Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, not testing on humans from the start causes delays in new meds getting to the market. If meds and procedures were immediately human-tested, side effects and other problems that take years to discover would be obvious. Of course, it's a moot point because no one will volunteer and using prisoners would not have much support.
As an aside, if animal testing makes meds so much safer, why are so many recalled because they kill or damage people once they are approved?
Last edited by toosie; 05-23-2017 at 03:49 PM..
Reason: The post you replied to was deleted
No!!!! Animals have souls that are no less important than human souls. Animal testing is sick and demented. It needs to be stopped immediately! Karma will always prevail.
I suggest prisoners who are on death row should be asked to volunteer as human guinea pigs. That would be a way of paying their debt to society and leave the innocent animals out of it.
There are a bout 3,000 prisoners on death row.
Let's see, they're there because they're conscientious citizens who want to do good things for society, so a significant number will volunteer to be human guinea pigs.
Do you really believe that:
1. Enough such prisoners will volunteer to make a difference?
2. Enough such prisoners have a conscience to do something for a society that is going to kill them?
Actually, not testing on humans from the start causes delays in new meds getting to the market. If meds and procedures were immediately human-tested, side effects and other problems that take years to discover would be obvious. Of course, it's a moot point because no one will volunteer and using prisoners would not have much support.
As an aside, if animal testing makes meds so much safer, why are so many recalled because they kill or damage people once they are approved?
Early trials using animals (usually mice) are done to show very basic safety and efficacy - drugs failing at THAT level are certainly doing more damage than good and would result in more human deaths if testing were done on humans. And it IS a moot point - I don't think you have any idea how many humans it would take to do testing at that level. Also, human trials at that point would be less well controlled than those done with animals and would take even higher numbers to sort out the random error introduced.
Science isn't perfect... if you think there are lots of recalls NOW, just wait until we stop testing.
I am with you. I purchase as many "cruelty free" cleansers, cosmetics, detergents, foods.
Meds can be difficult. But I try the best that I can.
The EU does not test on animals. Why can't we follow that example?
Animal testing is an actual industry with lobbyists who promote this largely out dated and cruel experimentation. Innocent animals are actually bread for the sole purpose of painful, deadly, and mostly redundant experiments.
We can use computer models for testing and purchase products with natural and less toxic ingredients.
We can and should do better.
Please explain what measure you take. Unless you are talking about untested supplements (not tested because they are not supposed to be making any health claims) then EVERY prescription medication you use will have been tested on animals at some point.
Studies do have to go through review boards to ensure the methods used are as cruelty-free as possible. What testing is redundant? Who wants to spend the time and money to do something that is unnecessary?
If models could be used, they would be! Running a model is a lot cheaper and faster than doing actual testing....with animals or with people. You don't think businesses would just LOVE to cut out that major cost and time to market? But a model has to be BASED ON SOMETHING. if you're testing something new, you DON'T KNOW.
If models could be used, they would be! Running a model is a lot cheaper and faster than doing actual testing....with animals or with people. You don't think businesses would just LOVE to cut out that major cost and time to market? But a model has to be BASED ON SOMETHING. if you're testing something new, you DON'T KNOW.
Yup.
Back when I was in grade school, I first heard about the dogs used for the insulin tests. It was in a presentation made by a boy who had Type 1 diabetes. When, several weeks ago, my partner started on insulin for his diabetes, I found myself thinking back on what that boy taught me over 30 years ago. I can feel bad for those dogs losing their lives, or I can think about all of the lives that have been saved because of the testing that was done.
As to what renee63 said here- if running a computer model was cheaper and just as effective, I would think that it would be done. But those models need to have some real life data to run on. If that data comes from testing on animals, and the end result is saving human lives or suffering, I can deal with that.
I used to work in a lab where we did bone defect testing on rats. We would anesthetize them, remove a segment of their femur too large to heal naturally, then place a plug of muscle tissue or fat tissue infused with bone morphogenic protein into the defect. After 6 weeks the animals were CT scanned then euthanized with CO2 gas. It was rather peaceful, they just stopped breathing. They also got pain medication after the procedures.
It's a double-edged sword. You cant do testing like this on humans. There are innumerable new drugs and interventions that would be unethical to test on humans. Similarly, you cant put a drug or intervention onto the market without testing, or the results could be disastrous. So we test them on animals. There are very strict laws and complex institutional policies in place that protect animal welfare to a reasonable degree, but it doesn't make it any less sad.
The people who are vehemently (emotionally) opposed to animal testing are quite frankly ignorant. What do you pose as an alternative? Testing on prisoners? There aren't enough. Even if there were, what if it was your family member, or someone wrongful imprisoned, or imprisoned for a petty non-violent offense?
If you test the general population, how do you select subjects? There would not be many volunteers. So now you are selecting people based on a lottery or against their will. What if it was you? Or your child or spouse? Would you find that just? What if you weren't ready to die or didn't want to have some device implanted inside you to "see how it works"?
I don't find animal testing palatable. But what I find less palatable is testing on involuntary human subjects, or not testing at all.
Moderator cut: deleted quoted post
Many cosmetics companies no longer test on animals, and the price points for those products are comparable to animal tested products. For laundry detergent and cleaning products, 7th Generation, Method, Mrs. Meyers, and several others don't animal test and also use environmentally - and personally - safer products.
With advances in science, we can do more test tube style testing of new medicines and cures. This does not give us the whole picture when it comes to whether or not a medicine will work on systems in your body. How a medicine affects the heart, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Although it may seem inhumane to most, I would argue that science sees it a necessary even crucial to the advancement of new cures/treatments.
Oh, they don't just test medicines on animals. They test cosmetics on them. I worked for a major beauty products corporation, and volunteered myself to test everything from mascara to hair coloring. Yes, they WILL test on humans (especially their own employees) if we humans will volunteer for it and give our informed consent to it. You sign a waiver that you will not sue them for any harm it might cause.
If you do not like animals being tested upon, then volunteer yourself. Every new drug or vaccine will need human subjects for testing before it's approved for the general market. Again, volunteer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
