a song by Fear Factory called crash test got me thinking about this topic

i just want to know what everone thinks about animal testing and why. oh im Against it i think it;s wrong playing with there live's

I'm for it when it comes to medicine. I know, Bikki, think of the bunnies, but my grandma's downstairs and wouldn't be alive if it wasn't for animal tested heart medication. And that's the same for so many people. Beauty products? Different thing entirely. I'd rather be The Great Unwashed than have clean hair from Pantene or Head & Shoulders.

Edited by user 02 February 2010 03:21:01(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Not sure what these higher brain functions are that you're talking about, but emotions seem to have developed in the mammalian brain, which means that all mammals experience some range of emotion. If you remove the florid human view of emotions as complex states of mind, all they are is the mind's reaction to a set of circumstances.

The question that is often brought up is whether or not animals feel pain. That's retarded. If they react to pain, they feel it. Pain is a signal in the brain. Whether or not it feels the way it does to humans is irrelevant. People often talk about dogs only showing affection to their owners because they see them as part of their pack, as though that means that it's not really love because it's an automatic response. Well I don't know if you've noticed, but humans tend to automatically love their families too. I guess that means we're not capable of real love either, because we just want to protect our shared genes.

I disagree with this whole notion of humans as being somehow a higher being, that somehow, because we smile when we see a rainbow, that means we're necessarily worthy of a higher set of ethics. Fuck that.

Imagine an alien species flies to the Earth. Physically they're stronger. Mentally they're stronger. Emotionally, they're capable of experiencing feelings beyond human comprehension. To them, pain isn't like we would understand as a response to an injury, it actually physically degrades the parts of their brains responsible for their memories and personalities. So that means they should totally test their drugs on humans right? After all, we're not capable of their level of pain therefore should it not be okay for them to inflict it on us instead of on themselves?

I don't want products tested on animals, I want products tested on humans, with consent. I understand that science and medicine have progressed much faster because of animal testing, and I know that by testing a small sample of animals you can save many more humans. I'm questioning the assumed notion of human ethics, more than anything else. If you are willingly inflicting pain on something, the reason had better be good. The animals don't have the choice, we do, and the choice shouldn't be as easy as "it's easier this way."

Edited by user 02 February 2010 11:13:40(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Who says it's our resources?

Okay, I know you're only young, but that's extremely stupid. Animals are not eating up our resources. The only animals that are eating our resources really are cattle livestock, and that's a human concern not an animal one.

I was sarcastic about that. I'm a proud supporter of the Darwinist ideals, and so I believe, if you want something accomplished, get it accomplished, but you're gonna have to do it with your own force and strength. If us humans want to test animals, then we should do it, but we are going to have to do it with our own force and strength. If animals don't want to be able to get tested, then they should fight back, but they are going to do it with their own force and strength, but unfortunately for them, they ain't that wise nor do they have the strenght to escape. If people don't want animals to be tested, they will have to make sure it doesn't happen, but they will have to do it with their own force and strength. But, for the people who don't want animals to be used for experiments are dumb, because they then would have to use a human for experimentations, which would put a human in risk, but once again, you could classify the human like an animal in this situation. Basically, these experimentations are all dangerous and nobody wants to do them, and those who want animals are merrily saying that they don't want to do it.

So, if you want to have sex with a lady, you should totally just do it, with your own force and strength, and if she's not strong enough to stop you, then that's fine?

Or does it only apply to other species?



Seems to me aliens are more likely to be Collectors than Asari...

This is the "we can therefore we should" argument, either because you believe human life more valuable, or because you believe it is simply the logical course of action, or because you simply don't believe in ethics. Any which way I can't really sympathise with this viewpoint.

Unfortunately we are not that smart yet.

don't get me started on the actual companies making these drugs... Most of the stuff they actually come up with is just a slightly different version of omthing they allready make, but because its new they get to charge more for it.... the companies are not out to solve our problems and cure desease... they make money from human problems and want that to continue.

You're saying that the ends justify the means? Because I'm not sure how fleecing people out of shit-loads of money is not justifiable no matter the means. It's tantamount to extortion. You might as well say, as long as they send the kid back alive, it's okay for someone to kidnap a child and hold them for ransom.