Animal Testing on The Increase

Agree2Disagree Forum

Animal Testing Rises

The latest statistics on animal testing in scientific research, published this week, have shown an increase in the practice in the last year. Despite the 2.2% increase since 2002, the Home Office has been quick to point out the essential nature of testing on animals, and the strict regulatory conditions applied throughout the process.

Home Office Minister Caroline Flint said; "There remains a clear need for the use of animals in vital scientific research where no alternative is available. This type of research saves countless lives each year and the Government fully supports the efforts of scientists working to secure medical advances and public health improvements.”

The majority of animals used in experiments in the UK (85%) are rodents, with the bulk of the remainder fish and birds. The use of dogs and cats, along with horses and non-human primates – which are all protected under separate rules to other animals – fell by 8% in the last year.

"Let us not forget, this is essential, life-saving research,” added Caroline Flint. “Scientists carrying out this work have been targeted by extremist groups and the Government has made clear that this type of criminal behaviour will not be tolerated. We recently published plans to strengthen the law further to protect the scientific community, who have the Government's full support."

- Green Consumer Guide

One of the problems with testing on animals is that the results of not even accurate. A rat or a rabbit is biologically very different from a human.

But if they didn't test it on rats and rabbits, we'd have to test it first on humans and the results of the tests would be far worse than when we have a vague idea of what it might do from the animal testing.

If people get so upset about animal testing, imagine how they'd get if we tested everything on people instead?

We do test things on people, and those people, unlike the animals, volunteer.

Testing on animals in the name of medicine may be acceptable...but the testing of cosmetics, personal-care, and household products by spraying these items in animal's eyes or rubbing it into their bare skin, is SICK!

I agree cosmetic testing is pushing it a bit, but medicinal testing is necessary.

What's your opinion on using rat poison to rid your home of rats though? That is no more humane than the way they die when used in laboratories.

While it us unlikely that I would ever have a rat or mouse problem due to my cats, I would not use poision...I would use traps.

Traps? The ones that snap down on the heads of the rodents, strangling and suffocating them until they die?

I was referring to humane traps. The ones were you can trap the "unwanted guest" and release it outside. Not only is it more humane, but more sanitary, in my opinion.

Again, I doubt I would ever have this problem though. A rat or mouse still has an instinct to survive...it would really go against that instinct, to enter a home with several cats.

My basic problem is with the testing of consumer products on animals, such as household products, cosmetics, and personal care items. These items are poured in animal's eyes, applied to their abraded skin, and forced to be ingested. Companies will claim that they have no alternative but, that is a bunch of BS. There are plenty of companies that do not test such products on animals. Somehow, they found alternatives.

The FDA mandates that drugs (over-the-counter & prescription) be tested on animals. So these companies have no choice. But, those who are dealing with such products as I mentioned above, DO have a choice. It is disgusting that they would choose such a practice.

I just received my copy of The National Anti-Vivisection Society's Personal Care For People Who Care book so that I can begin boycotting products from companies that continue this practice and, at the same time, support those companies that have adopted cruelty-free methods of ensuring that their products are safe for humans.

I agree, Anomaly77.


There are many alternatives. Unfortunately, the companies who should be testing their products on humans realize that when humans become involved in any kind of testing or experiment, there is usually a fee to have to pay the humans for their commissioned time. It's cheaper for these companies to pluck stray animals off the streets to conduct their abusive and torturous testing on.

Even pet food companies experiment and test animals in a cruel nature. Iams is one of them. They have video footage of their laboratory practices. Dozens of animals, cats and dogs, are starved for days and weeks. Some of them starve to death. There was a huge boycott on Iams products. The company said they stopped testing on animals, but so far there is no proof that they did stop.

I doubt I would ever have an infestation of any kind either, but if I did, humane removal would be my choice. Rats and mice are animals too.

The National Anti-Vivisection Society is a very worthy society! I was a supporter of Peta for many years, but recently I have become disheartened by some of their practices. Although their cause is admirable in so many ways, I don't understand why they are using Hollywood spokespeople whose bodies are filled with internal and external products that are direct derivatives of animal products and byproducts. Talk about hypocrites!

I think testing should be performed on violent criminal offenders. It would be the only time they would contribute something decent to society.

Animal testing is gay why cant we test it on what chelktty and people who want to commit suicide?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!??!?

.......*walks away slowly*

Domestic animals are bred for consumption, it does not matter if it's for testing, food or fur, but I am opposed to all HUMAN testing, which is totally barbaric. It is equal to Nazism in it's purest form to even suggest such a thing, even on convicted criminals.

So, you're saying that because people eat meat, it should be open season for humans to test on, torture and abuse them any way they please?

What about cats, dogs, chimpanzees, mice, etc? Are you planning on cooking up a nice cat-roast for your next family get-together?

I'm all for human testing. Pay people from poor Countries who can't get access to medicines normally to take experimental medicine... as long as they're educated on the possible risks, I can't see a problem with it considering that its completely voluntary.