Animal testing is the use of non-human animals in experiments that seek to control the variables that affect the behavior or biological system under study. Examples of applied research include testing disease treatments, breeding, defense research, and toxicology, including cosmetics testing. In education, animal testing is sometimes a component of biology or psychology courses. There is no nationwide ban on animal testing in the United States. The humane society estimates that more than 50 million dogs, cats, monkeys, rabbits, rats and other animals undergo testing each year in the US.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of Animal Testing
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
No
@9GS769Q2yrs2Y
We should not do animal testing, it is cruelty for our own benefit. Only animals that produce food should be harmed not animals who don't for no reason.
@9GT9X2H2yrs2Y
Depending on what u use to test the animals they could die and ur basically a murderer and animal abuser and you would be killing that animal for no reason.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
No, now you know that your drug is not safe and to not give it to a person. It was either the animal or a person who would die to that drug or whatever.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
Animals exist to serve us humans, by either producing food, materials for clothing and stuff, or to use as "dummies" to test safety of various things. Their lives are expendable compared to a human life.
@9FLRDWHWomen’s Equality2yrs2Y
-It’s unethical to sentence 100 million thinking + feeling animals to life in a laboratory cage and causing them pain, loneliness, and fear.
-The National Institutes of Health reports that 95 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail in humans.
It’s all very wasteful.
-Animal experiments prolong the suffering of people waiting for cures because the results mislead experimenters and waste money, time, and other resources that could be spent on human relevant research. Animal experiments are so worthless that up to half of them are never published.
-The world doesn’t need another stupid funded test on animals so that an experimenter can continue riding the grant gravy train that they are receiving.
@9FBKQ6TWomen’s Equality2yrs2Y
dont test things on animals they are living things like we are. they have a life and they need to live their life.
@SomberCapitalistGreen2yrs2Y
Many life-saving treatments and vaccines, such as the polio vaccine, have been developed thanks to animal testing.
Let's take the case of insulin, for example. Before the discovery of insulin, diabetes was a fatal disease. Dogs played a crucial role in the discovery and development of insulin in the early 20th century. Without animal testing, we wouldn't have this life-saving treatment for diabetes that benefits millions of humans today.
Whilst I understand and deeply respect your point, I ask you to consider this: If not animals, then what alternative do you propose to ensure the safety and effectiveness of new medical treatments and vaccines?
@9GRFGB62yrs2Y
Criminals if you want to use living beings so much, animals are innocent living beings, criminals are not
@9GXT4L4 1yr1Y
That's a massive violation to the 8th amendment. While I do support animal rights, and definitely think it should be limited and heavily regulated to life saving research, preferably as non-invasive as possible, subjecting any human to that kind of treatment is completely contrary to the right to not be subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Not only that, but who do you think this would really affect? Murderers, rapists, and pedophiles; or wrongly convicted individuals and minorities? Personally it depresses me that an animal had to suffer for us to progress in life saving care. But… Read more
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
their purpose of existence is to serve humans and help us improve our technology and feed our population.
@9FMM2V52yrs2Y
These disease or health problems that have been founded using animal testing, some examples are the polio vaccine, or insulin for diabetes.
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
Yes
@9GSW7SP2yrs2Y
Testing on animals is almost like testing on humans, while, yes, testing on humans would be the only other option, but animals are living things too, they have feelings just like humans do and don't deserve to die because of some test that's being conducted on them when they don't even get any form of a say in it
@9XSDBT26mos6MO
Animals being alive and having feelings is irrelevant. The political system, and by extension, the medical system, exists to serve human interests. If those interests come at the expense of a few hundred-thousand lab animals, then so be it. The political and medical consequences of making this illegal far outweigh any benefit. And just to be clear, there is no benefit whatsoever to making this practice illegal, beyond placating a minority of people who stand to gain nothing as well. The concept of "animal rights" does not exist in practice, and serious pursuit in its favor is a fraudulent act. So to argue this from an animal rights angle isn't a compelling case.
@9GP32F92yrs2Y
I say no beacue thats animal abuse and isn't right. It could harm animals and we need animals in the world.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
We need animals for food. Some animals are useless and don't need to live. Like rats, what do rats do for us, besides being able to be used for tests and experiments? Wild cats? What do they do? Viciously kill and eat humans who wander too far and get lost? They actually don't even deserve to live, unless they can be used for testing and experiments.
@9GQMT5J2yrs2Y
animals have no way of saying how they feel and are forced to do testing they shouldn't be put through
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
testing necessary to test the safety of things before putting a person through it and potentially killing them. Would you rather a human die or an animal die to a failed experiment?
@9GRVYDR2yrs2Y
If you had acid poured on you almost everyday of you short life, how would you feel? Now think about how those animals feel.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
Animals are inferior to people, no one cares how they feel. Their only purpose is to benefit humans. If it was a pet, yes that is cruel, but if it was on a wild animal, who cares?
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
Yes, but not for cosmetics
@9FLS4462yrs2Y
No animals are living beings and should not be subjected to testing that could kill them and they can't consent to it. Animals are living breathing beings and should not be treated like inanimate objects that are only here to benefit humans.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
animals are only here to benefit humans!!!
Animals are beings of nature, just as we are and just as we have been since the beginning of time. You wouldn’t want to see your family pet be abused and poked and prodded with needles, so why are these other animals any different? Why shouldn’t we practice on other humans, wouldn’t that show how makeup and devices and other things work on human skin or how well they work with humans better than animals?
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
The value of a pet comes from the owner's view and love of them. If no person loves that animal like a pet, then that animals' live is worthless and expendable.
@9FMHPCFWomen’s Equality2yrs2Y
I feel we should not test any product on any animals I feel we should test them on the criminals on death row, the criminals that have been given live sentence. Because the animals don't desurve to be tested on.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
First of all, I don't think there are enough criminals on death row anyways. But most importantly, murderers deserve to die in a similar fashion to how they killed their victim, not by being experimented on like an animal.
@9FLRDWHWomen’s Equality2yrs2Y
The harmful use of animals in experiments is not only cruel but also often ineffective. Animals do not naturally get the diseases that humans do. Such as types of heart disease, many types of cancer, HIV, Parkinson’s disease or schizophrenia. Signs of these diseases are artificially induced in animals in laboratories in an attempt to mock the human disease. These experiments belittle the human conditions which are affected by wide ranges of variables. (Ex: genetics and psychological issues)
@8JPQVPY5yrs5Y
Yes but heavily regulated.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
depends what you mean by "heavily regulated"
@8M2N46D5yrs5Y
No, not for cosmetics. Drugs should only be tested on animals if it is believed that the drug could improve the animal's health.
@89S67K7Independent5yrs5Y
No, use inmates that are serving life or death sentences and offer incentives for other inmates to volunteer.
@9B3BGKK2yrs2Y
Yes, but only for certain animals such as mice and rats
@8PW2KJP 4yrs4Y
Yes, animal testing is necessary for understanding the safety and proper dosages of new medicines and treatments. It would be dangerous and extremely unethical for scientists to test drugs on humans before making sure they are safe. Even though the testing might be harmful to the tested animal, I believe its sacrifice advances developments on medicine that could save millions of lives, both human and not.
@99GH9PQ2yrs2Y
Easy for you to say; you're not the one being sacrificed. If human lives are at stake then test on humans. You'll get better results and the medical industries will be forced to rethink and reduce their exploitative methods. In any event animals don't belong to us to do as we please.
@97XMXQB2yrs2Y
No, it is cruel, expensive and ineffective
@9HB5MKV1yr1Y
Yes, but never for superficial discoveries and only if the animals suffer zero pain or distress whatsoever
@9F7XJ6K2yrs2Y
Vermin types of animals but not animals that are like deer, dogs, sheep, cows, etc.
@DelightfulCivilRights2yrs2Y
Why are vermin animals different?
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
Because they don't do anything useful for us and if anything they harm us, so we can put them to good use and give them a purpose here, by being our test subjects for experiments and stuff
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
I agree, animals that are useful to us in other ways, either for food or house pets shouldn't be test subjects for experiments.
@9N92GYS11mos11MO
Yes, but never for superficial discoveries like cosmetics and only if the animals suffer zero discomfort
@9DDDH6X2yrs2Y
Yes, but should be held to a high standard in caring for them and no cruelty
@9HKRSQP 1yr1Y
Yes but only if the testing is not torture, sexual, or harmful. It must be done quickly and safely. Animals should be released after testing and taken care of. Also, animal testing should not be used in cosmetics.
@88PJVZX3yrs3Y
@8FR4FG55yrs5Y
@B4Y58X42wks2W
no you should use the people who are in prison for life to test on a real human being instead of an animal
@9FN36HC2yrs2Y
@9SV9J3J8mos8MO
To a degree, but they should compare it to some of the older stuff that has passed just to ensure nothing bad is in it beforehand.
@9HPGPWS1yr1Y
Yes, but not for cosmetics, and there should be strict regulations in place to ensure testing is as humane as possible.
@9DRSNNX2yrs2Y
@9DMBKZL 2yrs2Y
Yes, but not for cosmetics and must be under regulations to keep the research humane and ethical. If the research facilities cannot keep within standards the research must be shut down.
@9FN5MVV2yrs2Y
depends on the age and type of animal
@9L4Z23BIndependent 1yr1Y
No, products made for humans should be tested by humans, with a waiver acknowledging the risks and include compensation for testing, and any addition compensation for injuries
@9GJTNP92yrs2Y
No for cosmetics and medical. However, they can be used for drug safety and vaccine testing if ethical considerations are made.
@9GD75RN2yrs2Y
No, animal testing is not only inhumane, it is also expensive, ineffective, and cruelty free alternatives have been developed
Yes, but not for cosmetics or any superficial discovery. All animals must receive anesthesia and other treatments to remove any amount of pain and suffering
@9D3RPBQ2yrs2Y
No animal testing is inaccurate and dangerous not to mention unethical to animals.
@8FWB96X5yrs5Y
No, use prison inmates instead.
@9MFBRSL12mos12MO
Yes, but never for cosmetics or other superficial discoveries and only if the animals suffer no discomfort or distress
Yes, but not for superficial discoveries and only if measures are taken to prevent any pain for the animals.
@9F9W6JT2yrs2Y
Yes, but it has to be humane
@9FMM2KR2yrs2Y
@9D8ZLH22yrs2Y
Yes, but only on mice and rats
@9D6D9XD2yrs2Y
yes, but only if the animal is dying prior to the testing.
@BallotMacawDemocrat2yrs2Y
if an animal has cancer its ok to test?
@8VVXBKX4yrs4Y
@983Y7442yrs2Y
no and if they do, they should receive a criminal offense and charges
@8YMRPCVIndependent3yrs3Y
Yes, and allow specific people for testing as well, like rapists and serial killers.
@8Y6ZVGLIndependent3yrs3Y
This is the best answer mate!
Yes, but in an ethical way
@974J5JH3yrs3Y
As long as it does not kill, harm, or injure the animals in any way. But we should breed and only use certain animals for testing.
@8XC449M3yrs3Y
No that’s disgusting and you’re an awful human being if you do that.
@8SFTKXH4yrs4Y
No, abolish all vaccines and mass exterminate all animals that aren’t used for livestock or food, including pets
@984SJNR2yrs2Y
No, Because if they aren't safe then they could kill the animals.
@8CZX2935yrs5Y
@8GQP23H5yrs5Y
No use prisoners on death row
we can use humans that already have that disease, there are 8 billion humans on the planet
@8GY6QN35yrs5Y
No, animals cannot consent to such treatment and regardless of how we may feel about them, they are not people
@8TMX5T44yrs4Y
Yes, but animals should be treated humanely.
@8RQR3GQ4yrs4Y
No, use human volunteers instead.
@8NZPC4B5yrs5Y
Yes, as long as it is done humanely.
@9CCW2F72yrs2Y
No , use pedophiles and rapists
@984MWQ82yrs2Y
@8HKQR7G5yrs5Y
No, we have the technology to replicate human flesh for cosmetics. Animals can't consent to testing, but people can. Use cedavers and other human resources.
@974HSKH3yrs3Y
i mean pour animals but its better to know more then not enough
@9BLK65R2yrs2Y
No, not for cosmetics. Drugs should only be tested on animals if it is truly believed that the drug could improve the animal's health.
@9853CDF2yrs2Y
No, that’s animal cruelty
@8L36XSWLibertarian5yrs5Y
No, and allow prisoners to be test subjects for a reduced sentence for non violent crimes
@9BV94WQ2yrs2Y
yes because there are farms that breed mice for this specific use.
@lemans34272yrs2Y
While it is true that some farms breed mice for research purposes, the fact remains that animals experience pain and suffering during testing. This raises ethical concerns that cannot be ignored. Additionally, the use of animals in testing is not always reliable as animals do not always react to drugs or devices in the same way as humans do. This can lead to false positives or negatives, which can have serious consequences for human health. Therefore, it is imperative that we find more ethical and reliable alternatives to animal testing. What do you suggest as an alternative to animal testing?
@97YBR4P2yrs2Y
No, this is barbaric and exploitative.
@968CDRM3yrs3Y
No, this is animal cruelty
@9CF4CF62yrs2Y
@93VNTZH3yrs3Y
Yes as long as it is humane and within acceptable limits according to animal abuse laws.
@8Q29L26Republican 4yrs4Y
That could be considered animal cruelty in a way. Plus animals' minds don't work the same as humans' minds do.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
