Debate animal testing

ok this might have been a tread already, when i was back in Debates, the one about the tiger thingy well i was wondering.....


Quote :Fushigi Rockna
Aren't you just the cutest little <*Ahem*- Ark>. How cruel and unhumane of you! Animals deserve to live as well, we are not the only race living on this planet and we are certainly not the most important. Don't you know the reason the tasmanian tiger died? Because humans started hunting it, they fought it was an evil beast like they did the platapus and many more of Australia's animals. And you're acting like the government is paying for all of this. <*AHEM*- Ark>.
End Quote

there you said we arent the most important race on the planet but what about us testing on animals i know they don't die from people hunting them but does them being on this planet with us give us the right to test on them?

~hope this isn't a repeat thread~

 

ITS DISCUSTING!!:anger2:

I am greatly against animal testing. If the product is for humans i say test it on humans! What makes use superior to them so much that we can just take their lives away? Hunting is one thing and this is another. IF we dont hunt we may die of hunger but if we dont do animal testings. . . . .i am pretty sure we will still be here. So we should stop! I am sure there are enough computer programs, or chemical testers that now know what is harmfull to humans or animals. what ever happen to "do onto others as others would do to you". Animals dont go around and putting funny chemicals on use do they? . . . . . . . sorry if i am going a little over board but this is how i feel.

::Knods head in agreement to self::

 

: nods head in agreement to you too jaken:

 

A quote from Sealab, one of the best cartoons out there:


Quinn: You can't test drugs on humans! There are rules! Procedures! It has to be tested on animals first!

Sparks: Why? Why does all the crap we consume have to be tested on animals first? A rat doesn't wear lipstick, okay? A rabbit doesn't use hairspray! A monkey doesn't need pills to get ramped up for hot monkey sex! It's PEOPLE, man. We're miserable! So why SHOULDN'T we try it all first?

Quinn: ...Well, you've got a point there, actually. I'll try it.


Mind you, Sparks had created a drug to get everyone addicted so he could then start charging money for it, but the quote still works.

 

First of all, animals don't have secondary feelings. Therefore, they have no fear of death. If we tested on humans it just wouldn't be right. Unless you are a drifter, why would you risk your life for nothing? Maybe they would give you a large amount of money but hell, I might grow a 3rd arm or something. It just wouldn't be right, kind of like human cloning. Plus the fact that they test on animals that we dont welcome in the first place, such as rats.

 

Well whats wrong with rats? Yes animals do have a fear for death. Do you see zebras running right over to lions so they can eat them? No. . . . . And what? Its right to test it on another living creature. . . But not a human? Why is that right? How is that right? Its discusting! :anger2: What makes us so superior to them? Just becuase we are bigger? They dont deserve that no matter what anyone says or thinks!

Then the only thing that could make me even more mad. . . . is that you say Cloning animals is bad. . . .First you kill them. . .then when they become extinct you say its wrong to clone them! Whats up with that?!

 

Has a chicken ever built a skyscraper? Has a bunny ever wrote a poem? Has a pigeon ever formed its own religion?

The majority of animals are not sentient.

While I do not support testing cosmetics on animals, I do support the testing of medical things on them.

Why?

Well aside from the fact that a family of guppies or rats will go through their life cycles far far faster than humans (and hence show any ill effects of drugs much sooner, think of it as human evolution in fast forward), theres also the fact that they're cheap to produce, and in large enough numbers to produce credible results. While there will of course be differences between species-specific reactions, this makes a good first step.

Before you label me a sick mass murdering tool, let me make abundantly clear that I do not suppor testing on intelligent animals. That means no dolphins, whales, monkeys, gorillas, chimps and such.

Besides, if you had the chance to save thousands of human lives at the expense of hundreds of rat lives, wouldnt you take it? Since your view is that a life is a life, then you would, since, as there is no difference, hundreds of deaths are less than thousands.


EDIT: We are better than animals because we are sentient. Its possibly wrong to clone an extinct animal due to either its inability to survive in the modern ecosystem or due to catastrophic effects it may have, or possibly that we just cant get enough genetic variety for it to last anyway.

 

The only problem with your argument, Nephilim_X, is that in most medical cases the only way we make sure that new drugs will work for humans is by testing them on intelligent animals. Testing medicines on guppies or rats is basically useless because they're so different from us. That's why most medicines are tested on monkeys and other animals that have much more in common with us.

 

I make perfectly clear that I only support the testing on lesser animals. As there are tests done on these animals, my point is no less valid as I included a qualifier.

Besides, we're more similar than you probably realize. Rats and humans often suffer from the same diseases. That's because humans and rats have the same basic physiology, similar organs, and similar body plans. We both control our body chemistry using similar hormones, we both have nervous systems that work in the same way, and we both react similarly to infection and injury. There's absolutely no doubt that research on rats and other species has done a lot to advance modern medicine.

 

Yes, this is true. From what we know, a rat is only about five genes different than a human. A fish is only about eight.

And yet so much variety...

 

Ok everyone, here is a little somthing that i put together and want to show you. It is a collage of different things that animals get done to them. One a cat with one eye diolated another one a cat with a bar through its nose, rabbits and lots of um lined up to be tested with after shave and maskara. Then there is the monkey. If it didnt know any better why isnt it smiling? It doesnt look to happy that its there. WHat is the point in this? I dont think this is right. It made me sick just amking this.


This may be disurbing so if you get sick esily do not veiw this.


Here is is. . . .
Animal Testing Picture

 

That picture... The Horror....

I hate animal testing, and completely against it, even if it is little white mouse. What did they ever do to deserve such horrible fates, to die by torture by having different chemical and cosmetic put on them. If they should test these ****, they should test it on inmates who committed the worst atrocities ever know to man (like that Dahmer fellow, if he was alive).

btw I' a animal lover so my opinion could be biased

 

I am all for animal testing because it is necessary to protect humans and sometimes saves lives.

I think the sooner the human race stops seeing animals as friends and go back to seeing animals as food the better.

 

As I said above, I do not support testing on sentients or for cosmetics, so a good deal, if not all of that picture falls under my "No, thats bad. Bad scientist!" label.

What experiments where they for, though? Also, what era? Standards have changed. Additionally, how many % of animal testing is actually like this?

I didn't mention it above but I do have another qualifier, and that being that said experiments are not unnecessarily cruel.

 

Most medical testing is done on rats, due to thier fast life cycle and high genetic match to humans (97% if I recall right). Apes/Gorillas are used usually in behavoiral studies, which generally do not involve any cruelty, simply observing a lesser intelligent being to figure out how basic aspects of social behavoir and mammalian instincts work.

- Ark

 

Well the my reasons for supporting it is because I know nature is just as cruel to animals as we are if not moreso.

Diseases and things that eat them from the inside is scary stuff. Rats probably have a better life in a laboratory I dont know.

 

Tens your opinion sucks. And everyone else who is for ANIMAL CRUELTY.

This is a bad debate topic. Plus it ticks me off.

I am against animal testing. If the animal has a chance to get hurt then they shouldn't be tested on it. Most are defenseless animals. It is animal cruelty. I say any test that need to get done pay humans for it. This lets the human decided wither or not they want to be tested on.

Ten, you need a realty check. Humans CAN be worse then Mother Nature. I will gladly prove it to you sometime.

 

And you've done a wonderful job proving it.

Yeah, clearly having one opinion which you disagree with makes them vile, evil persons.

No, this is a GOOD debate topic. Its a controversial matter.

An interesting little thing here... as this thread began to get interesting I went to another board and decided to get their opinions. I find it intriguing how many call it a necessary evil, if evil at all.

 

Although I support medical testing, I DO NOT support the testing of animals for cosmetics.

Using an animal to find a cure for cancer is one thing, finding out if a lipstick will react with skin is another.

 

I think your right about testing cosmetics on animals. If anything is wrong that is and I think the cosmetics testing is the reason for a lot of bad feeling towards using animals to test on overall.

I really dont think women need to wear so much makeup but I think rats maybe do because they are a little scary and lets face it if you can make a rat look good you can make anything look good. Some blusher and lipstick maybe...errrmm well thats way of the point isnt it? Oh yeah and theres no need to do anymore testing on animals because all the cosmetics they will ever need is allready out there and is safe to use.

*still thinking about rats wearing lipstick*