| Author | Message |
|---|
Bollo x
Roaming In Bat Country
Age: 15
Gender: Female
Posts: 5564 | November 16th, 2008 at 11:42pm
I don't
They're still classed as endangered even if there's loads in captivity.
It's if there's less then a certain amount in the wild.
They don't take animals out of the wild to be tested on -they're breed espesh for it.
Gahh. I sound so horrible in my last few posts.
I am still against it when it's not completly nessacairy.
|
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 16th, 2008 at 11:53pm As long as there are plenty of animals in the wild, they can't go extinct or something.
I was actually thinking you were for it too. lol |
Resh
Blinded In Chains
Age: 19
Gender: -
Posts: 435 | November 17th, 2008 at 12:23am What's necessary though? Is testing on animals for anything really necessary? I'd say not, if we don't test on animals it's not going to be the end of the species is it? And i'm not suggesting an alternative, i'm suggesting no testing. I'm not saying testing is a bad idea just that it's not necessary, despite the fact that many people think of it in that way.
By the way, before i get attacked, this is a suggestion for people to think about, as this is a discussion thread i think it should have different views rather than just people agreeing, or the obvious two sides. So, this does not reflect my actual views, although I think people too often tend to forget that science of any kind is a luxury, a privilege and not a necessity. |
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 17th, 2008 at 12:42am Resh, you make a good point. I hear people saying it is necessary, but no one says for what specifically... |
Bollo x
Roaming In Bat Country
Age: 15
Gender: Female
Posts: 5564 | November 17th, 2008 at 05:04pm
nessacairys not really the right word i gues.
your right -it's never nessacairy.
it's probably more "morally right" or the "lesser of two evils"
and it means different things to different people
some people it would always be morally right
but to me (and most other people who say nessacairy) it's like when it could save a human life
|
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 18th, 2008 at 01:25am Let us have a scenario:
Suppose a person has been smoking for a long time. A medicine has been developed to counter the long term effects of smoking. That medicine was made by testing on pigs, monkeys, and mice.
Would it be morally right to give the person the medicine? |
Bollo x
Roaming In Bat Country
Age: 15
Gender: Female
Posts: 5564 | November 18th, 2008 at 08:28am
it depends....
if they didn't understand the health risks when they started smoking (cause alot of school like mine don't really tell you them) and they're gonna give up then yes
but if they're just gonna go and smoke and give themselves cancer again then no.
but that's only if they still have to test the medicine.
if it's already gone through the tests then noone else has to get hurt for it and it's already there so you may as well
|
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 19th, 2008 at 05:00am If someone smokes, they should know the risks involved(EX: the label in cigarrette boxes). |
Bollo x
Roaming In Bat Country
Age: 15
Gender: Female
Posts: 5564 | November 19th, 2008 at 08:41pm
they should, yes.
but that doesn't mean everyone does
and what about people who started smoking before the packets had warnings on?? -back when they thought it was acctually healthy
|
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 20th, 2008 at 05:24am umm...that was a long time ago, I think...I'm not sure though. |
Bollo x
Roaming In Bat Country
Age: 15
Gender: Female
Posts: 5564 | November 20th, 2008 at 05:22pm
this should really be in the smoking thread shouldn't it?
but it wasn't that long ago, only like 20years or summit i think
|
soadfan623
Sidewinder
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 151 | November 21st, 2008 at 12:55am ^you are right.
back on topic, I do not think that people should test expiremental medicines on animals, especially if it is to cure something can be prevented. |