Originally Posted by Kaioo
Animal Experimentation is sickening, however, it must be done to allow us to bring out these drugs and stuff which essentially can be used to cure illnesses. We need to test them on animals, as essentially, they have no conscience like we do. Plus, mouse and rat's insides are similar to ours.
What would you do if a sibling of yours was brought up for an experiment and died because it was lethal to humans? You would complain, obviously, say they should of tested it on something first... And that is why animals are tested on. There's a rat or mouse within 6 foot of everyone at all times, so put that to scale, the rats or mice being used for experimentation are nothing in the scale of rodents in the world.
In Britain alone there are more rodents than humans.
I'm getting fed up with people who just say it's sickening without understanding of how research with animals actually works. It's just like the evolution topic: people comment because they are completely ignorant of the situation at hand. Again, animal research is not that bad. They are, for the most part, treated as well as any reasonable ethical standard. And I must again stress that this type of treatment is better than how we treat the majority of the population of humans in the world. If we are to find animal research sickening, we should be focusing on why we're treating our own species worse in general and figure out how to deal with that first.
Well, mice are the closest cheap alternative we have. Not that everything is similar/same though.
Also, people aren't replying to your view because they more or less have the same views. I'm their opponent.
Originally Posted by Male Snorunt
I'm not understanding what you mean when you say we're treating them better by doing expirementation on them. And where do you get the statistic that "90% of humans value non-humans' lives over humans" while if someone is grossed out by an insect, they will crush it under their palm?
Think where the majority of humans exist. If we run under your assumption that treating non-human animals better is equal to valuing the life of non-human animals more, then that is the only conclusion we can arrive at. Obviously it's not a statistic, and obviously nobody would bother to find a statistic such as this (I mean, who'd get funding for that?). Secondly, this is about animal experimentation, not about random people crushing insects (even then we still do better than a majority of humans, at least the insects didn't suffer before dying). Do you have any idea on how animal experimentation even works? Do you know that there are strict laws and guidelines of ethical treatment of animals in animal research? Should it matter that you should be informed
before making a comment?
Originally Posted by Sixto
I don't consider a human life more valuable than a human's, but sometimes (although it may sound crazy) I think they should be considered equal, especially when a person is purposely abusing an animal. If it must be done for our well being, fine. But I'd rather not see it happen or think about it.
Just like watching Animal Planet: when I see a calf, in pain, trying to escape the grip or a lioness, there's nothing that can be done. It's life. In this case, (in a way) we are the lioness and the calf is the animal being experimented on. It's life. And it's important for our life.
Although, I am relieved to hear that experiments are causing less pain on animals. But I can't support or condone it. =\
I understand that there is obviously no possible way to persuade someone who has understanding of animal research, and I respect your ethical choice. I am relieved that I did at least relieve some of your worries, as for some reason people just seem to like to comment about these things without knowing literally anything about it. Seriously, we're not monsters that torture animals for fun and "research" and that's exactly the image we get from people. That's the basic premise of why I do reply to obviously heavily misinformed posts like the ones above you.