Animal Testing: The Present and the Future...

Was just having a discussion about this with some friends and wondering what you guys think.

Is it necessary? I know many big companies like Wilkinson and Procter and Gamble do this. A friend of mine happens to live near a place that tests their products on animals. Garnier is the name of the company I believe, along with a few others in that area. I also discovered on the box of Mitchell Woolfat soap that they do not test their products on animals. How does this affect your purchase? Would you guys rather buy a product you know did not bring any suffering to animals or whether you are unbiased. Please share your thoughts, and please keep it civil, as I'd prefer this to not turn into a heated argument.

New2DEShaving_Montreal said:

Was just having a discussion about this with some friends and wondering what you guys think.

Is it necessary? I know many big companies like Wilkinson and Procter and Gamble do this. A friend of mine happens to live near a place that tests their products on animals. Garnier is the name of the company I believe, along with a few others in that area. I also discovered on the box of Mitchell Woolfat soap that they do not test their products on animals. How does this affect your purchase? Would you guys rather buy a product you know did not bring any suffering to animals or whether you are unbiased. Please share your thoughts, and please keep it civil, as I'd prefer this to not turn into a heated argument.

Click to expand...

Some products do not need to be animal tested since everything in them has perfectly well know properties, has been used almost that exact formulation for many years, or the product hasn't changed for many years. Stuff like soaps and many cosmetics fall into this category.

The big problems happen when you start discussing drug development and chemical safety testing. That stuff *must* be tested on animals because biolological beings respond in very strange ways to certain sorts of relatively minor chemical changes. (cf. splenda aka left-handed sugar, thalidomide) (see also enantiomers and optical isomers)(further reading: chirality)

I feel that for cosmetics and such animal testing isn't always necessary and I prefer products that aren't tested on animals.


/bout time some of those chem classes came in handy

arghblech said:

Some products do not need to be animal tested since everything in them has perfectly well know properties, has been used almost that exact formulation for many years, or the product hasn't changed for many years. Stuff like soaps and many cosmetics fall into this category.

The big problems happen when you start discussing drug development and chemical safety testing. That stuff *must* be tested on animals because biolological beings respond in very strange ways to certain sorts of relatively minor chemical changes. (cf. splenda aka left-handed sugar, thalidomide) (see also enantiomers and optical isomers)(further reading: chirality)

I feel that for cosmetics and such animal testing isn't always necessary and I prefer products that aren't tested on animals.


/bout time some of those chem classes came in handy

Click to expand...

+1 on testing certain things on animals. I don't like the cruelty aspect of it but think of all the medicines we wouldn't have without it.

I never give it a thought.

I am of the belief that animals were put on earth to do the bidding of, and serve the purposes of mankind.

Anything short of all out abuse is fine by me, provided it is at least somewhat necessary.

Animal testing is not something that I consider or look for in selecting products. But I do favorably notice those products that claim there is no animal testing involved.

Eventually more methods will be developed to replace animal testing, but I don't ever see it going away completely. Sometimes you have to let the lab rat have the final say.

Fnord5 said:

I never give it a thought.

I am of the belief that animals were put on earth to do the bidding of, and serve the purposes of mankind.

Anything short of all out abuse is fine by me, provided it is at least somewhat necessary.

Click to expand...

I partially agree. I'm completely against gratuitous abuse but I don't equate an animal's life to a human being's. If there are no other viable options for testing a drug without taking chances with human life, then animal testing to me is necessary. Many people dislike it on principle but in practice, it's hard for me to say that a potential drug for breast cancer patients should be shelved because I'm against animal testing.

When it comes to cosmetics, however, I don't approve of animal testing. A person's vanity isn't as important as a person's life. Also, I'm not for killing animals just for their skin or fur and discarding the meat. As much of the animal should be used as possible. I have no idea under what circumstances my leather shoes were made but I know that beef and veal is consumed. Someone walking around with a mink stole or fox mittens would seriously bother me because chances are, that mink or fox was slaughtered just for its fur. There are way too many options to still do this.

_JP_ said:

Eventually more methods will be developed to replace animal testing, but I don't ever see it going away completely. Sometimes you have to let the lab rat have the final say.

Click to expand...

There was a time when horses and oxen were used heavily in farming for the purpose of plowing. It was ridiculously difficult to do this without these animals. It was the best means at accomplishing a necessary goal. Once the Industrial Revolution introduced machinery, a better option replaced animals. If something better comes along to replace animal testing, I'm all for the change.

I'm going to avoid weighing in on this one. This is a topic that often gets very emotional.

Oh Lord, not this again....

Anyone want to fill me in on what this "Art is the King" stuff is all about? I may have missed on this so please let me know.

Pardon me if this post sounds a bit like "Oh no, not this again" but its informative in a way to see what some of us think about the ingredients and methods used to bring us a product we like/dislike.

Put me in the Cosmetics: not necessary any more. Drugs: I'd be concerned if they didn't category.

I'm also in the you have no right to complain if you eat meat camp. (As a born and bred vegetarian who converted to an omnivore; people who complain about animal testing or hunting but still eat meat are a major pet peeve. If you're going to be offended for something for moral reasons then follow through and try and be the least hypocritical as possible.)