Amazon.com Widgets

Is it right to use products that have been tested on animals?

Asked by: lopoleaf
  • Can have benefits

    I know, I know, many people might not agree with this side and at first I didn't until I thought of the many good it can do. If we don't test our products on animals then humans will suffer, it can also, maybe hurt humans more then animals. You hurt an animals to save many humans.

  • Screw this side!

    This side sucks and no one should post on it! It's stupid and anyone who thinks otherwise is just as stupid as the people who test on animals! I hate this side and i will never post a yes comment on this debate! People who test on animals are stupid!

  • It is nice for people to be able to care more about animals than their fellow man.

    Using animals to test products is much better than testing products on humans. Testing products directly on people without first testing on animals will cause harm to many. There is no reason to risk human lives when an animal can be used. Humans should not be subjected to harmful tests.

  • Depends On the Product

    Honestly there's nothing overly terrible about cosmetic testing on animals. What you think that the bunny they put some lipstick on went through some sort of immeasurable pain? Cmon let's be real here.

    Drug testing in animals also isn't overly bad as it saves countless human lives by letting us know the effects of a drug or medicine before we as humans consume it.

  • Depends on what Products.

    If you're talking about cosmetic products exclusively, then I'd be on the opposite side of this debate, but it looks like you're encompassing a wide-variety of "products" instead. This changes my answer completely because there actually is a reason we test on animals and, honestly, it's pretty important.

    We have done experiments where we were able to discover insulin, something that has saved hundreds of thousands of people. We have reduced the global occurrences of polio by finding a vaccine through animal testing. Hell, we've even made huge strides in different cancers, brain injuries, and other horrible illnesses by using animals as subjects.

    It may sound a bit barbaric, but these things are highly regulated and have an incredible amount of laws put in place to protect animals from mistreatment. The proper housing standards for research animals is heavily influenced and guided by the Animal Welfare Act; all research must be pre-approved by Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee; and every practice that is used throughout the research must be inspected by the Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International.

    What organizations like the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals likes to show you are slaughterhouses and other research teams that don't abide by these rules. Not every developmental research organization is smashing animals and mistreating - in fact, most of the research done is very within the law and supports the health of the animal.

    Don't forget that there's not many animals used for research. "People in the United States eat 9 billion chickens and 150 million cattle, pigs and sheep annually, yet we only use around 26 million animals for research, 95% of which are rodents, birds and fish."

    I think that we're putting too much emphasis on what PETA tells us and not what's actually happening. Animal testing - when humane and ethical - is a very important facet of advancing medical progress. Many people wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for animal testing and, that, I think, should be recognized.

    Http://animalresearch.Thehastingscenter.Org/

  • From a scientific standpoint yes

    Nobody likes the idea of hurting animals but we still eat meat, hunt, use products that are animal tested, have our husbands kill spiders, and get our vaccines. Survival of the fittest, if human lives are being saved then it is just how we are programmed to survive. If someone said kill 20 rats or kill yourself and your family, which would you choose? If you really would rather the 20 rats live then you are a far less selfish person then I. Hypothetical animal testing is wrong, if no one had to die because we wanted to protect all life then I would be so for it being wrong but realistically, not in the world we live in. I respect those who do not eat meat or use animal tested products , I respect those who don't hunt, people who carry the spider out of the house, and are brave enough to put their lives on the line and not receive medical aids. For me, I understand the necessity of animal testing as a way for our species to survive, live longer, along with all the other benifits we receive from it.

  • Animals are self-interested.

    10 million years back, humans are considered weaklings as we don't have sharp claws, sharp teeth, wings or huge strength to protect ourselves. Humans are the underdog, always living in fear of being eaten alive. Does the sabre-tooth tiger or hyenas show any sign of mercy? Or does the other wild life share us their food? NO! Darwin is right, survival of the fittest, animals are self-interested. Their own survival is what matters. Today, we humans have conquered the world. We are on top of the food chain. We can make a species extinct on the press of a button. And why should we show mercy? Product testing on animals is a way to ensure the product is safe for us. The inferior should serve the superior, that's how the animal kingdom works. Animals are self-interested, right?

  • Foolish not to.

    Sure, many new products don't need to be tested on animals because they consist of the same compounds that have already been tested or used without testing and had no adverse reaction. Example, If I use a tested compound as a base for a product and add only use other ingredients, i.E., dyes, that have also been tested in the past. There would be no need to test the new product on animals.
    Where the issue lies is in the testing of new compounds or combining compounds. New compounds often have unforeseeable side effects and combining compounds could also have side effects due to chemical interaction. If a new compound goes untested, it could easily result in damage or even death.
    Either way, all new products are tested. The difference being that the ones that are not tested on animals are using the customers as lab rats. Personally, I would rather have products test on animals than paying to be a lab rat.

  • Can have benefits

    I know, I know, many people might not agree with this side and at first I didn't until I thought of the many good it can do. If we don't test our products on animals then humans will suffer, it can also, maybe hurt humans more then animals. You hurt an animals to save many humans.

  • Animals are innocent.

    What have animals ever done to you to deserve the harsh treatment that they get for the benefit of what? Your beauty? Is it really worth it? These animals have lives too. But they can't stand for themselves. They're too small. Too weak under the power of humans. It's disgraceful. I would have thought that with the technology we have in our world today we would be able to come up with a way to use technical transmitted information to see scientific results on a screen.

  • Animals is same as human

    Why do you think animals have to be test? Because we can have more safer l life? That's not right. Have you think your a mice or something like that and people test you? You can be very painful. It isn't right! All of animals have feeling. Do you really think testing animals are right way?

  • No, but animal testing has use.

    Finding the line, the balance between unnecessary cruelty and responsible research is not easy.

    On the surface, it is very easy to say cosmetics are vanity products. There is no rational reason to allow animal testing on a vanity product. However, you said products, and that's a large group. Do you want to bar animal testing for anything that may be used by people? Any drug? That's very different.

    It is all about our sensitivities. I like animals, don't want to see them mistreated in any way. But, asked logically, using the larger "product" classification, the answer gets fuzzy.

    Posted by: TBR
  • We should just all use natural products

    Many animals are suffering and dying because of this. Why cant us, humans just use all natural products and not have to deal with this animal cruelty. If we all just used natural products instead of this crap that's tested on animals this wouldn't be happening. Animals shouldn't have to suffer like this.

  • All of your arguments attempting to justify animal testing are easily proven false by any educated person.

    If you care so much about research then volunteer and let them test their products on you. Keep you in a cage where you don't have space to stand. Leave you there alone with no food, water, toilet, or space to even turn around. Let them implant medal bolts in your skull and shock you repetitively for days on end with no real scientific goal set. Let them ignore your screams of agony,pain, begging for mercy, begging to die.Let them stand around and laugh as you hopelessly attempt to fight off evil creatures cutting you open&ripping out organs, implanting viruses, burning your inside's with no anesthesia,no pain medicine,no hope, no one to save you. Watch as they boil your fellow victims alive. Our species chooses to be cruel just because they can.
    There are more than enough alternatives. Humanity is an imaginary concept our species has projected onto the ignorant majority in a successful attempt to psychologically manipulate them into believing there is order and hope;that natural law is human law.
    Those who don't use product with or eat meat or dairy live longer, healthier lives and rarely becoming ill. There are millions of people that live with a natural, cruelty free life style.
    There are currently several tech programs that have eliminated any logical reasoning behind animal testing. If you want to know how a human will react to something, test it on humans or use the advanced technological programs with guaranteed results. Anyone and Everyone who is and ever has been involved with animal testing, experimentation, knows that in all reality it is just an excuse to torture and feel good about it.
    As humans, we are over populated as is. Saving more human lives is not a good argument for animal testing when we all know that population control is a necessity that will be forcefully implemented one day soon. These laws and regulations your trying to use to justify animal testing are never enforced. In fact, to report abuse to animals in a testing lab is now, by definition of the law, treason and an act of terrorism. To disagree with animal testing is by law, an act of terrorism. Peaceful protests against animal cruelty can land you in prison. You can protest against a celebrity dyeing their hair orange and become a youtube hero from stopping such a tragedy as hair dye, but you cannot speak out to save millions of innocent lives without being persecuted for it.
    Response to anti PETA argument:
    Animal Testing supporters often attempt to discredit PETA by calling them extremist. You explain that PETA only shows the worst of the worst. PETA are not the extremists. They are the media reporting the unhealthy common extremities our society has allowed to become a social norm. They are one of the rare groups who don't make excuses for the truth just because the blunt reality is inconvenient.

  • Testing on animals is simply wrong

    Its unethical to test products meant for humabs on animals. They have no way of knowing whats going to happen to them, and no way of being able to agree to it or disagree ,and no way of informing them that it hurts. Animals should not be used to test any kind of human product on.

  • Animals is same as human

    Why do you think animals have to be test? Because we can have more safer l life? That's not right. Have you think your a mice or something like that and people test you? You can be very painful. It isn't right! All of animals have feeling. Do you really think testing animals are right way?

  • It is unnecessary cruelty and humans do not benefit either.

    Scientists with common sense are finally saying that humans do not benefit from animal testing: a drug tested on a beagle will not have the same effect on a human's liver, household products tested on rabbits will not get the same reaction from human skin etc etc. It is therefore pointless. It is possible to test products on cultivated human tissue from biopsies or donations that take animal testing out of the scene and test the product on and for whom they are intended to be used without cruelty or harm to anyone. Scientists know what is dangerous and in what quantities so the main reason for carrying out repetitive trials on animals is for job creation (which could be done in so many other areas) and a reluctance to making changes from what they are used to doing for decades, even when the change is for the better.
    Apart from that, any person who can subject another living being to a life of misery and pain before killing it when it is of no further use is sick, twisted and emotionally lacking. There is an aspect missing from these people that makes someone human and humane. If you knew your neighbour was treating their pet that way would accept it as alright? It doesn't make it acceptable just because large corporations are doing it to sell you a product.

  • We should just all use natural products

    Many animals are suffering and dying because of this. Why cant us, humans just use all natural products and not have to deal with this animal cruelty. If we all just used natural products instead of this crap that's tested on animals this wouldn't be happening. Animals shouldn't have to suffer like this.


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