The only way testing on animals could be acceptable is for the actual saving of human life. Olay doesn't need to test their face creams on rabbits-if they're dumb enough to produce a product that could be harmful, they shouldn't be in buisness. Even when testing on animals for medicinal purposes (I'm referring to AIDs and Cancer, ect, not the common cold), animals that are similar to humans must be used. However, primates are rather intelligent beings, and testing on them would raise a bloody big uproar. They are the ones you would get the best results out of, though. Rats and mice, very commonly used subjects, are not particularly alike humans, and can yield innaccurate findings.
while it may not do any good to the torturers, it still may make you feel better about yourself that you are not using products that are tested on the incient(sp?) animals. i try to stay away from things that are tested on them, just to make me feel better.
Advance the human race,you fools,there are people in the world that live in almost stone age conditions and you dont give a **** about them,youre all going to die,so tell me why you want to make animals suffer.Why is the human race so important,all is does is destroy things to sustian itself and make iuts life more confortable,the human race isnt far off a parasite.
There is actually no reason why animal testing should occur. There are many non-animal alternatives that are more sufficient to test medical therapies, chemicals, etc. The Epipack Yest, for example, uses cloned skin cells to estimate a humans reaction to a skin irritant This and other tests similar to it have the potential to replace the Draize skin irritancy tests). The Bovine Corneal opacity and Permeability Assay Test uses bovine corneas, obtained as a by-product of regular slaughter house procedure, measures the opacity and permeability of chemicals to the cornes (Thisa can replace the Draize eye irritancy test). Also, testing medicines on animals is very unreliable. Firstly, with animals only about 1/3 of side effects can be detected. Animals cannot report headaches, nausea, dizziness, etc. Secondly, because animals and humans have many phisiological difference there are many different side effects. A drug, such as Thalidamide, which caused no side effects in any of the animals it was tested on caused birth deffects in 10,000 children, who's mothers used it to alleveate morning sickness durring pregnancy. There are about 10,000 drugs taken off the marken permanently or for major labelling changes each year because they cause adverse side effects in humans. Other drugs, such as Penicillin kills guinea pigs, hampsters, and rabbits, but is commonly used in humans. Clinical tests are reliable, not animal tests. There are many other problems with animal testing, but this is getting long. If anyone wants to know anything else about it I'm sure I can tell you. I wrote my thesis on it, so I know most of what there is to know.
Animals are inferior to humans. This is a fact. We were put here to rule and use them however we want. If it saves human life there should be no limit as to what kind of testing is done on animals.
"Freedom is not Free"-Korean War Memorial, Washington DC.
Topics 
