Sign On
Create Account


single21-Oct-2012ethics/moralitymsgman by votes36155.7%


Do you support or oppose the use of live animals in medical research?

This survey is solely about the use of animals in medical research, for drugs or treatments that will eventually be used on humans. I'm not asking you whether you agree with the use of animals for other purposes, such as testing cosmetics for humans or testing veterinary medicine.

The survey only asks whether you broadly support or oppose the use of live animals in medical research. If you want to give a more nuanced answer, then feel free to explain more in your comments.

5Neither support nor oppose
2Don't know/No opinion

posted 21-Oct-2012 8:17am  
My understanding is there would be no medical research without animal testing. It's something that is required by government agencies at early stages to ensure safety and efficacy. I'd certainly be interested in hearing about alternatives, though.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
posted 21-Oct-2012 11:36am  
Support, for animals like mice and rats. Not for primates, though. It does make me a little queasy to think about the rodents being used, but I think that we wouldn't make nearly the medical advances we do without them.
posted 21-Oct-2012 12:08pm  
posted 21-Oct-2012 12:48pm  
The medical research is not necessary. Use the natural herbs, foods God gave research is really necessary. I don't like cruelty to animals.
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
posted 21-Oct-2012 1:06pm  
Definitely support. I think it should be strictly controlled and done as humanely as possible, but I would prefer to see catastrophic side effects detected in a mouse rather than in my mother.
posted 21-Oct-2012 2:08pm  
Definitely support.People who oppose it would like us to go back the middle ages and medicines based on folklore rather than science.
posted 22-Oct-2012 8:28am  
I'm oppossed. And it really makes it clear that, as a species, we are parasites.
I can't imagine the trauma of a monkey, rat or puppy being subjected to torture.

Of course, all this falls short when I consider the extent of our medical research and the progress we've made, as a species.

Its a hard argument to win.
posted 22-Oct-2012 2:59pm  
I support only because there are no reasonable options.
I oppose because there are far too many reports about medical causing irreparable harm on humans, so I can't imagine what it id to the poor critters.
posted 23-Oct-2012 1:21pm  
This is a tough one for me. I haven't really reached a verdict.

It does seem worse than the unnecessary slaughtering and eating of animals, and yet there's also more justification.

Not using animals doesn't mean we'd stop doing scientific research, it just means that we'd be much slower about it, testing five human volunteer subjects for 30 years, perhaps adding another five every five years, instead of immediately testing 400 animals over three years.
posted 23-Oct-2012 8:23pm  

I used to support it because I was ignorant of the actual process. I imagined it would be bunch of monkeys in the lab and scientists would wash their hair and put make up on them. While not completely ethical, I figured animals were not getting hurt just harassed. Little do I know that animal research is a form of animal torture.

After learning about the horrible practices of animal research I have come to oppose it. However, I oppose it the same way I oppose the abominable practice of animals being raised in sub-standard condition and slaughtered in order to feed us - by turning a blind eye and remembering to care every once in a while... which is, I understand, the stance of most people.
posted 23-Oct-2012 8:25pm  
Wait, I just wrote that whole paragraph above misreading the question - I thought you were asking about using animals for cosmetics research.

For purely medical purposes, yes, I support use of animal lab subjects.
(reply to Iseult) posted 23-Oct-2012 9:01pm  
Yeah, it's a real drag for a rabbit or monkey when they're forced to wear the wrong shade of blue for a month.
posted 28-Oct-2012 2:03am  
Im on the fence about it.I hate animals being used for medical research, but I think it is a necessary evil.
posted 28-Oct-2012 9:41am  
Nothing wrong with it... Personally I know some people who should be used as test subjects...
posted 6-Nov-2012 10:23am  
I'm critical of it. I have trouble making a blanket statement. It really depends on some very specific variables.
posted 13-Jul-2013 1:15am  
My grandson is in the Army Special Forces, and into the Medics. From my understanding, they use live goats to learn things. But, in the end, the animals are put to sleep. It gives me the chills.
posted 17-Jul-2013 6:07pm  
This is a tough one for me. My gut reaction is to say 'No', but realistically, if I thought research on animals would lead to a treatment against cancer, HIV or alzheimers for example, I would think it worth the sacrifice.
posted 19-Jul-2013 1:29pm  
I oppose the use of live animals in medical research because animals just like humans they feel pain and suffer as we do it just breaks my heart in two to see an animal being treated this way for this is wrong in my opinion
(reply to bill) posted 19-Jul-2013 1:31pm  
Well then Bill maybe they should start using humans in medical research labs instead?
(reply to JessicaWoman99) posted 24-Jul-2013 7:00am  
They do. Sometimes they experiment on whole towns in Africa, India, or East Europe without letting the villagers know.

If you'd like to vote and/or comment on this survey, please Sign On

Link this survey:

Hits: 0 today (0 in the last 30 days)