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

Their are other tests available. Animal testing should ONLY be used is it's absolutely nesasery, not because it's "easier and cheeper" and NOT for cosmetics.

(a perspective I like) No, only humans that have consented to being tested on and who are rewarded. Potentially death row inmate's too. However, they should still be given the choice, which will only add a year onto their death row wait.

Only for medical reasons and there should be a strict code for how the animals are treated (they should get to live in comfort and have good lives before and after testing)

only when absolutely necessary for the development of new life-saving treatments, not cosmetics or medical devices

Yes, but only if the products are non-dangerous in nature, and not used on rabbits unless they are what the product is made for.

Yes but only when essential (not cosmetics) and the animals should be well treated and should not suffer.

For important and life-saving medications and vaccinations where no other means would be sufficient. Animals should be treated with as much dignity as possible with efforts made to make them comfortable.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, not for repeated testing of safe compounds and with strict rules on cruelty.

These products are for humans, we should use humans. Killing an innocent life for the sake of humanity is dumb.

Yes, but it should be as the very last resort, always humane, and never for cosmetics; animal welfare should be prioritised

Yes, but not for cosmetics and further regulations should be put in place to reduce unnecessary cruelty.

Yes, as long as it's not fatal, or if it unintentionally is researchers do whatever they can to maintain life of the animals.

I agree that animals should be allowed to test drugs, vaccines and medical devices, but not the testing of cosmetics.

Not for cosmetics and very very minimally thereafter, and only for short periods, after which the animals are released (for re-homing etc)

Yes, however not for cosmetics and only until we can run simulations that provide the same or better results.

animals have helped us alot within the medical field however as we progress and find new modern alternatives to testing on animals, its just cruel and unnecessary- alot of the animals tested on are abused, starved and kept in cages their whole lives which should be illegal.
Cosmetic testing should be completely band.

Only if the thing being tested is either: A: Designed for animals in particular B: Completely harmless to the animals and stress-free (i.e. soap) Also, the animals should have exceptional welfare where this is regarded.

Animal testing should only be used if it would directly lead to saving another life, but not for instances which could be done in paid clinical trials on humans or for cosmetics or if a synthetic version is available bur more expensive

Yes, but only when impossible to use a human alternative

Many of the things tested on animals are for human use We have enough people in prison such as sex offenders child killers ect that can be utilised use the guilty mot the innocent

Yes, but not for cosmetics. Its fine if its necessary to save human lives, but not so some can keep up with today's trends and fashions.

If they are desperate to continue selling then that should be the very least resort, or just test on humans

Yes, but only where there is no other option

If necessary than yes, however we should minimise harm to all in general and reduce animal cruelty if possible without causing even greater harm to humans

Yes but not for cosmetics and only if the animals are kept in good environments when not being tested, are fed well and looked after and if they need to be tested they are only tested once or twice every 2 or 3 months.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, along with proper upholding of animal rights and regular checks for this.

Massively depends on the risk

Depends on the products and animals

Only when there is to be detrimental damage to the general public / human genetic populations.

People on death row should be tested instead of animals

Only for life saving drugs and only as a must

No, drugs tested on animals may show as a success but once test on humans they fail. This has been shown in scientific research and human tissue can be used which is more accurate.

Only for wild animals that are not common in a UK household.

Yes as long as they have passed all prior tests

criminals who are pedophiles rapists serial killers etc should be used instead

Definitely NOT!! Never! Science is far too advanced to need to use these out of date practices! …. Just stop it! Leave the animals out of it!

Yes but as humanly as possible

Only if there is absolutely no other alternatives.

if they need to test on a living creature then yes test on animals instead of humans

As long as the testing dose not harm the animals

Only if it dose not harm the animal in any way

Yes, as long as there is a consistent high ethical standard for the animals well being.

The practice should only be used if:
1) A more appropriate proxy (ie human tissue samples) cannot be found.
2) There is an imperative clinical need for testing to be done in a live enviroment.
3) That all harm and suffering be minimised as much as possible to the creature involved.
4) That these tests are conducted under a neutral body with legal oversight to punish violations.

Animals should not be tested as they are unable to give consent whereas people understand the possible repercussions and can agree to participate.

test them on refugees

people that bum people and that

Yes, but greater funding should be made available for research in to animal free testing models to increase the speed at which animal testing can be phased out.

Yes but only for medicines

Nope should be people that are used for testing as in people who have committed murder rape ect

Only lab rats not any animal taken from anywhere

No test on adults in prison long term

Yes as long as the animals aren't hurt killed at the end of the experiment

Complex issue, highly regulated

Yes, but in very rare circumstances. It should be absolutely necessary and if testing on humans is inappropriate

Rather than animals test on violent criminals

Yes but experiments must be humane.

No, test them on convicted rapists, sex offenders, murders instead.

No, unnecessary for cosmetics, inefficient in medical practise - diverts money away from finding newer, more effective and efficient methods.

Yes, but only if it's deemed absolutely necessary to ensure public safety

Yes for medical and drug use not for cosmetics.

As necessary

Yes, but with restrictions and must be done ethically.

No, we have cruelty-free alternatives available now

Only if the animal is not harmed in any way

Only if no harm or damage is caused to the animal

Only in rare circumstances for medical purposes only (not for cosmetics)

Test on prisoners instead

Yes, but regularly monitored to ensure conditions for the animals involved are optimal & humane

Yes but only for medicinal research purposes, and only where it is unlikely to cause the animal harm, suffering or discomfort. No cosmetics should be allowed to be tested on animals.

If humans want these things test you them on humans!!!

Yes, but only when testing is unlikely to cause significant distress

No, only criminals who commit extreme crimes

look yeh fam its not good for the animal dem get me. I am a vegan my drilla

I think if it’s for a life saving product yes but for cosmetics and things like that no

They should ban the use of gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutans in experiments and find alternative ways to test efficacy and safety of such products.

Only if the animal is not harmed

Yes if its humane

Only if the animals will not be harmed

Only for testing the safety of live saving medical treatment and vaccines

No, use volunteering humans and gradually phase out animal testing until a solution is found

Yes but only if it’s the safest option.

Yes as long as the animal is well treated, does not suffer and the work is essential such as vaccines and not cosmetics.

Yes, but more funding should be used to find alternative

Yes, but only for essential research, e.g. medicines, therapies etc

Yes, but there should be a focus on regulating the use of vertebrates rather than invertebrates

Vaccines and medical but not cosmetic

only for drug safety

Depending on the animal involved

Only to rats but not cosmetics

Yes, but there’s should be stricter rules on the animals safety. They shouldn’t be tested on in all circumstances

No, they should use serious sex offenders instead.

Yes, but within a clearly regulated framework that minimises harm

allow for drugs vaccines and medication but not cosmetics

sfcklshdjdginuahgmihgigbigjkljghjce

Only for drug and vaccine use not cosmetic

Not for cosmetics, where testing has already proved items to be safe. No need to create new ones in this day and age.