Experiments on animals for human purposes.
Supporters of the practice argue that virtually every medical achievement in the 20th century relied on the use of animals in some way.
Opponents question the necessity of it, saying that it's cruel, it's poor scientific practice, since it cannot reliably predict effects in humans, and that animals have an intrinsic right not to be used for experimentation.
What do you think?
ok i also will like to ask the same.... thn on whom?? if not tested thn complain ..
if tested othr thn human thn also problem!!! wat a world...
Whom would you like the new medicines to be tested on then?
Or would you take it without any trials for safety?
I remember when I disected frogs when i was in high school..I felt sorry for them,but i had no choice then,I have to pass biology..:)
well I do have my sympathy but unfortunately it is unavoidable till cloning/alternative method is developed for medical testing. All medicines have to be tested in some way or other. To conduct test on human could be more inhuman than on animals. Its like making a choice of less evil. Being on top of the food chain , the chicken life is short, either way its going to end up on my experiment desk or dinner table
will you then subject yourself for scientific testing? :)
interesting subject, controversial like most other subjects.
I think that no scientist would use it if "it's poor scientific practice", or where there's no other alternative.
I remember we were doing the same with the Frogs in the College. Operating them, while they are alive.