Animal testing is the use of non-human animals in experiments that seek to control the variables that affect the behavior or biological system under study. The United Kingdom was the first country in the world to implement laws protecting animals. In 1822 an Act to Prevent the Cruel and Improper Treatment of Cattle was passed by Parliament. The UK government has publicly stated that animals are sentient beings, not merely commodities, and has confirmed its commitment to the highest possible standards of animal welfare. Animal Welfare Act, an overhaul of pet abuse laws replacing the Protection of Animals Act, came into force in England and Wales in 2007.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Show more types:
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Constituency:
@9Q5W5WP9mos9MO
Only for drugs/vaccines/medical devices after thorough testing prior to ensure animal rights are considered.
@9PSXYR79mos9MO
They could be used for testing for only cures for life threatening diseases and important vaccines and definitely not cosmetics.
@9LN2VDK12mos12MO
Yes, but there should be incredibly strict regulations and a process overseeing proper/reasonable use of said animals for testing.
@9LGXKBKLiberal Democrat12mos12MO
Not for cosmetics - only essential medication and only when absolutely necessary (e.g., when the outcome for trailing on humans is below 50% known).
@9J53CWS1yr1Y
no and yes at the same time, no because it is a danger to the animals if the drug/vaccine/medical device/cosmetic doesn't work the way it is meant to, but yes because in some instances it can help to same lives.
@9FJNZW82yrs2Y
NO. We should be testing on convicted paedophiles. Then we would get better results, and they are rightly punished.
@9FRFHMS2yrs2Y
Yes, sadly but with stickers regulatory oversight despite, humane treatment, not used for cosmetic or things that could be tested on human, limit testing to certain animals and humane treat (to the best extent possible will texting on them, testing doesn’t mean we should ignore animal rights outright) all this with a future goal to phase out animal testing entirely with artificial or computer testing
@9F2C9GZ2yrs2Y
Only for medical use, no cosmetics or harmful scientific research
Yes but not with the chance of death
Test them on nonces and rapists
@9239TCD3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if the research is of significant importance, no alternative model is available and strict welfare standards are met
@8Z2DMJX3yrs3Y
No, add laws which make it easier for humans to volunteer for dangerous testing. Humans can make an informed decision. Animals cannot.
@8YJG3XM3yrs3Y
As long as no animals are harmed
@8Y2Y27J3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if this medical device will save lives.
@8X45WHC3yrs3Y
Only testing for drugs, vaccines, and medical devices but not cosmetics
@8VXS6B4Conservative4yrs4Y
No it should be used on bad people like criminals who are terrible
@8VS8SL74yrs4Y
Small animals like mice are okay to use, but bunny rabbits should not be used
@8TNJ99P4yrs4Y
Yes, but only when there are no reasonable or affordable options available such as cell or tissue testing
@8THY8DK4yrs4Y
All testing should be carried out on people who are guilty of crimes committed against children, rapists, terrorists, traitors and murderers!
@8T555584yrs4Y
Yes, but only where no other alternative can be used and use a percentage of cadavers should be used to test medical devices
@8SNKF2B4yrs4Y
Test on murderers and tortures
@8SNHNNH4yrs4Y
Only for medical purposes where no other non-invasive option is available, and all decisions are made open to transparent peer reviews.
@Redairsxybig4yrs4Y
Only if no alternative testing is viable and they are prepared to test it upon themselves
@8RN9GHH4yrs4Y
If it harms the animals then no
@8R2XKPM4yrs4Y
I don't agree with the use of animals. Their lives are no less valuable than that of humans. There will always be willing human participants for a fee. There will never be willing animal subjects.
@8QGVXSZ4yrs4Y
I think we should test non cosmetics as long as no serious harm is caused and testing is stopped if this occurs. More checks should be carried out regularly
@8QFJKLN4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if it's absolutely necessary for example medicine.
@Betr0n4yrs4Y
Yes, until we find an alternative method
@8HB9G4R4yrs4Y
Yes for vaccines and medical devices as long as the testing is humane as possible, however alternate methods such as artificially-produced human cells should be used whenever feasible.
@8DL6F9T5yrs5Y
Only if no other alternative exists and strongly follow ethical guidelines and not for cosmetics
@9CJ9HHQ2yrs2Y
Only if it does not cause them pain or distress
@9BJ48Z42yrs2Y
Yes, but only where required to prove clinical efficacy
@99QTCCB2yrs2Y
Depends on the animal, ie rodents
@98S7Y6LWomen's Equality2yrs2Y
Yes in extreme circumstances
@98KNHLN2yrs2Y
Certain animals that may pose a threat or create illnesses can be tested on. I'm unsure of another way.
@98HY77X2yrs2Y
It's inhumane but you've got to test it safely before giving it to the world
@98H2YQM2yrs2Y
Yes, but only where the societal value exceeds a certain threshold level, to be determined by a special tribunal that will consider case-by-case (and therefore set make decisions that serve as precedent for future cases).
Yes, but not for cosmetics and until there is a new and safer method developed that does not impact animals.
@96RVGPD2yrs2Y
For medical purposes and with welfare safeguards
@968WSR72yrs2Y
Test them on criminals such as pedos, rapes and some murders if they have done it for no reasons
@9688VQ42yrs2Y
Only if it can be proven that the testing is actually comparable to testing on a human
@8ZMBC8H3yrs3Y
Once tested on man made cells first
@8WP5YWP3yrs3Y
No, they should be tested on criminals on death row
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
