[mrdeadman]

do you think that it is morally/ethically right to test on animals for the advancement of science? people became pissed off when the doctor at Auschwitz tested on humans. the depth of his research is astounding. what are your thoughts on the matter?

[mike]

There is a big difference between testing on animals and testing on humans. What do you expect people to say to this post?

[constant thinker]

Mice are to primitive for me to really care about.

Human testing occurs all the time though even in this day and age.

[Will]

Human testing occurs all the time though even in this day and age.

Has anyone seen 'The Constant Gardener'? Its a very good movie but I don't know if testing drugs on people on that scale (without them knowing) actually happens or not .

[mike]

Mice are to primitive for me to really care about.

Well that is sad for you

Human testing occurs all the time though even in this day and age.

Human testing is not necessarily bad though

[Will]

Human testing occurs all the time though even in this day and age.

Human testing is not necessarily bad though

Unless the humans don't know that they are being tested on.

Has anyone seen 'The Constant Gardener'?

or read it? (just in case you haven't seen/read it- it has virtually nothing to do with gardening!)

[mike]

Unless the humans don't know that they are being tested on.

Of course...

[Will]

Unless the humans don't know that they are being tested on.

Which is what happens in The Constant Gardener.

[mrdeadman]

should we use that doctor's research? if we do we justify the means, but we can learn a lot from it.

[Will]

should we use that doctor's research? if we do we justify the means, but we can learn a lot from it.

What doctor? Are you talking about the murderer you mentioned above? Isn't all that research out of date anyway?

[mrdeadman]

What doctor? Are you talking about the murderer you mentioned above? Isn't all that research out of date anyway?

whatever you want to call him, sick and sadistic as it was, it still could potentially help society. have you seen some of the bs they do to animals?

[Will]

What doctor? Are you talking about the murderer you mentioned above? Isn't all that research out of date anyway?

whatever you want to call him, sick and sadistic as it was,

Are you talking about my comment or his research? (or both!?)

have you seen some of the bs they do to animals?

No- I don't have enough time to worry about the life of a poor little mouse, let alone thousands of them. Anyway, I thought you were all about helping society, not mice welfare?

should we use that doctor's research?

Depends what its for, and if it will offend anyone (very likely). Was his research in biolgical warfare or medicine or something else? If it was medical research I don't think it could've been that groundbreaking, and even if it was, at that time, i still don't see how it could be useful now.

[mrdeadman]

i was talking about his research.
it isn't the mice i was refering to but rather much larger animals.
and the research will be highly offensive to people.

[syko sykes]

as long as the people being tested are consented and agree to the tests it shouldn't really matter. people claim that it's ethically wrong to do testing on humans but someone still has to be the first. would you rather get treated with a newly developed medicine that has only been tested on pigs or one that has actually been tested on humans?

[Will]

i was talking about his research.

Phew !

it isn't the mice i was refering to but rather much larger animals.

Well, to be honest, I still don't care as much as I would if the testing was on humans. I am not religious or anything, but I still think that humans are much more 'important' creatures than non-humans, and I even have a dog!

and the research will be highly offensive to people.

In that case I don't think his research should be used. Just out of interest, what was the research on?