Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
These journals/discussions facilitate deep processing of learning and differentiation of instruction by encouraging critical thinking and independent exploration. They also provide an additional forum for me to give feedback to guide your individual learning.
Psychology
Rubrics
- 15 Points - Response made to the reading and two replies were submitted on two different days relevant to instructional unit
- 10 Points - Response and one reply made to the discussion or two replies were submitted on two different days relevant to reading
- 5 Points - One post was submitted relevant to reading
Postings
Blog Archive
About Me
Requirement
As you read the postings of your classmates, consider how you might add to the discussion. You could ask probing questions, offer examples, share a different perspective, seek clarification, add your own insights based on your experiences from outside this course, etc. Avoid brief comments like, "I agree with Helen." Your goal is to add to the discussion so that further understanding develops. I expect from each participant at least two postings in response to other student answers (this is in addition to posting your answer to the DQs).
31 comments:
I am in the middle of agreeing and disagreeing with animal testing. Animal testing is cruel depending on the type of testing (such as contacts, make-up, shampoo, etc.) because they could react differently than a human would. Animals could die from the testing but it's to save a life of a human being. The dying part is depressive and wrong, but if you think about it, what if your loved one or yourself were the first one to test? Animals don't have a voice so they can't exactly tell them "Hey don't test on me!"
Sometimes, when something happens to an animal, they tend to look sad and have glossy eyes when they look at you. Those looks result in guilt and sometimes cause you to change your mind. That is probably why some people don't like to test on animals because they have life. As for me, I'm neutral on animal testing.
I strongly disagree with animal testing, but there's that 1% of me agreeing with it and that's only because we shouldn't test them on humans. It's hard to watch animals being tested on or to even have the thought in your head that millions of innocent helpless animals are suffering. There's nothing you can really do about it except try to not buy the products that animals were tested on except some of us in fact tend to forget to check the label simply because were not having animal testing in our heads everyday before we purchase the product. we dont think about it at the time.
It makes me feel really emotional and depressed knowing that these animals couldnt live their life a happy life. Its really a shame that they never get the chance to discover freedom or to be loved by a family like the rest of the animals. As beccalima said, im neutral on the animal testing but everyday scientists discover something new or come up with some brilliant idea for mankind to enjoy or for something thats useful in their everyday lives. Why can't they come up with a solution to stop animal testing? Simply because the majority of them DO NOT care which is disappointing.
Testing on animals are not safe for them or humans. What ever affects the animal could have can be different than humans. Especially, when our behaviors and how we function is not the same as animals. Animals do not have the same rights as we do therefor, we should help them. No human or non-human should suffer any pain from the experiments. If anyone had a pet, could you watch a animal like your pet get tested on for humans. Scientists should consider virtual laboratory experiments because it is safer for the animals and for humans.
Without testing in animals we could not advanced in the Medical, Science, Psychology/Sociology or in many other fields. When lacking testing in these fields, Where would society be?
I feel that animal testing is wrong, Why test innocent animals? Why should an animal have to give their life for the improvement of mankind? It's very sad to think, of the hundreds of animals that die each day, just because someone thought this medicine would work. But how would we get an antibiotic for the common cold, strepthroat, or a burn? Meanwhile how did we come up with anesthesia without testing it on animals?
What person (in their right mind) would be the first in line, for a Brain Cancer anitbiotic to be tested on them? What if your brain dissolves? Who would've want to be the very first person that anesthesia was tested on? What if you had to depend on someone else to live, because you were numb for the rest of your life?
I am definitely bias when it comes to animal testing.
I disagree with animal testing. Animals can't defend themselves or tell us when something hurts, so we should give them the right to not be tested on. A lot of the time what works on animals does not even work on humans. I know that we have advanced because of the testing on animals, but look at how many animals we had to hurt or even kill to get there. They shouldn't be put threw that when they are just innocent animals not even knowing what they are going against.
I am for Animal Testing. IF we did not test on animals there is no way we could advance in the medical field and we wouldnt have much of the stuff we have today. Nearly everything that is used for humans was tested on animals prior to human use. Not being able to test products on animals means we would have to test on humans and im pretty sure there arent to many people willing to step up and be tested on. Alltogether i am for animal testing.
I am for animal testing because we need it to advance in science. Without it, all science would be brought to a halt. There is nothing wrong with animal testing. It is just another way scientists find the answers they need. If they did not have to test on them, they would not. But sometimes it is just necessary to do so. Think of it like this. Would you rather have animal testing, human testing, or no more science.
I completely understand why people see animal testing as cruel and unethical. I know I would never want my pet to be tested on and I definitely wouldn't want to cause him pain and I feel like all animals should be given that right. However, as the article points out it is important to use animals such as monkeys and other non-human primates to advance our knowledge when it comes to possible cures for many common ailments in our society.
Now although I believe it is okay to test on these animals before testing on humans there are limits. And I understand that people will say, "Well how can you be sure that the animal is being harmed?" and that's a very valuable point, but if that one animal is put through pain and maybe even killed, it could save many human lives. So I see the point that animal testing is unethical but at the same time we need to weigh our options and see which outcome would benefit a larger group of beneficiaries.
Also in response to Mike Rinehart's post, in which he agrees with animal testing. He makes a good point in saying that many of the products humans use daily now were once tested on animals. And as he points out it is nearly impossible to advance in fields that require testing products before they are used without the use of animal testing. And until an alternative method id developed animal testing is almost a necessity.
It depends on the situation. Because anmals have made a big contribution to medical studies and surgeries. Which have saved many human lives. If it is for a good cause like that then its worth it to do animal reaserch. When animal research is being conducted in animals with shampoos and cosmetics I believe thats wrong. Shampoos and cosmetics is not going to save human lives. It all depends on the research that is being conducted on the animal. I do agree with it but at the same time i don't.
I agree with Paige Chance. Animal testing is sometimes cruel to animals. I mean, what if we were the ones being tested on. I don't think you would like being a guinea pig on new experiments. And since animals can't say "no" we shouldn't be doing harmful tests on them. It just isn't right.
I don't believe that they should test products on animals. Animals don't have the same skin as us, nor do they have the same hair. Animal testing should not be aloud. They can find humans to test products on.
- Carlye George
I think they should be able to test on animals because without animal testing how are we suppose to make new medicine for humans. And without animal testing humand would have to be the ones tested on and i know non of you would like to be tested on.
Im replying to Amanda Long about animal testing. It is not that wrong. It is not like the scientists purposely hurt the animals. In fact, most times the animals feel no pain. Plus, most of these animals were breed for testing, so they are not missing out on a life or anything.
I am for animal testing, because chimps are the closest living models to compare the human body with. I agree with becca in that animal testing should be done sparingly, due to the fact that those issues are not nearly as life threatening. Shampoo and makeup are not worth any life, human or animal.
I understand that animals can appeal to one's emotional side, yet it is necessary to make some sacrifices for the good of a growing nation. If the scientific world wants to progress, there must be forms of testing and experimenting. For example, in Anatomy cats are disected because they were due to be killed anyway in the pound. Therefore there is sometimes a moral reason to killing an animal for science as well.
I partly agree, but disagree at the same time. Testing products on animals is a better tester then humans, yes. But certain products may vary, and could have two dfferent reactions to humans, and animals. We test on animals, yes, that's to save more human lives, but animals can be just as important. Shampoo, make-up, and other materials can really harm an animal, and do no such damage to us. Some testing is very cruel, but some is for the right reasons.
-Brittany Haley
I am torn between agreeing and disagreeing. To a certain extent I agree because animal testing has definately aided us humans and has even saved lives. But it also further engrains the fact that the human race lacks any sense of morality when it comes to saving and enhancing one's life. I mean is this completely self serving and immoral? Well, it kind of is.
But I do think that if the researchers can convince EVERYONE that the animal is not exhibiting any pain whatsoever and the animal is willingly participating in the study, then they should be able to proceed if it will be that benefitial. But if they cannot completely prove this, then they most definately should not. Who are we to say whether an animal can be purchased, and then killed or injured in the name of science? What makes this ethical? Especially if there are alternative methods that can be perfected and replace this.
I agree with erin, it most definately depends on the overall purpose of the experiment. If it is for a practical life altering study, then it probably should be conducted. But At the same time who is to say? Who is to draw that distinctive line stating what is ok, and what is not ok?
The article also should have explained and proved the "painless" experiences better than it was stated.
I think that if there is any way to avoid testing on an animal and still have the product be very effective and safe, then that should be done. However, we really only progress in science and bettering treatment for humans when we use animals as test subjects. Although I feel much sympathy for the animals because they are helpless creatures, I still think that if it is the only way to better mankind, then it needs to be done.
I completely agree with anna frizzell. If there were any way to get around animal testing i would definetly be for it, but until that happens i believe testing on animals is the only way that we will be able to progress in science.
Animal research is something that i kind of agree with, but at the same time i am against. If we did not test on animals we would be testing on humans, and although an animals life is just as important as a humans, people tend to be needed more than a monkey. Acording to the artical there are many times that a drug has work on a primate but failed on the human. Although there are many more times where they were successful on both. Without animal research we would be stoping us from getting closer to cures for different cancers and diseases. Many animals have been hurt or killed from testings gone wrong but much more of the testa have gone right and saved hundreds of lives.
I agree with annafrizzell in the matter that, at this point it is the only way we can progress in science. Even though I wish there was another way, because I love animals, it has to be done.
I can see why people think that animal testing is cruel. I guess it is a little sad, but I'd much rather it be tested before it being used on me. Also, it makes me feel better when I realize how far the world has come in medicine because of the use of animals. I guess I agree with most people here in that when avoidable, it should be avoided. Things like shampoo and soaps have been around long enough that I don't think they need to be tested anymore.
I think animal research is ok because it is better than human research. Because it help us to advance in the medical field. By taking the risk of losing one animal to save many humans in the world. Animal research isnt always a bad thing, if we arnt trying to hurt them during the process.
I agree with sammy and frizzell because It is the only way to progress in science. Until we find another way to do it. Animal testing must go on!
I agree with Jarrod. Animal testing must continue to happen. If there is a point for animal testing such as finding a cure for a disease then this should still take place. Animals may react differently than we do to the "cure" we might have found, but it will be one step closer to finding the human cure. Without the animals being apart of the research we would not be where we are today in the medical field. We obviously don't use animals because we dislike them, but if this testing can save thousands of lives it's obviously well worth the effort.
I think without testing products we won't be able to advance in technology, but the testing should not be done on animals. The testing of products on animals could be considered a form of torture because there's nothing they can do to stop it. Also, it seems like the animal testing would be false information considering animals aren't the same as people. I agree with what Becca Lima's saying!
I happen to think animal testing is wrong.
When it comes to me and my beliefs, I think it’s inhumane. How would you feel if you had to give up your animal for reasons not in your control? Then the government comes and buys little fluffy only to take little fluffy and inject her with things? Everyone knows the lab mice thing. But they say they work on the everyday household pets like cats and dogs. Cats and dogs are not US. Two different species, VERY MUCH.
Now when it comes to medical practice, I understand you DON’T want to use it on humans. Well then, use it on people in death row…use it on people who give up their body to science! Animals cant say STOP and NO….all they can do is whine. And those scientist don’t seem to even care.
You got a product for HUMANS…..then use HUMANS….
I agree with SarahDong and Carlye George
It's abuse in a way...
If a person did that to a human baby, people would be on their case. If they did that to a kitten...Oh IT'S IN THE NAME OF SCIENCE!!
I think that a lie, and also they don't have the same skin as us...
I'm pretty sure perfume on fur is different then perfume on skin.
Animal research is a necassary evil, scientist need to test certain products, surgery methods, and medical supplies on animals, because if they didn't they would test these products on humans! Now, I am not saying i support the testing of eyeliner on those poor little monkey babys, but it is bound to happen the world is full of loopholes, and capitalism. If the make-up company's couldn't test their products then, the make up company's couldn't sell their products, and then the U.S would have a serious deficiency in eyeliner which would cause an uproar, malls would be burnt down, women (and 80's glam rockers) would be up in arms... everybody would feel ugly, and because of this the morale of the entire nation would be down, women think their ugly, men are depressed because their women are mad because they think they are ugly, the world as we know it would end, and so I say yes! I do support animal testing. Why? Because they are animals they are not cognitive beings, and all the propoganda and rhetoric that spews out of the PETA organization doesn't prove a thing. Why? Because PETA humanizes the animals, makes them seem like people but aye theres the rub. Animals are not people.
I disagree and agree with Sydney, OF COURSE people would be angry if somebody tested a foreign substance on a human child... Its a human. But as for your argument about the cat, I must disagree we need to test perfume on cats, because if we didn't test it on cats, we would test on humans, now i would prefer a kitten receive a carconegenic dose of Gucci's new cologne, than a human test subject. Call me naive but I value a human life, over the life of a "cutsey" kitty.
I agree with Angela, the point she made about the advancement of medical testing due to animals, is a good one, and gave me insight
Post a Comment