Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, regrettably some animal testing is necessary for the safety of consumer products.

    The use of animals in research and product testing is necessary for the development and advancement in areas such as genetics, developmental biology, drug and toxicology testing. Animal testing is conduct by various agencies such as universities, medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, farms, and defense establishments; as well as by commercial companies that offer animal-testing services to industry.

    It's agreed that in some instances animal testing is over used, but in reality it is a necessity.

  • Yes, it serves purposes for testing.

    Although animal testing may be distasteful to people, it does some good in developing products that may be of benefit to humans. Without animal testing it would be hard to learn of the effectiveness and possible harmful side effects of new items intended for the marketplace. We do still need animal testing.

  • Yes, it is.

    Animal testing is necessary, but unfortunate. The testing of animals helps us determine new ways to help other animals, and continue to help humans. It would be nice to find a new way to test things, but unrealistic at this time. At the very least they should find a way to keep from doing the cruel and hurtful animal tests, or make their living as well off as possible.

  • Animal Testing is necessary

    Animal testing is necessary because the only way for scientific progression is testing. Whether is be on living organisms or machines, both are for human progression in technology. Another way to look at it is that we are not testing on our own species. One can not argue it is in humane as it is on lesser species. On this world there is a animal web. The strongest live on, and the weak die. As humans are the strongest and most developed we have lived on. Throughout the history of Earth, species have killed eachother to extinction, why is this any different than that. One may argue that we are much more intelligent, meaning that we don't need to kill or test on other species. Yet, if these tests help improve our species, and aid in progression for science then it is worth it.

  • It is illegal to kill humans

    By law, it is considered murder if the person being tested on instead of animals dies. Animals in the other hand, don't have the same rougets we do. So if an animal dies, they won't be sent to jail. (If a human does, it would probably result with a law suit, trip to court, or sentence to jail.)

  • No other alternative

    Animal testing for medical purposes are only used when there is no other alternative. All other routes have to be exhausted before animal trials are attempted and animal trials lead to treatments for real human suffering. Its not ideal but I know that if I was ill or any of my family were ill, I'd want a treatment, whatever the cost.

  • Sorry, But It's Necessary

    Although It Is Considered Animal Cruelty, We Need It For Our Good. Without These Animals Being Tested On, We Could Be Potentially Hurt If Scientist Don't Know The Effects Of The Product. We Can Get Diseases Like Diabetes, Cancer Or More Different Things That Are Not Good For Our Health. I Personally Believe It's Cruel, But Without Animal Testing Our Lives Can Be A Stake

  • Yes, it is necessary

    Very often statistics about animal testing are entered with no context, blown out of proportion or very simply false. Many sources that state a high death rate for testing animals are usually using numbers that span many years, deceiving people to instantly turn against it. It is truly not bad for the animals as well, since according to a study by California Biomedical Research Association if animal testing was not done million of animals would die from diseases like tetanus, anthrax, and canine parvovirus since effective vaccines would not be able to be produced. While in less developed countries regulation is not as common, in the counties where most testing is done there are very strict regulations placed upon animal testing to ensure that the animals are not mistreated like the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) of 1966. This proof shows that companies like PETA blow numbers out of proportion and use propaganda tactics in order to gain attention and media coverage.

  • Yes, it is necessary.

    1.Without animal research, medicine is simply impossible to progress
    2.These types of testing are ancient, very common. As early as 500 BC people have been using animals for experiments . All countries are using about 50.1 million animals for testing.
    3. At present, there are no other alternative method to detect a substance in a complex organism will react
    4. The structure of an animal is similar to human's.

  • Yes it is necessary

    We are the ones documenting experiments on animals and for humans to be tested on will require some actual volunteers, which will take years to be approved by the government. And honestly, what decent human would volunteer?! If you actually did that by the time the government has replied, problems may have gotten worse and the circumstances will most likely have changed.. Animals make it easier and far less time consuming. The fact that we are willing to eat animals on a daily basis, seems to me that animal testing is humane as people slaughter animals willingly and suddenly it’s not okay for us to be testing them?! Animals aren’t as advanced as humans. That is a fact. They can not fully comprehend what is going on and the psychological effects will be lesser on animals than humans. 100 million Only 0.000002% of animals in the world are used for testing. Animal research has played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough over the last few decades and without animals testing medicine, medicine as we know it today would not exist. Thanks to animal research, mostly in mice, cancer survival rates have continued to rise. In fact in the last 40 years survival rate from cancer has doubled giving thousands their lives back. At cancer research uk using animals is part of the way that they beat cancer. As when they research they discover the faulty genes and molecules that cause cancer and test new treatments. This is all done on animals so they know what they are doing when they find the tumour in a human as we share 95% of our genes with a mouse, making them an effective model to understand cancer of the human body. If we tested a cure right away on humans without knowing what would happen it would be inhumane as you are giving the human a greater chance to die than live. It would be better if you hadn't give them the cure in the first place as you would have no idea what would happen to the person.
    We, as the affirming team, realise that animal testing is not okay or a joyous time but we believe the positive outcomes and benefits for humanity outweigh the negative The products you use to wash your hair, clean your room and wash your clothes with are most likely all tested on animals. Over half of your household items would not be allowed to even enter stores without being tested on animals first. That means you would not being paying for these products, these products would not exist. The economy would be failing if there was no testing due to the simple fact that money funds our society. Paying for products such as air wick, duck and dynamo as well as many others gives more money to the government which helps build towards a better economy. Surely the economy would not succeed. The world as we know it would not be the same.

  • Don't hurt animals

    It's not necessary because you could harm and/or kill the animals with the chemicals. Animals are made for our happiness and for food but killing them and unjust to them they have no say in what they can and can't do. How do you think animals feel about it. Huh?

  • It is not

    Testing on animals has become an unnecessary act thanks to scientists who have developed more humane, modern, yet still effective non-animal research methods. These methods include human-based micro dosing, human-patient simulators, in vitro technology, and well developed computer modeling. These methods are cheaper, faster, and more accurate than animal testing and most importantly save the lives of many innocent animals, which would otherwise be tortured to death.
    Although people may argue that animal testing is necessary in order to make safe, useful products, this isn’t particularly true. Animals, especially healthy ones, will react differently to chemicals and drugs than sick humans.

  • Wrong, Cruel and Unnecessary

    Animal testing is not necessary and is a barbaric practice. These animals are sensitive and thinking beings and suffer just as humans. These cruel experiments are morally wrong. Innocent animals should not have to suffer and give up their lives for human greed and/or bad decisions. Animal cruelty must stop!

  • Animal Testing is CRUEL

    It is not necessary to use animals to test our products. Millions of animals are killed each year, not even including rodents. Apparently rodents can feel pain, and are livivg creatures, but aren't considered as "real" animals. If you don't care about mice or rats, they are not the only animals being tested on. There are hundreds of thousands of dogs, cats, rabbits, bears, and who knows what DYING for our cosmetics and medicine. DOGS! Imagine your beloved pet dog (if you have one) being force fed large amounts of drugs each day, nonstop, and "observe" the symptoms, like rashes or even death!

  • Animals shouldn't be put through this kind of pain.

    Animal testing isn't necessary! There must be an alternative method. It's not fair to all the animals that are being put through these cruel and painful tests. Its inhumane. Hurting these animals to benefit ourselves is selfish. No animal should be put through these tests no matter what the cause.

  • No no no

    Animal product testing is unnecessay because animals are not the same as humans frim anatomy phisiology and metabolism. Wich means most side effects from animals are not the same as humans. We now have technology to view the oitential side effects to humans. Pluss the animals dont deserve to be tested on harmful chemicals. In germany one year 58,000 people died from animal tests that were unreliable.You pick what is equideble

  • No, I don't think so

    No, I don't think animal testing is necessary. This is the 21st century and surely we have developed better and safer testing than that on animals. I don't see any benefit in running tests on animals. It's cruel and harsh and should not be accepted. Animal testing simply isn't necessary.

  • Animal testing should not be allowed.

    Animal testing should not be allowed. It is cruel and harmful to the animals. There must be another way for humans to stay healthy. We shouldn't have to test animals to find cures. Less than 2% of illnesses found in humans are also found in animals. Animal rights are just as important as ours. Why should they have to be put through pain and misery just to help us?

  • Wrong, Cruel and Unnecessary

    There must be another way to test products than by mutilating innocent animals. The cruelty to these animals is morally wrong. They are thinking, feeling, and sensitive creatures just as humans and these cruel experiments are wrong and must end. These innocent animals do not deserve to suffer and give up their lives for our bad decisions and/or greed.

  • Animals can't speak for themselves so we torture them?

    By now somebody must have come up with some other way to test these types of products without being cruel to poor, innocent animals. I personally can't believe that some type of law hasn't been put in place yet. Its absolutely ridiculous that humans think we're better than animals so we can do whatever we like to them. I hope that the people who think this is even the slightest bit okay to do feel horrible about the way they think.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.