I think that human experimentation should be viewed upon by the general public as an advancement in technology and acumen. I think that as long as laws are not being broken, people should not see anything wrong with human experimentation. I think such programs will help to benefit society and the world.
Yes, I think that experimentation on humans is something the public should consider an advancement. If it is for our improvement, I believe that it is something that should be handled with care though, and only used on a volunteer or paid basis, and, if approved, possibly done on prisoners but that is a little bit more controversial. Overall though, I think the general public should consider it.
I think that lauded is taking it a bit too far. Aside from the scientists and other researchers who actually work in the field of human experimentation, nobody is going to be setting up cheerleading sections for it. Instead of trying to create enthusiasm where none will ever exist, just accept the research findings when published.
Though the question is awkwardly worded, I believe it is asking if we should extol the virtues of scientists who perform experiments on humans. There is nothing inherently noble or amazing about experimenting on humans. Many social scientists are experimenting on humans every day through surveys and personality tests. Performing more harmful experiments on humans has a dark track record, to say the least. The fact that such test subjects were always social undesirables (the mentally infirm or members of persecuted groups) should tell you everything you need to know about how laudable those experiments were.
Human experimentation is wrong and should not be lauded as a good thing by anyone. Experiments could occur on animals because if something were rot go wrong, then only the animal would be harmed and not a person. People are to precious and valuable to be used as human guinea pigs.