Community Chat

[Cakers3]

---

@occasionalrain wrote:

Not fantastic news for the innocent animals tortured to achieve it.

---

@occasionalrain   Were you vaccinated as a child?  Do you receive the flu shot every year?  Have you never taken any medication at all?

Nobody likes animal testing, nobody.  But it would by hypocritical to say we care about animal testing for medicine but take advantage of said medicine when it comes to our health.

[occasionalrain]

@Cakers3  No, I do not get a flu shot or take medication. I can't know about what I got as a child. If something is meant to benefit people, of which we have too many, they should be the ones who volunteer for testing. They can say no, animals can't.

[Oznell]

I've seen no evidence presented that these two extraordinary developments for humanity depended on cruelty to animals.

[Cakers3]

---

@occasionalrain wrote:

@Cakers3  No, I do not get a flu shot or take medication. I can't know about what I got as a child. If something is meant to benefit people, of which we have too many, they should be the ones who volunteer for testing. They can say no, animals can't.

---

@occasionalrain   Vaccinations do not have to be just for children.

I get what you are saying-and again, nobody wants animals to suffer.

You may not need medication but thousands of people do to survive.

Are you saying if you contracted a life-threatening illness you would prefer to die because the medications may (or may not) have been tested on animals?

I am cringing a bit at the "we have too many people" idea-we have had human experimentation throughout history, too.  You know what I'm talking about.

The answer to world over-population is not to experiment solely on humans. 

And humans DO participate in clinical trials.

Animals also benefit from research, too, and are vaccinated, treated for illness, etc.