Animals for research

RudyGarmisch

RudyGarmisch

Active member
Staff member
Alright, I wanna hear what people have to say on this:

Is it right for humans to use animals for scientific research? Should a rat have any more right than a monkey? Is it even right to keep animals in captivity? Where is the line for you and what defines what you think is 'right'?
 
i definetley do not agree with using animalz for testing. its cruel. as much as they would like to believe iits not cruel, it iz. an animal should have just as much right as a human, so uze humanz to test.
 
What if its a behavioral project with apes to figure out how our brains have developed a system of learning? And the animals are kept in a zoo-like environment? Still cruel?
 
i dont agree with any kind of animal cruelty, think about it from their point of view, but its a hard topic to talk about because i think that i'd rather 1000 rats die than 1000 humans did, or 100 rabbits were killed but cancer was cured
 
All of the animals needed for tests should be used. Anything that helps benefit us should be taken advantage of. Who the fuck cares if animals don't live full lives? A lot of them run off of instincts and don't even really think. Survival of the fittest, only the strong survive.
 
there's nothing wrong with animal research. they were put on this planet for us to test...

but really, there are plenty of circumstances where animal research is the way to go because of the beneficial results. i'm for it.
 
depends on how smart they are.

100 apes/dolphins = 1 human

100 domesticated animals = 1 ape

all other animals have no concept of death, and don't matter to anybody. so therefore their only importance is to help the ecosystem.
 
Interesting point here. Intelligence is a basis for life and death? Why do we value 'intelligence' this way? Why should that be the single factor that elevates 'higher' animals from 'lower' ones that we dont mind testing on?
 
intellegence = a better concept of pain/death

think about it. does a bug's life matter at all to you?
 
we either test on animals or humans, and i value a human life more than an animal that is bred to be tested on, and possibly die. i am for animal testing, i dont think we would have nearly as good of meds today if it werent for animal testing.
 
Humans eat animals, so what's the differences between eating them, and testing on them. Both ways the animal dies, and both ways it benefits humans.

And for the question are some animals more important than others. I would say YES. I believe the value of animals depends on how big a certain species population is.
 
ya basically,

it's wrong to test on certain animals

but fish for example have no concept of paint after a cycle of 7 seconds
 
I personally believe that it would be better to test on a human. There are more than enough "perfect specimen" with a lack of common sense and rational thought in this world. Let the animals be, what the fuck did they do to you?
 
If it wasn't for animal testing, you would've have half the things we need today not to mention how many life saving drugs there are now because of it. But I only agree with animal testing unless the animals are sick, dying or going to get euthanized already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top