed with a few protests against animal testing. And they don't do it as inhumanly as many might think: "jabbing needled into the body wherever they want to." These people ARE scientists, they know what they are doing and unfortunately it has to be done.
This website is an archive of data gathererd by Avicus Network LLC between the years of 2013 and 2017
Copyright Ⓒ 2012-2017 Avicus Network LLC. All Rights Reserved