Topic Of The Week: Animal Testing - For or Against?

I disagree with animal testing. The fact remains that as similar as human DNA is to an animals, it is NOT the same. That is why even after all the testing a drug takes to pass FDA, sometimes they STILL have to be recalled. And in most cases, the drug is being reviewed for almost 10yrs before it is approved. With science being able to test at a cell level, I dont believe animal testing is necessary.
 
What would the alternative be to animal testing? Go straight to human testing? Even with all the animal testing they still have to do clinical trials on humans before they approve a drug. There's still way more drugs that are safe compared to those that are recalled.
 
^No one is saying that we should stop all medical testing.

My point is that scientists should at least look at alternatives to using animals.

In a lot of ways, researchers would save money because a good chunk of their money goes into housing, feeding and caring for animals which by law they have to do. Unfortunately not all scientists are ethical and some of them may not treat the animal as a living creature, just a test subject with no feelings-not all scientists just a few.

Here in North America, everyone gets their back up when the issue of animal research is brought up because we tend to go to extremes in this part of the world. Rather then talking to one another logically, we resort to trashing labs, threatening researchers, bomb threats etc. In retaliation, the scientists grow more secretive of their work.

Back in the early 80s, there was a country in Europe where questions were brought up about animal use in resarch labs. Instead of shirking way, researchers opened up their labs to the public to show how well the animals were looked after.

North American is so extreme in its reactions to debates. It's rather sad actually.
 
There are thousands of people every day who call an exterminator to get rid of animals that we deem to be vermin. Some people think without hesitation when these vermin infest our homes and make our lives miserable. They don't bat an eye to it, but as soon as SOME PEOPLE hear that people will start testing on animals, they raise hell in an effort to protest.

I don't like it personally, and I don't like that it's something that unfortunately needs to be done. I don't like the suffering of animals, I don't like the suffering of anyone, but as cruel as it may sound...it's something that's a necessary evil. I think that while it is a necessary evil, the animals should go through as little testing as possible, that they should go through as little
suffering as possible.

Edit: I only use all caps on SOME PEOPLE because I want to enunciate the fact that not everyone is like that, only some people, and I'm not pointing out to anyone on the board.
 
that article is kinda pointless...the person talks about questioning students, but it is done in the 80s, where people's perception of AIDs wasn't the best. if that was done now, the answers would be completely different. besides the fact the study presented in the article is not remotely scientific.....
Click to expand...

Hmm...That article wasn't intended for justifying the support/against animals testing, scientifically or whatever. I was just using it to emphasize my opinion that it is not black or white, that people weigh importance/values differently. That's all.

Like was stated earlier...how do we know the animals are really in pain? Maybe they don't have the same kind of nervous system as humans.
Click to expand...

How does one know they aren't really in pain? When animals get beaten up, they yelp. Why? Because they can feel pain.
 
in some cases, animals are the best way to find out if the effects of a treatment are statistically significant. with humans, they may not get enough volunteers to make a proper sample size. also, there are lurking variables that may influence the outcome of a study that can be controlled in animal populations but not humans. for example, they use animals from the same litters in the same test groups so that they all have similar genotypes. this way, one is not more likely to succeed because of genetics than an other. you cant say to a woman 'we want you to have 50 children with the same man in the next two years and then hand them over to us' just doesnt work.
infact, thats what they had to do to prove smoking causes cancer. even though they could see that smokers had a higher rate of lung cancer, the tobacco industry would argue that people who were more likely to develop cancer could be more likely to choose to smoke. and you cant take 1000 nonsmokers and say 'this half is going to smoke, this half isnt' so they used beagles. i thought it sounded ridiculous, but ive grown up knowing that smoking causes cancer, they werent sure at that time. they were just trying to do the most unbiased study possible for the public.
some animals are also used to produce pharmaceuticals that we rely on to live. the antibodies found in most vaccines cant be manufactured so animals are injected with dilute solutions of the virus and their antibodies are harvested. is this animal cruelty? they are living in labs and repeatedly poked with a needle, but how many diseases have been wiped out because vaccines are first tested on, and then produced by animals? an other one is antivenom. it is admittedly a hard and stressful procedure on the snake to be milked, and again horses and goats are injected with it to harvest antibodies. but what happens to you from a snake bite, depending on the venom, is some of the worst things i have ever seen. the perfection and production of these anibodies, through animal research, has saved thousands of lives.
as much as we all hope this might stop one day, there really isnt a good way to test drugs, treatments or therapies without a living body.
 
Ok but by the same effect then we shouldn't arrest people for abusing their animals by not feeding or leaving them outside with no shelter. With testing they are abusing animals (any way you put it they are intentionally hurting the animals). For the greater good we do animal testing but Hitler also thought ridding the Jews was for the greater good for a perfect society.
 
i would really like to know where people get this information that test animals live in horrible conditions and are abused.
http://www.apa.org/science/anguide.html
this is an article that outlines the guidelines of getting approved for research and maintaining the study. how many people here have actually been to a research lab? i volunteer in one, i walk the dogs. their cages are cleaned every day, they get out for exercise every day, they always have access to food and water, are groomed and bathed on a regular basis, and there isnt a mean dog in that building.
these animals are treated better than some people treat their pets, ive never heard of a scientist lighting a lab rat on fire and kicking it down the street, but of heard of a person doing that to their own cat. these labs are under supervision to ensure they are opperating within the law.
 
Yeah that is a great outline of what should be done but how do we know that that is what is always followed. When a product is very close to becoming a cure, the pressure would be on and maybe protocols will not be followed.

From your article

E. Experimental procedures that require prolonged aversive conditions or produce tissue damage or metabolic disturbances require greater justification and surveillance. These include prolonged exposure to extreme environmental conditions, experimentally induced prey killng, or infliction of physical trauma or tissue damage. An animal observed to be in a state of severe distress or chronic pain that cannot be alleviated and is not essential to the purposes of the research should be euthanized immediately.

So basically put them in pain and if can't fix it kill em.

allmaple you volunteer at on but have you seen any experiments being performed on them?
 
Totally against! I´m with the associations for animal rights and makes me sick what ppl do with some animals...

I´m sorry but i´m an animal lover and i think some ppl are not worth living...
 
I'm against, I can't take animal testing its so... well yeah cruel. Enough said.

Wait, if there was cruel and unusual punishments for animals, animal testing would be one of them.
 
I think cruel and unusual punishment for animals is having owners that abuse them. There have been several cases where I live where cats, dogs, horses, etc were starved, lived in filth, had no water, etc. You could see their ribs they were so undernourished. I've seen goat heads cut off and hung on poles. Cats and dogs killed for fun. All of this within the last year. Nobody thinks about things like that. I'm sure the test animals are treated much better than that.

Other than the experiments they put the animals through, there shouldn't be any abuse.
 
Yes but some companies don't do that. My english teacher made us read a paper about Animal testing and they had this place... that I'm having issues remembering the name of, where they had puppies and other animals cut open so they could do testing, which I think is horrible, they showed us graphic pictures that I do NOT want to see again.
Anyway thats just what I read, I'm sure that company was shut down, and I'm sure that there all not like that but after I read that I'm still against.
 
where i volunteer the experiments are mostly nutrtional studies and how different diets affect organ function and overall health. there are some beagles that are in behaviour studies and their activities are strictly monitored so i cant walk them anymore. can you tell me where the cruelty is in that? they eat food, have blood work and xrays done every now and then, and some of them are video taped.
ive met the researchers and they arent evil scientists. theyre there to do the best job they can. some of you try and say there are unethical researchers out there who abuse their animals. but lets get realistic here guys. these labs work with millions of dollars in grant money, they have to follow laws that protect the animals. they are inspected and if the animals are being mistreated they cant hide that. what scientist is going to risk their funding by not cleaning out the cages every day? who wants to be known as 'that scientist who almost cured cancer but didnt want to feed their rats every day'?
 
kou_seiya_girl said:
I´m sorry but i´m an animal lover and i think some ppl are not worth living...
Click to expand...

I love animals too.

Ya know, some of those "what the do them" may be just some urban legens or were done decades ago but still go on.
I know at least in EU countries they have pretty strict rules and stuff when it comes to this kind of stuff. It has to be because the strict rules that go e.g. with farming (cattle) and believe me, EU looks after those very very well and you cannot get away from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top