Would you be a guinea pig for scientific or medical research?
Many animal advocacy groups have told us that we cannot use animals no longer. I agree with that only becasue animals are not like people. Would you be that test subject for find solutions to or cures for diseases and such?
Nope, because the medical establishment has no interest in ever curing any disease. Pharmaceuticals don't care about people, they care about their bottom line only. They'd rather chase symptoms and have people dependent on medicines for a lifetime than ever cure anything. I was almost killed by a prescription drug I should never have been put on because the pharmaceutical reps were pushing it on doctors. Never again will I trust the medical establishment. In those clinical trials - 14 people died out of 1,000, yet the FDA declared the drug "safe" and it was prescribed for several years before being given a "black box warning". Nope, no way no how would I ever be a guinea pig knowingly for big pharma to profit off of.
It really would depend on the circumstances and my own and my family's health, as well as how much I believed in the importance of the research.
Probably not. On the other hand, if a person has a terminal illness, he/she may say, 'Why not? What do I have to lose?' I can totally understand their point of view.
That being said I am 100 percent AGAINST using animals for research. I found a list on the internet of societies who ask for donations but allow animal research. I REFUSE to donate money to any of those organizations. Just the thought of these terrified caged animals makes me sick. I so loathe animal cruelty that I cannot read about it in the paper, or see a movie that it involves. And using animals for scientific or medical research is extremely cruel.
I agree with Christen - I truly believe many medications are just plain dangerous. I personally cannot take statins, decongestants or narcotics. They mess me up terribly.
I also agree with Christin that pharmaceuticals don't care about people. One of the medications my husband is on for diabetes would charge over $1,000 per month IF we did not have insurance. All they care about is making big money.
That being said, some medications are necessary...I have to take blood pressure pills, and those with diabetes must have insulin.
But I am certainly not a candidate to be a guinea pig, and I would have no desire to do so. Thank you for a great question. Blessings, Sparklea
It depends. I know from experience that you really don't know what you'd be willing to do if you were in a tight spot. Or if someone's life depended on you to do make such a sacrifice. I stung myself with honey bees for 20 years. Gave me my life back. Never thought I'd do that. And some thought I was just plain stupid. Why did I do it? I still had a child to raise after my husband died. I wasn't afraid of death but it did bother me to think that my child wouldn't have at least one parent to raise him. It was worth it.
As others have said, it might depend on the circumstance,When I found out my cancer-stricken cousin had volunteered for an experimental treatment, I asked her if she wanted to be a 'guinea pig' and she said she had gone through the conventional treatments, and -- even if this didn't help her, personally,-- it might help someone else. Which sounds reasonable and even generous.
If I had the illness in question, and my life depended on the research, I would likely opt in. Otherwise, my cynical self-serving tendencies would likely outweigh any altruistic motivation.
Definitely not and I do not agree that they should use animals either. Have they ever thought about using each other?
I think that most people who suffer from a serious illness are already statistics in the making. Depending on the severity of their illness taking a new experimental drug would be a viable alternative to many.
I suffer from a disease classed under the category of rare illnesses and it has been a real battle. Many individuals classed in this same category of illness are willingly taking experimental treatments.
It all comes down to how much pain, disability, or risk you are currently under. Plus I am sure that many healthier individuals would do it for the money if there was a monetary gain to be had.
So I guess the answer is yes. If I had a chance to get much closer to a normal life or a viable period of remission, you bet I would jump at it.
Never voluntarily, the other option won't matter, since new regulations, orders, or regimes implementations frequently come out as ' there isn't other choice but...'
I did it once before with no harmful effects. I was a guinea pig for a new allergy drug about 30 years ago. I tried to volunteer for a relatively harmless program recently, but they never answered my email, and I've even forgotten what it was now. I would not be as willing to volunteer for something serious like my epileptic friend did. He was very stable on his meds, and he volunteered for a study of a new medication. It threw him so far off that he never recovered. He ended up having brain surgery which debilitated him.
So, I would volunteer under only one of two conditions: the study would be relatively harmless, or I would be desperately ill and had nothing to lose.
I do not agree with experiments on animals of any kind, especially not testing cosmetics to make women more attractive. I worried the whole time the first monkey was in space.
If I absolutely knew with proof it was going to work, I would do it to save a life.
However these people are only out for money, so for myself personally, not a chance.
They can never offer full proof, no one can.
Technology is supposed to be so advanced, I am sure out there in this world, someone can figure out how to test, non human and non animal.
It's like cancer, money had gone into research for as long as I can remember and yet where does the money really end up. By now , with all the so called money they have raised, there should be a sure fire way to rid cancer. Technology Advanced remember.
Or here is a thought, maybe scientists/doctors do have a sure fire way, but they would lose millions if the research surfaced. Who knows.
I think specific circumstances have to be considered beforehand, such as the severity of the experiment, side-effects and short to long term complications.
It all depends on what aspect it is. If it is for the upper body then maybe so. If it is for the lower body then maybe not.
by Threekeys19 months ago
Can You Be Vegan and Also Carry Out Medical Research on Animals?If you say yes could you explain. If no? could you also elaborate.
by Steven Escareno6 years ago
Since I've been on hubpages and doing various research on movies that are fixing to come out and such, I noticed something highly strange that I never thought of before until now. Online, I notice all these users...
by awesome776 years ago
Coming from a very poor background, I have come to realize that most rich people do not give a rats ass about the poor! If in doubt, show me a rich person and you will see someone that has gone to great lengths to...
by Oztinato2 years ago
Is the scienctific method infallible?Like many ancient religions modern scientists regard their methods to be infallible. Is this the right attitude?
by princesspeac_9586 years ago
Is it okay for a guinea pig to be curious of food that they can not eat?My 10 month old male guinea pig is very loud when it comes to bananas, which I don't let him eat becuase of high potaissum. What should I do....
by kjmcivor17 years ago
I have a guinea pig that will not sit still to let me pet her, is there a way to get her to relax?She is about a year old and I wanted to know if she will settle down with age or if I can train her. Even when I...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.