AnonymousAspy wrote:
Animal testing is a vital part of science, for the time being, Its likely that if ya ever wore any non selfmade clothes, used makeup, had to take medicine for anything or even ate/drunk something not selfmade you took advantage of that.
Hell if there was no animal testing we would not know what was poisonous/dangerous for our health till possibly a large chunk of the population got exposed to something with possibly disastrous consequences. The ammounts of deaths both animal and human would be far higher besides the reason i mentioned above as noone would be willing to commit possible murder to make medicines as they would not be able to test it.
That said, the technology to abolish animal testing is slowly catching up but it is still nowhere near ready to completly to get rid of it
Think of how much MORE we could learn about human health if we tested on actual HUMANS, consent or no! /sarcasm
Actually, a number of scientific bodies consider animal-testing to be unethical and unscientific, and that's been the case for several decades.
We have human tissue samples, computer models, and a variety of more accurate means of testing.
Were that not the case, would it ethically justify using sentient beings as means to human ends?
I'm not seeing how.
_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."