This is not my...Debate
 |
Protesting against the protesters - in a twist last week those in support of medical research on animals took to the streets.
However, though some are against animal testing on ethical grounds, others claim it to be inaccurate. |
Do you think that animal testing is the best way of undertaking medical research?
Have your say. Click here
(Make sure that you fill in all the fields as otherwise it is really annoying and eats your text.)
Your Comments...
Beagles
Medical research is one thing but no Beagle should be made to smoke B&H. Leave that to the monkeys they love it...
- Cam
(Erm...?! - Susie)
I suppose we could always test the new drugs on the homeless and the starving or our countries enemies. No one really seems to care about them unless of course it means having a free concert in the park.
It never fails to amaze me that people care more about doing something about the baby seals, puppies and monkeys than they do their fellow humans.
I guess it's so much easier to love and care for our four-legged creatures than it is to get to know our neighbours or extend an olive branch to our enemies.
Sincerely,
Extreme Bobby ;-)
Whether or not animal testing is the best method of medical research is avoiding the real issue.
We should instead be asking: is it ethical, is it moral, to be using animals in this way?
As humans we have developed power over, and therefore a responsibilty towards, the animal kingdom. Some take the biblical line: "God gave man power over the animals", to mean that we can eat them, wear them, put them in cages and cut them up in the name of research.
Others interpret it to mean we should look after animals and their habitats and respect them as fellow sentient beings.
Some may say that the benefits of animal testing outweigh the suffering caused. Would the same argument be used to advocate the vivisection of Jewish prisoners by Nazi 'doctors' during World War II?
This is all not to mention the huge amounts of money that animal testing generates for companies invloved in it and the difference between animal and human organisms that make animal experiments redundant.
We as human beings should not be abusing our fellow creatures as we do. We should have advanced as a society beyond this level.
And the sooner we do the better.
- Simon
No method of testing is perfect, whether using animals or using no animals. The suffering caused by releasing products onto the market which have unexpected side-effects can be enormous: take thalidomide for example.
It's because of tragedies like these that strict testing must be done before a drug is released onto the market. Now - would you allow a drug to be tested on you if you were pregnant to assess whether it causes birth defects?
Of course not.
But maybe the closest we can get to assessing the risk of birth defects is to test on animals. I want to be as sure as possible that a drug is safe before I would use it. Some would say it's wrong to test our drugs on animals. I would like to look at this value judgement from a different angle.
If you admit that it's permissible to take animal life for food or clothing, then is it any different to take an animal's life for testing a drug with human health benefits?
Just as we are concerned to ensure humane killing of animals in an abattoir and to minimise suffering, we should also ensure strict rules are enforced in any animal testing to minimise suffering and pain.
Using animals in research with great care for the wellbeing of the animal during the testing is one very useful option for assessing the safety of drugs. There are many other useful techniques for testing which do not require animals. ALL options should be considered in testing. No option provides a failsafe method and there is always risk.
Finally, I would like to express my extreme disgust at the tactics of the militant animal rights campaigners whose behaviour in persecuting those who are doing animal testing has robbed them of any respect in my eyes.
The testers are doing nothing illegal. But the militants are.
Whereas I normally welcome discussion on these points, for me they have lost all credibility and their actions are far worse than anything they accuse their victims of.
- Christine
