Try the political quiz
+

Filter by type

Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

353 Replies

 @9PVZJB3Labouranswered…9mos9MO

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

 @9PJJ7DYanswered…9mos9MO

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

 @9TQCCGNanswered…6mos6MO

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

 @9677WZ2answered…2yrs2Y

 @9663Y8Sanswered…2yrs2Y

 @95Q52RVanswered…3yrs3Y

Yes, but not for cosmetics, and only after there is relative theoretical proof that the drug is safe

 @95Q4X6Ranswered…3yrs3Y

Only if the drug is not dangerous. If we do not know its dangerous then we should not.

 @92FXBBKanswered…3yrs3Y

yes but humanely, if there is pain or side affects that could cause inhumane treatment on any level then no. The animal should be happy.

 @8ZL2GLYanswered…3yrs3Y

 @8S77NHLLiberal Democratanswered…4yrs4Y

Difficult question nit for cosmetics but if medical then if very carefully monitored and only if no other way then we may have to do it.

 @8RR4577answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but as long as it doesn’t permanently harm or diminish the rights of the animal.

 @98SZ7P3answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but support human trials for those willing to take part in the early stages to replace animals.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...