Humanitarian

Agree

No

From a humanitarian perspective, the ideal stance would be to oppose the use of animals in testing due to ethical concerns about causing harm to sentient beings. This view is supported by the growth of alternative testing methods that do not involve animals, such as in vitro testing and computer modeling, which are becoming increasingly viable and effective. The score is not higher because there might be a recognition that, in some specific and critical cases, animal testing could be considered necessary until all alternatives are fully viable for ensuring human safety. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

Yes, but not for cosmetics

This answer reflects a compromise position that aligns with humanitarian concerns by seeking to minimize harm to animals while acknowledging the potential necessity of animal testing for critical medical purposes. The exclusion of cosmetics from allowable testing reflects a humanitarian prioritization of essential over non-essential uses of animals in research. The history of animal welfare movements, which have often advocated for reducing unnecessary suffering, supports this nuanced stance. However, the score is not higher because it still permits animal testing under certain conditions, which some humanitarian perspectives would oppose. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes

Humanitarian ideology, which emphasizes the welfare and rights of all beings, would likely disagree with the unrestricted use of animals in testing due to ethical concerns about animal welfare and rights. Historically, humanitarian perspectives have often been aligned with movements advocating for the ethical treatment of animals, as seen in the establishment of organizations like the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) in the 19th century. However, the score is not -5 because there might be a recognition of the potential necessity of animal testing in critical medical research that could save human lives, albeit under strict ethical guidelines. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.