Animal testing

[Kerry]

Most of us wouldn't be here had medicines not been tested on animals, yet so many are against it. Are you? Or should animal testing continue? Are you OK with some animals? Say mice, rats? But others are a no no like monkeys or rabbits?

Debate

[MTVN]

Animal testing brings progress so yes I do support it, maybe not when it's being used to test cosmetics and things though.

[Niall]

I think animal testing is necessary to help advance medical science. Half of the world's drugs probably wouldn't be here without the use of animal testing. I really would like to know how those who are against this expect science to advance. Its stupid, what are we going to test a, for example, a potential cure for cancer if we can't use animals? On bricks?

I think that if a drug is unstable and unsuitable for human trials then it should be tested on an animal first as I'm quite sure there would be outrage if pharmaceutical companies tested all their products exclusively on humans first - what if one of them were to die?

Its a no-brainer to me.

[Kerry]

The thing that prompted this is remember the mouse with the ear grown on it's back? It's just been on a documentory I'm watching. It's a shocking image to see yet is breakthrough medicine/treatment. Where would we be without such experiments? Plus it never harmed the mouse

[Locke.]

Test it on murderers and paedophiles instead.

[Kerry]

Test it on murderers and paedophiles instead.

I'd be of a similar view but sadly.....

[Niall]

Test it on murderers and paedophiles instead.

But you can't really. Its not right, regardless of the crimes they committed.

[MeMyselfAndI]

i dont agree with it at all.
animal testing isn't all about medicine.. they can kill animals just to "attempt" to make a perfume, which might not even be released, so murdering animals for a chance to make a new perfume its wrong

[Kerry]

i dont agree with it at all.
animal testing isn't all about medicine.. they can kill animals just to "attempt" to make a perfume, which might not even be released, so murdering animals for a chance to make a new perfume its wrong

It's not all about perfumes. It's for medicine too. Medicine that saves lives, not just a paracetomol

[MTVN]

i dont agree with it at all.
animal testing isn't all about medicine.. they can kill animals just to "attempt" to make a perfume, which might not even be released, so murdering animals for a chance to make a new perfume its wrong

It's not about that, it's about supporting medical progress, and animal testing is a vital part of that, it's not like it's solely used to test cosmetics

[Vicky.]

Test it on murderers and paedophiles instead.

Brilliant idea :laugh:

Problem with that would be though, if someone had been wrongly convicted and they found out like years later. And they had 40 eyeballs or something due to medical research, when they did nothing wrong in the first place D:

[MeMyselfAndI]

yeah but what i was saying is animal testing for things like perfumes is wrong. whereas animal testing for things like medicine i supose could be acceptable

[Niall]

i dont agree with it at all.
animal testing isn't all about medicine.. they can kill animals just to "attempt" to make a perfume, which might not even be released, so murdering animals for a chance to make a new perfume its wrong

What else are you gonna test the perfume on though? A banana?

Imagine if Calvin Klein released a brand new fragrance without animal testing. They miss out a side effect and so when its released the perfume causes skin diseases in people. Surely a couple of mice is worth more than disfiguring potentially thousands of people?

[Kerry]

yeah but what i was saying is animal testing for things like perfumes is wrong. whereas animal testing for things like medicine i supose could be acceptable

I actually think testing on animals for cosmetics has been banned. Or at the very least shops refuse to sell those products anymore so it's a no go anyway

[MTVN]

I actually think testing on animals for cosmetics has been banned. Or at the very least shops refuse to sell those products anymore so it's a no go anyway

This is what wiki says: Although the British Home Office stopped giving licences to test finished cosmetic products in 1998, compounds that have both cosmetic and medical uses, such as those in the "anti-wrinkle" preparations Zyderm, Restylane and Botox, are still bound by the regulations requiring animal testing

[Vicky.]

What else are you gonna test the perfume on though? A banana?

Imagine if Calvin Klein released a brand new fragrance without animal testing. They miss out a side effect and so when its released the perfume causes skin diseases in people. Surely a couple of mice is worth more than disfiguring potentially thousands of people?

Yes, but we dont NEED perfume.

I get mm&is point.

I dont agree with it for cosmetic stuff. If the people making the perfume/whatever who are going to profit from it want to test it, test it on themselves. Why put an animal through potential pain?

I do think sometimes animal testing can sometimes be necessary though, to test out medication and things like that.

[Kerry]

They do do medical trials on people too MM&I

I remember one person in the news who was injected with something and never went back for the antidote - Never heard anything after that :/

[Niall]

Yes, but we dont NEED perfume.

I get mm&is point.

I dont agree with it for cosmetic stuff. If the people making the perfume/whatever who are going to profit from it want to test it, test it on themselves. Why put an animal through potential pain?

I do think sometimes animal testing can sometimes be necessary though, to test out medication and things like that.

I think the same thing too, I'm just arguing the point for the sake of it. :laugh:

[Boothy]

Testing on animals for cosmetic reasons is wrong but I agree with animal testing for medicinal purposes. Without it, we'd be without important, potentially lifesaving medicines. The only people I can genuinely believe would be against it are the narrow-minded do-gooders who, if were in charge, would actually do more harm than good, and naive animal lovers who can't see the benefits.

I'd propose testing on volunteers in exchange for money when it comes to cosmetics, something which I believe does exist but alongside animal testing.

[Kerry]

This is what wiki says: Although the British Home Office stopped giving licences to test finished cosmetic products in 1998, compounds that have both cosmetic and medical uses, such as those in the "anti-wrinkle" preparations Zyderm, Restylane and Botox, are still bound by the regulations requiring animal testing

Ahhh yeah, I suppose they must have to test thinking about it

[MTVN]

Tyrone on Corrie volunteered to be a "human guinea pig" once I think, it does happen

[Kerry]

Tyrone on Corrie volunteered to be a "human guinea pig" once I think, it does happen

I saw a documentory on it once (God I sound a nerd) and people do. They get paid, forgotten how much, but many medical students volunteer

[MTVN]

I saw a documentory on it once (God I sound a nerd) and people do. They get paid, forgotten how much, but many medical students volunteer

Yeah, I think the money's actually quite good. Well, it'll be proportionate to the risk I suppose, not something I would want to do

[Kerry]

Yeah, I think the money's actually quite good. Well, it'll be proportionate to the risk I suppose, not something I would want to do

Must be pretty scary :shocked: "I'll just pop this pill...... I might grow two heads or drop down dead but here goes...." :joker:

[Jords]

Animal testing brings progress so yes I do support it, maybe not when it's being used to test cosmetics and things though.

Agreed with this.

Did about Animal Testing in E&P last year, quite an interesting topic.

[Zippy]

For medical research yes. For cosmetic research...no!

I can't bare the thought of monkeys being used as they are very human like and have similar emotions and feelings.

[Kerry]

For medical research yes. For cosmetic research...no!

I can't bare the thought of monkeys being used as they are very human like and have similar emotions and feelings.

I think monkeys do (or did) for that very reason