Should researchers be allowed to use animals in testing the safety of drugs, vaccines, medical devices, and cosmetics?

Yes, but researchers should be ethical and ensure that they minimize risks to the testing population

Only in the testing for the safety of life saving drugs, vaccines and medical devices where it would be inhumane to test on a human subject and where the ends justify the means. For example, testing for potential drugs that can cure diseases or end pandemics. Never for cosmetics.

Test on prisoners that have committed the worse kind of acts. Animals should not suffer but these people should

Yes, unfortunately testing is needed on some products, so only when it can be demonstrated that it needed and only after they have passed prior testing so as to not be dangerous to the animals

Shouldn't humans be testing other humans instead of non-human animals? After all, most of these products are intended strictly for human consumption.

if there is another way then this should always be used, the animals should have some quality of life and not in torture or pain mentally or pysically

Human safety should be paramount, though animals can't express themselves and is our responsibility to ensure their safety and wellbeing.

Yes, but there should be strict rules regarding the kind of testing, types of animals, and assurance of avoiding unnecessary cruelty

I believe yes, but only in regards to drugs, vaccines and only cosmetic procedures that save people lives or for reconstructive surgery. (Trans people, people who how been hurt changing their appearance, or have other conditions that affect someone’s appearance)

Not for cosmetics. Use now significantly reduced for medical research but apply more pressure to use non-animal models

Yes, as long as the product has been fully tested and it is the last option before testing on humans

All drugs and medical vaccines should be lab tested using convicted criminals, specifically the ones on either death row or serving a life sentence.

Def not for cosmetics but even for medical we should try to find the way that causes the least amount of pain to the animals in question

To an extent. I think if there is no other alternative animals should be experimented on if the drug is deemed safe for humans before the start of human trials

Depends on the health of that animal, if it’s old/dying then they can be used for only testing essential drugs/vaccines/medical devices definitely not cosmetics

Providing that any outcome is species relevant and that the benefits could prevent undeniable catastrophe

Yes, and only for medical research if legally human candidates cannot be used. Never for cosmetics or non-medical reasons.

Not for cosmetics. Only where it is proven that the results are relevant to humans and is absolutey necessary. The environment must be good with normal animal rights upheld at all times and where possible the animals should be rehomed not automatically euthanized. DO NOT OUT SOURCE TO OTHER COUNTRIES

Yes, but there should be very high standards of welfare required and length should be limited to a small proportion of the animal's average lifespan

Yes but only when there is absolutely no alternative, and pain control and living conditions for lab animals should be continuously reviewed and improved. And definitely not for cosmetics.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, and only when no other viable option can be found - with a move towards phasing out.

Yes but only for animals that aren't fully developed or havent similar mentalities to humans. Like you can do it on a snail but not monkeys.

It depends on how endangered that animal is, how much longer it has to live, and which type of drug etc.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, and only with rodents or less conscious creatures. No unfair or cruel tests. Never prolong suffering unnecessarily.

Yes, but only as a last resort, and only for human medicines or treatments, no cosmetics or non essential testing etc.

Yes but I think try limit to use dangerous ones that will not massively benefit us and to try use animals on death bed

With strict limits in place and a plan to change practice to eliminate the use of animals. And not for cosmetics

On vermin's as they poisonous and cause more harm to society and species than good. We need to stop draining cow's for milk, their milk is for their offspring's not designed for humans. Would humans share their milk with animal species.

yes but only for medical advancement not cosmetic and the animals should have a good quality of life rather than being trapped in a cage. Also dont take the mick with it, if its essential to use them then its better than testing on humans however lets leave them be as much as possible

Yes, but not for cosmetics and not on certain animals. There should be a minimum level of proof (theoretical or practical) showing further testing is required to avoid unnecessary pain for no gain

Yes, as long as it is done ethically and humanely, and not for unnecessary products such as cosmetics

Yes for life threatening illness only, and a code of conduct on the treatment of the animals in place with strict prosecution if failure to adhere and frequent auditing.

Only in the rare cases where animal testing is proven to produce reliable results for applications in human beings and never for cosmetics

No, products should be tested on convicted peadophiles as they are human and testing would be more accurate

Get better with algorithms and AI to do much more without and only use animals where really necessary. Certainly not for cosmetics!

Do it in a humane way if those animals don't wanna take the drug then its for a reason and maybe test on human volunteers or pay people to test instead who can consent

medicine but after being tested be set free so tested like once and then set free. Or just banned in general it really just depends on what

Yes but allow people to be able to volunteer to do so aswell to decrease the death of animals for this

i think it has to be safe as possible and it should be agreed by the goverment but it should be for certain things.

Yes, but with very strict rules and guidelines, and checks to make sure the animals are being treated well.

Yes and no as how would new drugs and vaccines , medical devices and cosmetics be published if hasn’t passed animal test

no absolutely not, animals should never be used as all animals also have feelings. if you can’t do it to a human, don’t do it to an animal.

If there at things on hand to reverse or help with any damage to the animal then possibly when most needed like with important medical/ scientific reasons.

yes, only if its a needed drug that can only be approved through animal testing and not harm the animal or make them suffer

Maybe aim to phase it out by using human subjects more often in studies. People be given the choice to volunteer. Although I expect the numbers of takers won’t be sufficient enough or the legalities of such things could be a nightmare. We should try though and animals and humans are similar but not the same so testing on a human would be better results wise.

Yes so long as reduced risk of harm to animals.

If there are no other means and it is only for healthcare type reasons not cosmetics.

yes but so long as they are healthy and the number of animals of a species isn't low

Testing of cosmetic products and their ingredients on animals should be banned. Stricter regulations should be in place for medical testing to ensure that results are shared and pharmaceutical companies do not have the right to 'trademark' or protect IP of results (since that would lead to more animal tests being undertaken by other companies).

For now, yes but not for cosmetics, however we need to look at developing a different way to test products.

Yes but no for cosmetics and needs tighter regulations and more control to minimise suffering and harder to do unnecessary tests, also make scientists study ethics.

i think it should only be for stuff that might be a risk to humans and not animals that are endangered like rats

Use of animals for a variety of testing environments should be wholly phased out, but for the moment should continue whilst alternatives are discussed and researched.

Only for vaccines and drugs that are absolutely necessary to help prevent serious disease or help with life threatening symptoms

Yes but not for cosmetics and animals should not suffer as a consequence of testing. Testing time on one animal must be limited.

Animal testing is only the standard model as we have yet to adope a more ethical but as yet untested method of testing. more efford should be put into researching these alternate methods but for now, I support medical testing.

Only for Essential drugs and only if they're crtian the drugs are safe. They should be tested on the worst criminals in society first

If it is vital to further the scientific research being conducted, However it should not if there are other readily available options

If we are willing to test on animals then we can test on humans since we are the ones it is being created for

Yes but only for animals with less intelligence for example it would be wrong to do it on apes but goldfish or things like that are less bad

Only if no other suitable alternative is available, with strict safety and animal welfare regulations

Yes as long as the animals used are not endangered, I also believe that we wouldn’t have endangered animals if had have used them in the first place.

If we ate dodo we would have dodo, if we ate panda we would have panda.

When did you last see a Wild cow ?

If we didn’t eat / need cow we would have very few very skinny Indian looking worshipped cows

Use prisoners. They Dan bargain their years in jail as payment depending on the amount of risk taken.

Yes, but it must be specific. E.g. the animal must have already passed to practice a medical instrument.

Test on criminals that should be on death penalty (aka rapists, pedophiles, terrorists, serial killers.. etc.)

Yes but they should look into more options for stem cell technologies with the aim of abolishing this within a certain timeframe.

Yes, but only where the negative welfare outcomes for the animal participants are outweighed by a direct, measurable, and proportionate benefit to human health/welfare which can be quantified. Such testing must be agreed by the national ethics board as is currently the case.

depends on if the animal is useful to the environment or not

Only for very important testing that are not that harmful. No cosmetics should be tested on animals because if you are that sure of your product there shouldn’t be need to test it

Only for antivenom and cancer research. Even though there is a vaccine for cancer but the big pharma companies are worth an astronomical amount of money and use it as a cash flow

No, use paedophiles instead

Depends on what it is

Use it on criminals

Yes for vaccines and medical devices, no for cosmetics

We should use convicted sex offenders

Yes, but allow animals to be voluntarily replaced with humans for those willing.

As long as it aligns with religious and moral values

They should only be used for minor amount of drug testing

Yes, but only under exceptional circumstances

if the animal is sick or already gonna die ok fine but not an animal that is healthy

Yes should be banned whenever possible

Only when absolutely essential

Murderes, rapists and peadofiles shoukd be used

to a certain extent.

Only recently deceased animals (by natural causes) should be tested on, in a system similar to organ donations after death. Otherwise, under no circumstances should animal testing be legal.

Yes if it is an animal that is no where near to extinction

yes to vaccines not cosmetics

yes, but only if there is no chance of harming them

Yes, but make sure they are as safe as possible first.

It depends on what they are doing to them

If they are going to die anyways then there is no fatal risk

If it is endangered no

Let more educated people decide

Yes, but only for tests that have not been completed before and information shared to prevent unnecessary testing

Yes, not live ones and 0 suffering

Depend on the animal

only if i agree