I have mixed feelings regarding the issues of animal testing. Animals used for medical research that yield a positive outcome are more beneficial to developments in human medicine than those that are used for cosmetic purposes. Most cosmetics are essentially superfluous and therefore exposing animals to unnecessary harm for the prosperity of human society is abominable. As a result, the benefits of animal testing for medical purposes outweighs the costs of potentially harming animals.
I feel as though animal testing can be looked at in two ways: it benefits humans so we don't have to test drugs or cosmetics on ourselves, or from the opposite point of view in that it is possibly harming or, in some instances, killing the animals being tested. It is easy to sit back and say that it is a good thing because it is, in fact, very beneficial to the human population. However this is really a question of how you value the live of a different species. I personally believe that in the case of medical research the rewards outweigh the risks. However I disagree with the testing of animals for cosmetic purposes.
I believe that animal testing for medical research purposes, as long as it isn't excessive and indecent, is perfectly acceptable. It ultimately relates back to the food chain principle. The more developed complex animal feeds and survives off of the lower, less complex animal. Medical research falls directly into this category in that we use the animals for our own species survival. On the other hand cosmetic testing can swing both ways. Testing a cosmetic on a human could induce a reaction with fatal consequences. If the test would have been performed on an animal, researchers would have seen this risk and never tested the compound on a human. Thus the animal would save the human in this case and follow what I stated above. Cosmetics though, aren't vital to the overall survivability of our species. If one goes by this statement then one would say that cosmetic testing isn't necessary and it should be banned, but basic human nature is to appear attractive as to impress others and essentially find a mate in order to reproduce. So one could also state that cosmetics are a vital part to human nature and thus justify the testing. This subject is ultimately determined on a person-by-person basis and there can't be a true and definitive answer to both.
I have mixed feelings about animal testing. I recently read an article for another class when animals were used as subjects for testing, in that case I felt that animal testing was okay because no harm came to the animals in anyway. However, in another article I read, the animals were injected with rabies and sacrificed 3 days later, this is feel was cruel not only to infect them with a horrible disease but to then kill them in order to trace the disease pathway to the brain. I understand that certain compromises must be made at times in order to achieve the result we search for in medical research,but to me it just seems cruel in a way, even if it is necessary.
As far as cosmetic testing is concerned, humans and animals react differently to certain products. I think if humans want to wear make-up to look "pretty" why not let them be the test subjects. I mean people have always said, "beauty is pain." I personally do not wear make-up. Also, I have many allergies so I know that just because a product says hypoallergenic doesn't necessarily mean it is. Just because a monkey doesn't react to something or look ridiculous doesn't mean a human won't.
To me this is something each individual has their own opinion about and some believe the reason for testing animal subjects could be justified in some cases but not in others.
Animal testing is necessary, if those who are doing the experimenting do not want a law suit. It allows experimenters to see the effects of a product. Why sacrifice a human life? There are lots of advantages of using animals. One, the experimenter doesn't have to rely on the human to see what is wrong, they may be biases or leave out important info that may be harmful. Animals are somewhat, if not, have similar anatomy to humans, we both operate somewhat the same way. Using animals, experimenters can predict what the effects might be on humans. Now, there is a part in this testing process that falls on the FDA, but that is another issue. Why do people (in general) care more about animals than humans? People don't know what they want. They want to be healthy, they take pills for every little thing, they want to look pretty...yet they don't know what it takes to actually make that happen.
Animals may be harmed during the writing of this paragraph for your health and your demands to be presentable to the public and to your husbands...
Animal testing is simply the most ethical solution for companies developing new drugs, cosmetics, or other products that might have ill effects on humans. Of course these companies should be smart about their processes, and develop the first stages of their products to be as safe as possible, but it is obviously the more ethical choice to risk the lives of mice than the lives of human beings. I think that an easy way to think about animal testing is, if you eat meat, it is no more ethical of an act than using products that involved animal testing.
Although animal testing can be seen as cruel and harmful towards animals, i believe it is a sort of necessary evil that we must put up with in order to ensure safety. Testing for medical purposes is essential because before mass distribution of a medicine or chemical can cause disastrous results, researchers must find a way to make sure it is okay. However simply because animals are not human does not mean they cannot feel pain and horror at what may be happening to them. To inflict extremely harmful experiments is morally reckless and wrong, especially when we have no real claim over them at all. I agree with the comment saying that eating animal products is no different than using the products tested on animals.
What is your feeling about animal testing? I can see the positives of animal testing, as well as the negatives. I don't favor animal testing, but like Dana said it is sort of a necessary evil that we must put up to. It's unethical to do certain trials on humans and the only thing we have left is animals. For medical purposes, and cosmetic purposes it is difficult to find the right line not to cross when it becomes unethical to test animals. Just because they are animals and can't physically tell us that they are hurting or suffering, doesn't mean that they aren't suffering. I believe that animal testing is ok as long as there are guidelines and protocols for avoiding animal cruelty.
I do not agree with animal testing for medical purposes or the cosmetic industry either for a few reasons. Not only is it sad to test things on defenseless creature, but it may not even be helpful. Primates maybe the closest in DNA for humans, but their systems do not always respond the same way as a human or any other type of animal. For the cosmetic industry I think they should only test on human volunteers, and it the risk is too great then it does not need to be done. For example the new advertisments to grow longer stronger lashes?? To me thats unneccesary, and all these bad possible side effects, when you can buy fake ones that look real. It is crul to have a mouse growing ears on its back. Both tests are unacceptable.
It's hard to say if animal testing is right or wrong per se. There are practical arguments for both sides. As an animal lover myself, I would of course advocate for the view that animal testing is inherently wrong in every regard. However, as someone who is not ignorant of the positive research done using animals, I'd have to say that there are in fact instances where animal testing is necessary, even if it is a detestable practice. There have been many findings made by using animals in experiments that have benefited the knowledge of how humans may react to certain things. Without the testing of animals, the scientific community would know a lot less than it does about the inner workings of humans since it is unethical to test humans. There is no exact right or wrong exactly in this matter, but perhaps, there's a way that animal testing can be minimized to practices that are absolutely necessary and not flagrantly wasteful and unethical.
Animal testing should not be done for cosmetic purposes because people can live without some of those products. Animal testing should be used for medical research because testing has to start somewhere.Sadly deaths will occur but it shouldn't be at the cost of a human life.
I actually agree with animal testing. At first I was against it, but the more and more I think about it, the more I am for it. I think if we can test out drugs on animals so that they could maybe benefit human beings we should do that. Animals do have emotions and feelings but I personally don't believe animals have souls. So as for testing drugs I agree with testing animals. As for cosmetic purposes, I am opposed for that. If you want to improve the way God created you, than you should take on the risks' that they involve
Animal testing is a tough subject. It is necessary to do preliminary test on animals when it comes to medical testing. Animal testing in regards to medical purposes is beneficial because it allows scientists to modify their drug before testing on humans. Some drugs can be potentially fatal to humans when they are being developed. Animals are living creatures which makes the argument that all creatures are precious. I personally believe that a humans life is the most precious since we were made in God's image. For this reason, using animals for medical purposes is okay with me. If a drug that was developed by testing on an animal saves one life, I think the development was worth the life of maybe a few animals. However, when it comes to cosmetic testing I believe that there is room for argument. Personally I think that testing new cosmetics on animals is strange but at the same time I would rather know that no human life would be sacrificed to test cosmetics. I am not real sure which side I take on this issue but for both industries, the use of animals is good since it might save lives.
I strongly oppose animal testing due to the fact that an animal cannot consent to it. Also, it pains me to know and witness tests that require animals to experience severe pain or pyschological suffering. If a scientist would not subject a human to these events, then why is it okay to do this to an animal?
I feel like using animals for medical testing is not ideal, but it is a needed means of acquiring data before drugs can be successfully used. Proper testing can help us avoid repeats of things like the side affects thalidomide brought on the unborn children of mothers who took the drug. In the end I just have to put the safety of people before the safety of animals (guess I'm kinda partial to my own species...) when it comes to cosmetics testing I'm a little more hesitant about. I understand the need for testing, but I feel like it's a lot less needed. Medical testing is meant for the betterment of lives. Cosmetic testing just enhances the market.
I personally don't agree with animal testing for medical or cosmetic purposes, but I feel that its better than having to test humans. Without it, we wouldn't be where we are with all the advancements in science and technology. However, I feel that medical testing is more necessary than cosmetic animal testing because by testing animals with medicines, we are looking at the side-effects it could have on humans. And it goes towards developing new cures for diseases, whereas with cosmetics, its not really necessary to risk the lives of animals so that we can look pretty. Overall, I guess I would be okay with animal testing, as long as proper guidelines are adhered to, and that its ethical in its treatment to the animals.
I have mixed feelings about animal testing. I think that using animals to further expand our knowledge in the medical world is good. However, I do not think that cosmetic testing should be done on animals. I think that Medical testing is more urgent than cosmetic testing. Medical testing will only advance our society. I also think about whether, I would rather my sister be subjected to medical testing and suffering for the rest of her life or would I rather my dog do the testing and we just put him down afterwards?
I possibly want to be a veterinarian. From that perspective, I want to take care of animals and treat them when they are sick. I think I have mixed feelings on the topic of animal testing. If no harm is done to the animal, I have no problem with cosmetic testing. However, it seems silly to me to harm an animal in order to test cosmetics. So, my opinion on animal testing in cosmetics would depend on the situation and the circumstances regarding the safety of the animal.
As far as medical testing goes, I am a proponent of animal testing within reason. In the last book we read, Deadly Feasts, it was necessary to do testing on chimps and other animals in order to study the effects of kuru and CJD in humans. Therefore, it seems that if we have the means to further our medical knowledge and help save human lives, it is necessary to conduct animal testing. However, animal testing should be controlled by laws to make sure that there is a standard procedure within reason.
My personal opinion on animal testing is that it not as cut and dry as I would like it to be. I think that animal testing is permissable for cancer research in which the ultimate goal is to save the lives of people. I do not however agree with animal testing of cosmetics or any other non-vital circumstance. There are always grey areas to the matter and each situation needs to be investigated separately.
I think that animals should be used for all kinds of testing. The likely hood of a person suing a company for the ill effects of a drug or cosmetic are so likely that a drug or cosmetic company could go bankrupt at virtually any moment. For the sake of our capitalistic society, they are very necessary.
I have mixed feelings regarding the issues of animal testing. Animals used for medical research that yield a positive outcome are more beneficial to developments in human medicine than those that are used for cosmetic purposes. Most cosmetics are essentially superfluous and therefore exposing animals to unnecessary harm for the prosperity of human society is abominable. As a result, the benefits of animal testing for medical purposes outweighs the costs of potentially harming animals.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though animal testing can be looked at in two ways: it benefits humans so we don't have to test drugs or cosmetics on ourselves, or from the opposite point of view in that it is possibly harming or, in some instances, killing the animals being tested. It is easy to sit back and say that it is a good thing because it is, in fact, very beneficial to the human population. However this is really a question of how you value the live of a different species. I personally believe that in the case of medical research the rewards outweigh the risks. However I disagree with the testing of animals for cosmetic purposes.
ReplyDeleteI believe that animal testing for medical research purposes, as long as it isn't excessive and indecent, is perfectly acceptable. It ultimately relates back to the food chain principle. The more developed complex animal feeds and survives off of the lower, less complex animal. Medical research falls directly into this category in that we use the animals for our own species survival. On the other hand cosmetic testing can swing both ways. Testing a cosmetic on a human could induce a reaction with fatal consequences. If the test would have been performed on an animal, researchers would have seen this risk and never tested the compound on a human. Thus the animal would save the human in this case and follow what I stated above. Cosmetics though, aren't vital to the overall survivability of our species. If one goes by this statement then one would say that cosmetic testing isn't necessary and it should be banned, but basic human nature is to appear attractive as to impress others and essentially find a mate in order to reproduce. So one could also state that cosmetics are a vital part to human nature and thus justify the testing.
ReplyDeleteThis subject is ultimately determined on a person-by-person basis and there can't be a true and definitive answer to both.
I have mixed feelings about animal testing. I recently read an article for another class when animals were used as subjects for testing, in that case I felt that animal testing was okay because no harm came to the animals in anyway. However, in another article I read, the animals were injected with rabies and sacrificed 3 days later, this is feel was cruel not only to infect them with a horrible disease but to then kill them in order to trace the disease pathway to the brain. I understand that certain compromises must be made at times in order to achieve the result we search for in medical research,but to me it just seems cruel in a way, even if it is necessary.
ReplyDeleteAs far as cosmetic testing is concerned, humans and animals react differently to certain products. I think if humans want to wear make-up to look "pretty" why not let them be the test subjects. I mean people have always said, "beauty is pain."
I personally do not wear make-up. Also, I have many allergies so I know that just because a product says hypoallergenic doesn't necessarily mean it is. Just because a monkey doesn't react to something or look ridiculous doesn't mean a human won't.
To me this is something each individual has their own opinion about and some believe the reason for testing animal subjects could be justified in some cases but not in others.
Animal testing is necessary, if those who are doing the experimenting do not want a law suit. It allows experimenters to see the effects of a product. Why sacrifice a human life?
ReplyDeleteThere are lots of advantages of using animals. One, the experimenter doesn't have to rely on the human to see what is wrong, they may be biases or leave out important info that may be harmful. Animals are somewhat, if not, have similar anatomy to humans, we both operate somewhat the same way. Using animals, experimenters can predict what the effects might be on humans. Now, there is a part in this testing process that falls on the FDA, but that is another issue.
Why do people (in general) care more about animals than humans?
People don't know what they want. They want to be healthy, they take pills for every little thing, they want to look pretty...yet they don't know what it takes to actually make that happen.
Animals may be harmed during the writing of this paragraph for your health and your demands to be presentable to the public and to your husbands...
Animal testing is simply the most ethical solution for companies developing new drugs, cosmetics, or other products that might have ill effects on humans. Of course these companies should be smart about their processes, and develop the first stages of their products to be as safe as possible, but it is obviously the more ethical choice to risk the lives of mice than the lives of human beings. I think that an easy way to think about animal testing is, if you eat meat, it is no more ethical of an act than using products that involved animal testing.
ReplyDeleteAlthough animal testing can be seen as cruel and harmful towards animals, i believe it is a sort of necessary evil that we must put up with in order to ensure safety. Testing for medical purposes is essential because before mass distribution of a medicine or chemical can cause disastrous results, researchers must find a way to make sure it is okay. However simply because animals are not human does not mean they cannot feel pain and horror at what may be happening to them. To inflict extremely harmful experiments is morally reckless and wrong, especially when we have no real claim over them at all. I agree with the comment saying that eating animal products is no different than using the products tested on animals.
ReplyDeleteWhat is your feeling about animal testing? I can see the positives of animal testing, as well as the negatives. I don't favor animal testing, but like Dana said it is sort of a necessary evil that we must put up to. It's unethical to do certain trials on humans and the only thing we have left is animals. For medical purposes, and cosmetic purposes it is difficult to find the right line not to cross when it becomes unethical to test animals. Just because they are animals and can't physically tell us that they are hurting or suffering, doesn't mean that they aren't suffering. I believe that animal testing is ok as long as there are guidelines and protocols for avoiding animal cruelty.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with animal testing for medical purposes or the cosmetic industry either for a few reasons. Not only is it sad to test things on defenseless creature, but it may not even be helpful. Primates maybe the closest in DNA for humans, but their systems do not always respond the same way as a human or any other type of animal. For the cosmetic industry I think they should only test on human volunteers, and it the risk is too great then it does not need to be done. For example the new advertisments to grow longer stronger lashes?? To me thats unneccesary, and all these bad possible side effects, when you can buy fake ones that look real. It is crul to have a mouse growing ears on its back. Both tests are unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to say if animal testing is right or wrong per se. There are practical arguments for both sides. As an animal lover myself, I would of course advocate for the view that animal testing is inherently wrong in every regard. However, as someone who is not ignorant of the positive research done using animals, I'd have to say that there are in fact instances where animal testing is necessary, even if it is a detestable practice. There have been many findings made by using animals in experiments that have benefited the knowledge of how humans may react to certain things. Without the testing of animals, the scientific community would know a lot less than it does about the inner workings of humans since it is unethical to test humans. There is no exact right or wrong exactly in this matter, but perhaps, there's a way that animal testing can be minimized to practices that are absolutely necessary and not flagrantly wasteful and unethical.
ReplyDeleteAnimal testing should not be done for cosmetic purposes because people can live without some of those products. Animal testing should be used for medical research because testing has to start somewhere.Sadly deaths will occur but it shouldn't be at the cost of a human life.
ReplyDeleteI actually agree with animal testing. At first I was against it, but the more and more I think about it, the more I am for it. I think if we can test out drugs on animals so that they could maybe benefit human beings we should do that. Animals do have emotions and feelings but I personally don't believe animals have souls. So as for testing drugs I agree with testing animals. As for cosmetic purposes, I am opposed for that. If you want to improve the way God created you, than you should take on the risks' that they involve
ReplyDeleteAnimal testing is a tough subject. It is necessary to do preliminary test on animals when it comes to medical testing. Animal testing in regards to medical purposes is beneficial because it allows scientists to modify their drug before testing on humans. Some drugs can be potentially fatal to humans when they are being developed. Animals are living creatures which makes the argument that all creatures are precious. I personally believe that a humans life is the most precious since we were made in God's image. For this reason, using animals for medical purposes is okay with me. If a drug that was developed by testing on an animal saves one life, I think the development was worth the life of maybe a few animals. However, when it comes to cosmetic testing I believe that there is room for argument. Personally I think that testing new cosmetics on animals is strange but at the same time I would rather know that no human life would be sacrificed to test cosmetics. I am not real sure which side I take on this issue but for both industries, the use of animals is good since it might save lives.
ReplyDeleteI strongly oppose animal testing due to the fact that an animal cannot consent to it. Also, it pains me to know and witness tests that require animals to experience severe pain or pyschological suffering. If a scientist would not subject a human to these events, then why is it okay to do this to an animal?
ReplyDeleteI feel like using animals for medical testing is not ideal, but it is a needed means of acquiring data before drugs can be successfully used. Proper testing can help us avoid repeats of things like the side affects thalidomide brought on the unborn children of mothers who took the drug. In the end I just have to put the safety of people before the safety of animals (guess I'm kinda partial to my own species...) when it comes to cosmetics testing I'm a little more hesitant about. I understand the need for testing, but I feel like it's a lot less needed. Medical testing is meant for the betterment of lives. Cosmetic testing just enhances the market.
ReplyDeleteI personally don't agree with animal testing for medical or cosmetic purposes, but I feel that its better than having to test humans. Without it, we wouldn't be where we are with all the advancements in science and technology. However, I feel that medical testing is more necessary than cosmetic animal testing because by testing animals with medicines, we are looking at the side-effects it could have on humans. And it goes towards developing new cures for diseases, whereas with cosmetics, its not really necessary to risk the lives of animals so that we can look pretty. Overall, I guess I would be okay with animal testing, as long as proper guidelines are adhered to, and that its ethical in its treatment to the animals.
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings about animal testing. I think that using animals to further expand our knowledge in the medical world is good. However, I do not think that cosmetic testing should be done on animals. I think that Medical testing is more urgent than cosmetic testing. Medical testing will only advance our society. I also think about whether, I would rather my sister be subjected to medical testing and suffering for the rest of her life or would I rather my dog do the testing and we just put him down afterwards?
ReplyDeleteI possibly want to be a veterinarian. From that perspective, I want to take care of animals and treat them when they are sick. I think I have mixed feelings on the topic of animal testing. If no harm is done to the animal, I have no problem with cosmetic testing. However, it seems silly to me to harm an animal in order to test cosmetics. So, my opinion on animal testing in cosmetics would depend on the situation and the circumstances regarding the safety of the animal.
ReplyDeleteAs far as medical testing goes, I am a proponent of animal testing within reason. In the last book we read, Deadly Feasts, it was necessary to do testing on chimps and other animals in order to study the effects of kuru and CJD in humans. Therefore, it seems that if we have the means to further our medical knowledge and help save human lives, it is necessary to conduct animal testing. However, animal testing should be controlled by laws to make sure that there is a standard procedure within reason.
My personal opinion on animal testing is that it not as cut and dry as I would like it to be. I think that animal testing is permissable for cancer research in which the ultimate goal is to save the lives of people. I do not however agree with animal testing of cosmetics or any other non-vital circumstance. There are always grey areas to the matter and each situation needs to be investigated separately.
ReplyDeleteI think that animals should be used for all kinds of testing. The likely hood of a person suing a company for the ill effects of a drug or cosmetic are so likely that a drug or cosmetic company could go bankrupt at virtually any moment. For the sake of our capitalistic society, they are very necessary.
ReplyDelete