Animal testing: Do you support it and in what capacity?

[Paradoxical]

Poll question: Animal testing: Do you support it and in what capacity?

I just finished watching a documentary on the Animal Liberation Front and their involvement in various forms of sabotage against the animal testing industries.

A main theme of the video was the promotion of the idea that all forms of animal testing are unethical and should be stopped.

While I agree that certain forms of animal testing are unethical as well as ineffective, I also understand that animal testing still has a place in the research and, especially, the medical community.

If there is anyone here with strong opinions one way or the other, it would be really great if you guys could post some evidence to substantiate your claims.

[flvegan]

1. This should be outstanding.

:popcorn:

Can I ask what documentary you watched on this "Animal Liberation Front" just so I can view it as well?

[Paradoxical]

2. I think it was called "Behind The Mask"

I have a fairly extensive understanding of the animal rights movement and have been doing research on it for years. I especially am fond of Peter Singer.

[flvegan]

4. By Uncaged Films. A brilliant piece of work.

I've recommended that documentary time and again here on DU. Glad you enjoyed it. Nice to see friends on the big screen, so to speak.

[Paradoxical]

6. One argument in the film was that animal testing provides little to no substantive data.

Which I really had no place to speak on as I have zero experience in the medical industry.

But I've spoken to several biology majors and bio-medical engineers who say that all animal testing is unethical and unnecessary except for very specific forms within the medical community. Which is basically where I stand right now. The vast majority of the time it's wrong. But there are times when there is no alternative and there is high potential for the saving of many lives.

[flvegan]

8. I'm never going to suggest that no usable data can be garnered from

animal testing one way or another. No more than I'd say we could take 2 groups of 2,000 children and drop one bomb of one kind on group A and one bomb on group B and see which is more effective. That's good data. Which brings us back to ethics. Animal testing is unethical. Bottom line. Nothing more needs to be said. I think that probably brings us back to Peter Singer (whom, btw, is largely hated here at DU, IIRC).

[Paradoxical]

9. Well from what I understand Singer is not against all forms of testing.

He simply made it perfectly clear that if you think it's okay to have animal testing on certain animals, you have to be okay with testing on certain types of humans. Like humans with severe brain damage to the point where consciousness is lost.

And I do.

I'm much more of a utilitarian than any other form of ethicist. So I do not necessarily think that all forms of animal testing are unethical. But most of them are. Especially in places like the cosmetic industry. Totally fucked up.

[flvegan]

10. The cosmetic industry

is about vanity. We really need to quadrant the whole thing into a need v want sort of thing. As for Peter Singer, like I said, we're back to universal acceptance. If it's okay to test Marlboros on a room full of beagles, why not death row inmates? Oh, well see that's where it comes down to we humans think one species (ours) is better than another (everything else).

All forms of animal testing are unethical. Animals have no choice to be a part of it. "Being a beagle" shouldn't be a consequence.

[Paradoxical]

14. So you are against all animal testing?

[flvegan]

22. Yes.

Wanted to be sure I answered your question. I am against all animal testing.

[Cid_B]

19. Reminds me of a quote...

... from a show I saw on the subject.

Something about how they would personally choke out every monkey on the face the earth to save one homeless junkie with aids.

IOW folks have to decide if they think human life is more important than a pig. Some folks say yes but I suspect that in the end if it came down to it they would utilize research garnered from animal testing if they had to save their life or their childs life.

[Blue-Jay]

24. "Animal Liberation Front"?

OP probably watched a rerun of ALF and got confused. He liked to eat cats, you know. (tastes like chik'n-or whatever you weirdos call it) :D

[blondeatlast]

3. I'm biased here--I take insulin and realize that animal testing

resulted in what keeps me alive.

I very much don't like the idea and would like very, very, very strict regulation of it, though.

Edit: my 'l" key seems to be failing...

[originalpckelly]

5. I think that No Child Left Behind needs to stick to humans.

They really are going overboard on this one.

[REP]

7. I avoid it as much as I can

Unfortunately, I need pharmaceutical drugs to stay alive so I'm not avoiding some of the worst of it.

I don't know enough to know if it's the only way to save human (and other non-human animal) lives. If it truly is, their treatment needs to be improved. If it isn't, it needs to stop.

[blondeatlast]

11. I would think they could be maintained much more humanely.

I would think an attempt to mimic their natural living conditions would be more likely to produce stronger results than more stressful, artificial ones. A little grass and trees and a pond or soething--it doesn't seem all that hard and think of the good publitcity that would come the way of any pharma co. that would do it.

I take insulin--right there with you--it makes me uncomfortable, but I sure as hell am not going to get sick and die over it.

Edit: FWIW, I take DNA derived insulin now, but spent many, many years on beef and pork derived.

[jillan]

12. No - but when it comes to medication, I would rather have it tested on mice than humans.

But no testing on dogs or cats.

I'm so torn on this. I just don't want medications being tested on humans.

[flvegan]

13. No testing on dogs or cats.

But primates, etc are okay? Can I ask why?

[Maru Kitteh]

15. Zero. None.

[Raine]

16. Zero support from me, absolutely none nt

[grahamhgreen]

17. No testing. There's an interesting novel about this: Bronwyn Finds Her Cat

http://www.amazon.com/Bronwyn-Finds-Her-Cat-ebook/dp/B003LL371Y

[shockra]

18. Do not support.

This subject reminded me of a quote which I think sums it all up.

Isn't man an amazing animal? He kills wildlife by the millions in order to protect his domestic animals and their feed. Then he kills domestic animals by the billions and eats them. This in turn kills man by the millions, because eating all those animals leads to degenerative -- and fatal -- health conditions like heart disease, kidney disease, and cancer. So then man tortures and kills millions more animals to look for cures for these diseases. Elsewhere, millions of other human beings are being killed by hunger and malnutrition because food they could eat is being used to fatten domestic animals. Meanwhile, some people are dying of sad laughter at the absurdity of man, who kills so easily and so violently, and once a year sends out cards praying for "Peace on Earth."

--Preface from Old MacDonald's Factory Farm by C. David Coates

[Sky Masterson]

20. I tested my cats earlier

They don't know shit about anything except how to manipulate me.

[The2ndWheel]

21. Human testing for human progress

We shouldn't privatize the profits and socialize the costs, right? I mean, we're always bitching about corporations doing that. We're certainly not testing on other animals for their benefit. It's all about human greed.

All testing done for people, should be done on people. Voluntarily, of course. If progress is what we think it is, we should be lining up to help our fellow man. Small price to pay, I would think.

[iris27]

23. I think it could be drastically reduced and done much more humanely.

It seems little hypocritical for me to set out traps for the rats that invaded my garage, but be against their use in research that could save lives.

However, the sheer scale of deaths involved, the vivisections, it all just seems so wasteful.

I almost applied for a lab animal caretaker position at my local university, once. Figured I'd just be cleaning cages, feeding, etc. Then I found out they use lots of other animals besides just mice and rats...one of about 3 centers in the country to use dogs. How the hell could I leave dozens of dogs caged up at night, awaiting another day of god knows what to be done to them, then go home and scratch my pup behind the ears?

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. I support standardized testing for all animals. No Animal Left Behind. n/t

[petronius]

26. The primates have an unfair advantage - have you ever watched a bunny try

to bubble in a scantron?

[JVS]

27. I trust researchers to make these decisions.