Don't you agree that it is inhumane to test products on animals? C'mon there are other alternatives.?

No, animals are basically food. If they arent for eating and cant defend themselves from us they have earned the right to be test subjects. The animals dont care at all. Just ask them.

Don't you agree that it is inhumane to test products on animals? C'mon there are other alternatives.?
Absolutely, Positively, Unequivocally YES, I agree NO ANIMAL TESTING!!





There is NOTHING we need bad enough to harm another living creature.
Reply:Yes I agree. It doesn't help anyway, what is bad for animals isn't neccassarily bad for us (and vice versa). How many drugs have they had to recall because they tested safe in animals but turned out to be harmful or deadly to humans?





BTW: Humulin insulin in not made from animals.


Humulin is synthesized in a special non-disease-producing special laboratory strain of Escherichia coli bacteria that has been genetically altered by the addition of the gene for human insulin production.


http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/hum703...
Reply:Like people. I rather them test anamals then humans.........
Reply:hell yeah, and testing drugs is not all they do to animals they torture them with little experiments like starving them or depriving them of water to see how long it takes them to die, or giving them electroshock therapy to see what people go through when they have epoleptic seizures( like that could explain anything), or trying to crush a dogs leg without damaging the muscle, blinding animals for no reason. there is so much shi* that animals are forced to endure thats why people should get their pets spayed and neutered and have the common decency to not get a pet if they are not going to take care of them. instead of animal testing they should test on murderers and child molesters.
Reply:well it depends on what kind of products and animals.so its a sorta for me!
Reply:Yeah, I'd have to agree. Just because we have more intellectual power than animals doesn't give us the right to test on them. Would we have the right to test something on a person who was stupid just because he was stupid?
Reply:All I want to say is everyone *completely* against animal testing (even medical) shouldn't go to the doctor or vet anymore. Even 'simple' but important things like antibiotics and vaccines came to be from animal testing. I think it's wrong to benefit from something you don't believe in, are against and preach about...stand by your beliefs. I won't buy needless things tested on animals (ever), but you better believe I won't turn down cancer treatment...will you?
Reply:I agree with Cat. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge animal lover. I do my part to help by donating to the SPCA, buying household products that don't test on animals, and adopting my pets. I'm by no means saying that animals should be used to test things like hairspray, cleaning solutions, make-up etc. etc. but for medical use, we really don't have another choice. If people were the test dummies and they were dying out like flies, don't you think there would be much more outrage in this country? Let's see 100 human lives or 100 rat lives? Seems pretty obvious to me. If you take your pet to the vet, as most pet owners do, you are supporting animal testing. How else do you think they came up will pet medicines? Would you be willing to let your own pet suffer because you don't agree with the testing needed to heal him? It's also funny how all these people who claim to be sooooo against ALL animal testing are the first in line for vaccines and treatments. A PETA vice President, Mary Beth Sweeten, is a Type A diabetic who uses insulin developed from testing on dogs.....my point exactly. If your child had cancer, would you just say "oh well, we will have to fight this off the best we can without medicine" or would you also be the first in line for the newest life saving treatment? When you get a cold or headache, don't you buy over the counter drugs to ease the symptoms? I find it hard to beleive that anyone can value an animal's life above a human's, but that's just me.
Reply:ANYONE who SAID no IS HEARTLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply:Yes it is. It's disgusting to see some of the things scientists have put animals through. Taking baby monkeys away from their mothers and watching how they react after living in isolation (a dark box) until adulthood, only to be dumped in a pen with other monkeys years later... the poor thing was scared to death.





Sadly that isn't so bad compared to other things i've seen them do (causing retardation). Is abusing "lower life forms" really the correct way to establish human kind as a superior race? I don't think so.
Reply:yes you are totally right it is a very wrong thing to do if there was a different easier cheaper way to test then they would probably jump on the opportunity but there isn't so until they find a way to test on something else then oh well
Reply:Drugs and medicine, I think it's ok.


These drugs could potentially save a life, cure a disease.





Testing products, things we more want then need.


I think it's ridiculous, unfair and cruel.





Something is wrong with our world when we still see it ok to rub shampoo in an animals eye to see what happens.


What a shame.
Reply:Funny is that they don't even have the same effects on us.
Reply:Nothing should ever be tested on animals. Animals were not brought into this world to be tortured, maimed or abused for the sake of humanity. We, as a socierty, have to search for alternatives. 100% Animal Test Free!
Reply:Yes, I agree. Humans seem to be too scared to risk their lives, but they dont think it's a problem to risk the lives of innocent animals. Im not vegetarian or vegan etc. but I still think testing on animals is wrong. I think that we should test the products on ourselfs... maybe.
Reply:yes, it's unsciencetific and cruel anyone who thinks its right is stupid, nothing we've learned in science is from animal testing, animals react difrently to things then we do, insulin shots will kill animals while ppl with diabetis have to take them, why do you thing so many comercial drugs out there have side effects like "head-ache, dry mouth, fainting,dizzyness, and sometimes fatal sideeffect?" its because on animals the drug was harmless but on people its not.











http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/im...





this is unscientific, nothing can be learned from it
Reply:"products" should NOT be tested on animals.


Medications have to be.
Reply:Yeah, you could be the guinnea pig. I know I'd rather them test it on animals before humans...and I love animals.
Reply:No, I can't say I agree with you. Personally, I prefer not to test my cat food on myself before giving it to my cat. I fully expect Science Diet to test its products on animals before selling it to consumers.





As far as household products go, then yes, I agree - and I try not to buy household products that are tested on animals. But I do have my priorities - for example, I could care less if they brush dogs' teeth with toothpaste just as long as they keep the Pine Sol out of it.





I agree somewhat that drugs shouldn't be tested on animals only because there are so many people who are stricken with diseases and debilitating conditions who would be grateful to have the chance to test new medications - people who either can't afford treatment or people who can't be helped any other way. I know that if I developed a medication and needed to test it, I would first try to find some human volunteer subjects before looking for animals. But unfortunately, our society is too lawsuit happy to allow humans to be the first test subjects.
Reply:yep animals are human i bet if they could talk they'll want to rebel agains human hehehe


"treat others how u want to be treated" i guess that inclueds animals
Reply:True.





We should be testing them on Liberals.





Animals are too cute.
Reply:In some cases, no, there is no other alternative, unless you want to go back to Nazi Germany when testing was done on humans.
Reply:Yes, I do agree with you. Especially when there are so many prisons, stuffed with people who would be good candidates.
Reply:I think it's according to what the product is. There are a lot of life saving medications, etc that we would not have if not for animal testing. As much as I love my pets, I do value human life much more than animals.
Reply:its


either


them


or


us


u


kno
Reply:it IS inhuman to do anything to molest animals. Should be tested on humans or not tested at all! humans can talk, animals can not talk!!!!
Reply:Yes, I think it is inhumane. It's a tricky situation though, companies can't just release products that may be harmful to people (and animals) by just relying on computer simulations and tests. I guess for me it depends what exactly they're testing. If it's a new drug that could save lives then I have less of a problem with it.
Reply:Rats and mice.........sure test them.


But not horses or dogs or other animals like that.





Before you know it there will be a group out there trying to save the carrot
Reply:Let's have accurate info before we get bent out of shape! Are we aware that Humulin (it's a type of human insulin) is actually manufacted from porcine (pig) and bovine (cow) insulin, it also has a synthetic aspect as well. These animals help us in other ways that just testing--they are a source of treatment for us poor humans that can't secrete our own hormones and enzymes. Any insulin overdose will harm any critter beit human, canine, feline, and the like. These animals are just a mere few chromosomes off from being our counterparts which is why medical, and I stress the word medical, testing and research is vital to humanity. As far as other alternatives go, in vitro studies using cells from cadavers are used in pharmaceutical research. If we have such a problem with the little fuzzies being used, why don't we pony up our bodies--any volunteers? I have the sticker on my driver's license--do you?