jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (8 posts)

Do you think it is necessary to do animal testing?

  1. BlissfulWriter profile image67
    BlissfulWriterposted 6 years ago

    Do you think it is necessary to do animal testing?

    Do you think it is necessary to do animal testing in order to produce drugs and products for humans and to do research on disease processes?

  2. jandee profile image59
    jandeeposted 6 years ago

    NO................NO DEfinitely.......Not..

  3. profile image0
    Deb Welchposted 6 years ago

    I Googled this topic:  I am copying an alternative that was given, -  (There are alternatives to many tests that are currently done on animals - e.g. growing tissue or cell cultures from human cells in the laboratory.)  www.idebate.org  Animals are treated so badly that has been proven by PETA. No - I do not agree with the necessity of using animals for disease research.

  4. profile image0
    Gusserposted 6 years ago

    It sure beats letting humans die. PETA  is People Eating Tasty Animals.

  5. madmachio profile image61
    madmachioposted 6 years ago

    I'd rather a few lab rats die then a kid or fellow human. Rats (animals) are a lot cheaper then growing tissue. Now it doesn't mean be cruel to the animals, but if the results of testing hurts them, that's better then it happening on one of us.

  6. old albion profile image71
    old albionposted 6 years ago

    Regretfully I feel it is necessary. It is better that a rat dies in the name of research, than your mother for the lack of it.
    Graham.

  7. topquark profile image76
    topquarkposted 6 years ago

    I think that some animal testing is necessary to better understand disease and produce life-saving medications. However, I don't think that all the testing currently being carried out is necessary; some of it could be done in other ways. Cosmetics testing on animals is never justified, in my opinion.

  8. Jennifer Madison profile image89
    Jennifer Madisonposted 6 years ago

    I am not sure if those of you who support the testing of animals really know what it is about. Obviously, it is not only rats that suffer. In the US, about five million dogs, cats, rabbits, rats, monkeys, and other animals die from lethal tests performed on them. Substances are forced into the animals’ throats, pumped into their stomachs, where the substance causes stomach ruptures in some cases, injected into a vein, applied to the eyes, rectum and vagina or inhaled through a gas mask. The animals react by breathing hard, having diarrhea, bleeding from the eyes, nose or mouth. The animals sit terrified in their barren cages and as they are stressed, they show neurotic behaviors such as pulling out their own hair, shaking, rocking back and forth, biting themselves. If someone passes by their cage they cower in fear. Their life is marked by loneliness, terror and pain. There are already many companies that have turned their back to animal testing. They have done their homework: there are alternative tests such as testing on human cell cultures and tissue studies (in vitro tests) and artificial human “skin” and “eyes” that imitate the body’s natural properties. Computer virtual organs can also be used as accurate models of human body parts. EPISKIN™ and EpiDerm™ are multi-layered skin models that consist of cultures of human skin cells. These methods have been scientifically validated and accepted around the world as good replacements of animal testing.

    Companies that don't test on animals:

    Bobbi Brown
    Abercrombie & Fitch
    LIDO Skin Care
    Paul Mitchell Systems
    Carolina Herrera
    (amongst many others)

    Companies that do test on animals:

    L'oreal
    Dolce & Gabbana
    Estée Lauder
    Procter & Gamble
    Hugo Boss
    Johnson & Johnson (and the list goes on and on)

    I think it is time to reconsider our favorite brands...

 
working