Speaker Geeks! discussion

Voice out your opinion on this highly debated topic.

I don't have a problem withit.

For a second I thought this said "Animal Texting".

Tab wrote: "For a second I thought this said "Animal Texting"."

lol

I do have large problems with this. If we can test things on animals, we should test them on humans too without their consent too! Do you have a problem with that? Of course!

Animal testing is wrong.

I see where you guys are coming from, but if we couldn't test on animals what could we test on? would you prefer them to put untested drugs out for people to buy and then get some sort of ailment?

.....IDK.....animals shouldn't be our test subjects, though i don't know what we could use....so......*confusion*

It doesn't have t be tested on humans either! How many moisturizers and perfumes do we need?

what about medicine?

That has to be tested on humans because the effects can only be studied truly under out anatomy. Those are voluntary tests with lots of consent forms, and are necessary to measure the placebo effect as well.

It's better to test them on animals first, because then they know there's more of a likelihood of them working before they use it on a human and kill them

Animal testing is wrong...But then again, what else would we test it on :/ Murderers? Rapists?

Perhaps scientists can discover a new way to simulate testing?

yeah

Alright...well...NO. I'm sick of scientists having the compulsive need to improve just everything. Now animals? Heck, no. They're already splicing DNA which I find...for lack of a better word, sickening. LEAVE THE ANIMALS ALONE! I wish they'd just leave live creatures, in general, alone. They have no right to harm or experiment on anything against their will. And animals can't talk so that should just automatically make them off limits. Anything that cannot give their consent on what they will have/won't have done to them should be made illegal to experiment on or harm.

H99 wrote: "Medicine. Cures. That, we need. Zoos shouldn't exist, though. I mean, I don't want tigers and lions roaming everywhere, but they shouldn't be confined in zoos, right?"

Yeah. Unless they are unable to survive in the wild.

Elevetha wrote: "Animals should be treated with a certain degree of respect but let's not forget that they are animals. They don't think the same way we do. They don't have intellect. They aren't humans and they do..."

I never said we should. However, I don't agree with the fact that animals are unnecessarily abused for atrocious reasons. I'd be more strongly opposed to let's say, slavery, than animal abuse because it involves people instead of animals, but animals still deserve to be treated correctly. ((And when I mentioned the DNA splicing I forgot to add HUMAN DNA splicing which is why it makes me sick.)

Michaelhoctor wrote: "Animal testing is wrong...But then again, what else would we test it on :/ Murderers? Rapists?"

Yes! I think that instead of testing on animals, medicine and lotion and stuff should be tested on prisoners who have committed murder. Then, we could just get rid of the death penalty and people would have to actually pay for what they did. No joke.

Um...I wouldn't do it on prisoners. Because, then it really doesn't make us any better than them in terms of crime and torture. I vote a life of solitude and impending isolation for years to come.

yeah, that makes me think a lot of Hitler for some reason...

?

Ruth wrote: "yeah, that makes me think a lot of Hitler for some reason..."

I'm not trying to be like Hitler...

But there actually is talk of passing a bill to get rid of the death pentalty and resorting to torture instead...

Sierra wrote: "Michaelhoctor wrote: "Animal testing is wrong...But then again, what else would we test it on :/ Murderers? Rapists?"

Yes! I think that instead of testing on animals, medicine and lotion and stuff..."

I agree with this very much, because we are testing makeup on the poor mouse who would never really wear it.

But they also test makeup on animals to check if it causes reactions. But would this mouse ever drink regular medicine?

I think it's wrong that animals are often suffering for our wants and needs, I people want new things so bad they should be testing them on themselves not bringing innocent creatures, that gain nothing from the sacrifice themselves, into it!

I am against animal testing, As we all know animals are living things and feel pain just as we do. If we as humans are not capable of being tested on then we shouldnt be making the decision to use defenseless animals.

I'm against animal testing. They don't have opposable thumbs so can't hold the No. 2 pencils. Also, it would throw off the SAT bell curve. IF the animals want to take tests to get their GED, well then, ok.
but I'm not going to spend my time teaching spot how to analyze Edgar Allen Poe or diagram a sentence.

I AIN'T!

Alright, I think animal testing is very wrong. And it needs to be limited... but not stepped. On very important things, I think we would still need it. Animals are not humans, even if they can feel pain.
I hate it when animals are being tested on for stupid things like perfume... pay a human for that. But really important things? Maybe test it on animals that don't feel as much pain...
I know it really makes me sad to think about it, but sometimes it's necessary.

Yeah.

I love animals... but just humans feel way more pain than animals do. But still, I think it's wrong and shouldn't be used unless absolutely necessary.

How do we know that we as humans feel more pain than animals and why do we have the right to choose?

The fact we eat animals isnt what the topic is about. This is about animal testing

Yeah i know i wasnt being bad. The eating of animals is something else though. Thats all i was saying x

Eating is different then testing things on animals, testing can cause horrid side affects and the animal can be exposed to pain for periods of time. I feel like it's testing on a baby, of course that's more extreme, but at the same time animals can not stick up for themselves, they have no say. How would you like it if it was reverse? Would you want animals or something to do test on you? I think not.

Kaylee wrote: "Mrs.Crazy wrote: "Eating is different then testing things on animals, testing can cause horrid side affects and the animal can be exposed to pain for periods of time. I feel like it's testing on a ..."

But they would. Some animals do eat humans. It's just part of the food chain.

H99 wrote: "How are people against animal testing when so many animals die each year to be food for us?"

*shrugs* Im a vegetarian because of it.

Kaylee wrote: "Mrs.Crazy wrote: "Kaylee wrote: "Mrs.Crazy wrote: "Eating is different then testing things on animals, testing can cause horrid side affects and the animal can be exposed to pain for periods of tim..."

And neither do they want to be eaten, but that's just life. And that's okay, it isn't completely your fault. ;)

my opinion is that I consider testing animals for vaccines, medicines etc. a necessary evil.
But I consider testing for makeups, etc. an unnecessary evil.

However, there is no reason for some testing that the animal needs to be conscious or even alive. (meaning you can biopsy some skin samples, for example).

I also think, unfortunately, the concept of intellectual property and corporate espionage means some of the same experiments are conducted repeatedly and redundantly, because the data is not shared.

INDEED, animal testing is wrong.We are using this helpless animals for experimenting and there's nothing they can do about it because,simply, they can't neither speak nor act against it.

On the contrary, we can use them for figuring out some difficult stuffs which will help us to decrease our vulnerabilities.Which is really selfish.

its bad and wrong becaues eaveb apes (the closest species to humans are so difrent to so they cant reallyknow anyway....

let humans cus alot will pay for.teasting

Reviving