Is animal testing morally wrong?
Around the world, animals are used to test products ranging from shampoos to new drugs to treat cancers. Antibiotics, HIV drugs, insulin and anaesthetics all rely on animal testing, and British law states that any new drug must be tested on at least two different species of live mammal.
Surely this can't be necessary? Animals have as much right to life as humans and modern technology must be able to provide an alternative.
Is it morally wrong to use animals, or is it difficult to ignore the fact that operations on them helped develop techniques such as organ transplants and open-heart surgery?
Do we need animal testing to fight against diseases and to advance medicine? Have your say.
Your comments
-
sue from surrey says:Nov 11, 13:22
animal testing should be banned. They have as much right to live on this planet as we do. Animals do not belong to us.
-
you from me says:Nov 7, 19:16
Experiment on rapists child molesters murderers terrorists NOT innocent defenceless so called animals, the only animals are human ?
-
Michael from Sunderland says:Nov 6, 17:59
I believe that animals are what they are called, animals, we eat them, we enjoy their company.
As long as they are not treated cruelly or put under duress I think for medical purposes we should use them to test drugs etc, but I stress that they should not be cruelly treated. -
sammy from deanfield says:Nov 5, 11:12
i am gay and suk dick
-
lee hodson from porto says:Nov 5, 11:11
i am gay and i lookin for a man but i have already been sexual intercorse and i have hiv
Report this comment:
Comments page 2 of 63
This comment board is closed.
Debate status
- Total comments : 339
- Allowed comments : 315
- Blocked comments : 24
- Waiting for moderation : 0