If only it were not nessecary... (Vivisection)

Member Name: MichaelR

Product:	Vivisection
Date:	28/01/01 (43 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Can save lives.

Disadvantages: Animals have to die.

I've thought long and hard about this topic, for years now.

I've also thought long and hard over the past few hours about whether or not to write about this, as I am aware that this is a very sensitive topic, and I am also aware that there are a lot of hard-liners out there. (On both sides)

Before I say anything else, I am aware that the nature of this topic means that there will probably be some comments written about this opinion, but please don't bother with the abusive ones, as I won't read or reply to them. I am going to try to be objective here, and if you don't like what I say, then that's your privilege, and I will happily listen to any reasoned reply. I will not however, listen to outright abuse.

Thank you.

Firstly, since the two topics are very closely related and fall under the collective umbrella of "Animal Rights" may I firstly say that I am very definitely anti-hunting and anti live exports.

I do not condone unnecessary cruelty towards animals. I think that killing for "sport" is totally unjustifiable, as is causing animals to suffer by transporting them in cramped containers over long distances, but since those are different topics, I will leave those alone for now.

Where experimentation on animals differs from the above activities though, is that it is necessary. I really do truly wish that it wasn't.

I really can't see a viable alternative. Some people argue that we should use criminals for this purpose. Well, I believe in the sanctity of human life. I do not believe that it is right to risk the life of another human being, no matter how low that human being may be, he or she has a right to life.

I also believe in the possibility of rehabilitation... and that a person has the right to go back to his or her life after serving his or her debt to society, no matter how heinous their crime.

Even if the prisoner has already
been condemned to death, than I can not condone what would amount to torture.

You may say don't animals also have a right to life too? well, yes they do, to some extent, but I feel that human life has to come before that of other creatures.

If someone came up to you, and gave you this choice:

"Your dog can live, or the closest person in your life to you can live"

and the one that you don't choose is taken away and executed, which would you choose to be the one that lives? I know which I would choose.

I realise that is not exactly what is going on, because we don't have the choice over who is struck down by a fatal illness, but I am just trying to illustrate the point that people have got to come before animals.

I do not condone the testing of cosmetics on animals, as cosmetics are not essential to human life, but I do feel that drugs must be tested on animals to ensure their safety before they are given to humans to take. I feel that it is better for 1000 rats to die than it is for one human.

I am aware that animals, including human beings, all differ in physiology, but I do feel that experimentation on animals is of use in establishing whether or not a drug is safe. If a drug kills another mammal, then it is more than likely to kill a human too.

Once we have established whether or not a drug is safe, then we can move on to test it on humans to assess it's effectiveness, but the safety of human subjects must always be of paramount importance.

I do not agree with unnecessary experiments, but I am sure that everyone, even those against experimentation on animals must see that there are situations where drugs must be tested, and until there is an alternative to testing on animals, one that is viable and sustainable in the long term, then we have no other choice.

You can argue all you like about the morality of it. Yes, perhaps it is immoral to kill ani
mals so that man may live. Is it any more moral to stand by and watch human beings die needlessly though?

The day that a real alternative comes along, I will gladly proclaim my opposition to testing on animals, but I don't think that day will ever come.

Now, just one more point. I would like to say a word or two about those who use violence and intimidation to try and stop testing on animals.

I respect the rights of other people to peaceful protest, and I respect their rights to oppose and even to fight against experimentation on animals.

What I do not respect however is people who kill or otherwise use violence against people for any reason.

Such people think that they have a right to do so because they are acting against "murderers". But what does it make them if they are taking human lives?

Soldiers they might say.... I myself think that is bullshit. They are terrorists, and they are very, very sick in the head if they believe that it is right to kill scientists because they are performing experiments to try and cure people of, in many cases, life threatening illnesses.

OK, I've said my piece now. I'm sure that not everyone will agree with it, but still.... it would be a strange world if everyone agreed with what everyone else said.

Summary: