No, animal testing is wrong no matter what. There are other more efficient (and much more accurate) ways of testing. Testing on poor helpless animals is extremely wrong, and unreliable. Our bodies aren't the same as theirs, and using them for testing just provides false results, which can end up taking many lives.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(Thatbitch):What are some example that are more effiecent that doesn't use people (Cause Test drugs could, like, kill someone, you know?) Cause Animal testing helps on how something reacts on a living creature without risking human lives.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(Shut The Fuck Up): Because risking animal lives is so much better.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(S.): They don't have the same type of realization as humans do

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(Shut The Fuck Up): Why don't they test it on humans then?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Like I said, cause a human life is to valuable AND you get sued when you accidentally kill someone

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(Shut The Fuck Up): Computer models could be used, or in vitro studies.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No computer we have is detailed enough to simulate an environment as complex as a living organism. Yes, animals are different from humans, but in many ways we are VERY similar, especially if testing is done on mammals (such as mice). The result won't be exactly the same but is really valuable to the research process...much more so than doing no real testing at all.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, computers can be used to simulate a living organism. And that's only one alternative, there's still in vitro, microdosing, and research on stem cells. Testing on animals is a HUGE waste of time. Yes, sometimes it is sucessful, but there's so many examples of how unreliable it is. Do some research on it and you'll see.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

thank you, I completely agree with you. I have recently done a large research paper on why testing on animals is horrible and everyone of your reasons came up in my studies. Almost 100 million animals are killed for little gain each year in Europe. Most of the time the animals yield no positive results in furthering research.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

To the people who said "no way," if you've ever recieved a flu vaccine, you've promoted animal testing (well not really "testing," but vaccines are grown in live chicken eggs, which is why you can't get the vaccine if you're allergic to eggs). Or if anyone you know has ever taken a prescription drug of any kind (or even non-prescription but FDA-approved), you've promoted animal testing. Animal testing is kind of sad, but the gains FAR outweigh the costs. And obviously this isn't the case everywhere, but labs are extremely humane. (I should know, I work in one :))

by Anonymous 13 years ago

My step mom works on mice in her lab at the college in our town. They study the mice and the affects of alcohol, so they're learning more about alcoholism, which with the amount of drunk driving, could help us immensely. I've seen the mice, and they live in cages with their families, with plenty of food and water (or alcohol, depending on the mouse and study at the time). It lives good life, longer than it would in the wild, and when it's time for it to die so they can study the brain, they give it a shot so it can't feel a thing and is motionless (though living), and kill it. It's *VERY* humane, and it's helping society. Shouldn't that be allowed? Now, if it's causing pain to the animals, no. And if it's for something like make up, no. Then we're using it for superficial reasons. But for things like finding cures to diseases and learning more about alcoholism, there will be more lives saved than lives lost (and the lives lost for the cures are very, very good and they die painlessly.)

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(Shut The Fuck Up): @334038 (Shut The Fuck Up): @334368 (utstudent): Animal testing is wrong, just because they can't fight against our freakishly advanced race, doesn't give us means to use them for our own benefit. Now while that seems humane, there should be no question in the first place. @334462 (Anonymous):

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Except that it IS humane. I have seen the conditions in which these mice live. They're HAPPY. Trust me, it's really cute when I get to go play with them and they're running around with their family in the cages. And it's helping us learn more to help people. It's giving mice a safe place to live where they can be with family and friends with food and water/alcohol until, after about a month (longer than their lifespan in the wild), they die PAINLESSLY to help science.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You say animal testing is wrong - but I bet most of you are hypocrites when you say that. Animals are meant to kill animals to benefit themselves. That's how nature works. Stop being a pussy and deal with it.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Animals kill each other every day for food - you've probably eaten animals before. We're doing simply what animals do. I can guarantee you that more than thousands of humans wouldn't be alive today because of tests on mice. Now, are you saying a mouse's life is more valuable than a human's?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It's the natural process in life. those mice are going to die one day, by a predator or naturally. if it's for a good reason and if it's humane they may as well be useful. it's like not donating your organs for a stupid reason.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

also if the people that voted no way aren't vegans or pure vegetarian, leave

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I do not believe in animal testing. I do understand that many of today's products are around and so successful due to animal testing however did those animals have a say to be experimented on? A human can voice their opinion and state whether or not they are comfortable with being tested on and they receive large compensation for allowing themselves for testing. This topic is extremely controversial, we could test products on animals and possibly produce a successful product, however we could also test products on humans and it could go wrong thus leaving that company with a major law suit.....so society are against animal testing which I agree with, but the companies can not afford to test on humans so it is a sad case.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Us humans take the lives of other animals for granted. We don't know how hard other animals work to survive but all we have to do is go to the market. At the rate we're eating other animals now, they could become extinct too soon. We need to learn how to balance our consumption of other organisms.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(ms.rite): What your talking about is total crap, are chickens close to going extinct? NO. Cows? NO. Sheep? NO. I don't understand how any of the animals we're eating are "going extinct"

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I'd say it's all alright, as long as it does something useful.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Lol animals we eat going extint? Don't talk out your ass cuz you wanna prove a point. Its the natural food chain, the circle of life, survival of the fittest. Survival of the fittest being the most important, humans are at the top of the food chain for a reason. We do what's necessary to survive. If you oppose animal testing so much go volunteer yourself for medicinal studies and save a few mice. No? Then stfu.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Lol animals we eat going extint? Don't talk out your ass cuz you wanna prove a point. Its the natural food chain, the circle of life, survival of the fittest. Survival of the fittest being the most important, humans are at the top of the food chain for a reason. We do what's necessary to survive. If you oppose animal testing so much go volunteer yourself for medicinal studies and save a few mice. No? Then stfu.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

More animals are killed for eating than for testing though.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The way the world works is natural selection, and no matter how compassionate we try to be, we will have to put ourselves before other species if it comes to it. For make-up testing and that kind of crap, absolutely not. It's not helping humans survive and is completely trivial, so the deaths of small animals isn't worth it. But for curing cancer and that stuff, I believe that testing on smaller animals is worth the hundreds of saved lives later. Also, most of the animals tested on lack a complex mind and suffer little to none of the psychological horror that us humans would if subjected to the same treatment. If we make sure they feel no physical pain either, they really couldn't care less; it's just another death in life. And even if they did have advanced minds, they lack the medical advances humans have, so they're probably used to it and death will not affect them as it does us.

by Anonymous 13 years ago