Should researchers be allowed to use animals in testing the safety of drugs, vaccines, medical devices, and cosmetics?

Yes but only rats or mice

Yes, but the process should be regulated to ensure the animals are not unreasonably treated.

Only when they are at least 85% confident it will work and never for cosmetic’s

Only for less harmful experiments, and with a full understanding of the potential harm to the animals.

Yes, so long as there is no harm done to the animals that the tests are being done to.

So depends

In most cases no, but some scientifc and medical research requires testing on animals like mice, and this should be allowed

No, unless there are no viable alternatives

I do believe that it’s beneficial and important that they use some animals for testing but only when they are at least 85% confident it will work and never for cosmetic’s

Test on rapists instead.

Use criminals that are in jail instead

they need to do testing before

No, testing should be done on prisoners convicted of violent crimes.

Only testing performed on rats and mice

Use the prisoners that are in for violent crimes.

I hate to say yes! I think it is important that they use SOME animals for testing.. rats and mice... I know it's horrible. But I do believe it is beneficial.

Yes, as long as they are treated humanly and euthanised in the least painless way

Not for medical devices or cosmetics. Not for drugs or vaccines if they are not biologically related to humans and the results can’t be inferred / translated.

No, testing should be done on convicted violent criminals instead.

Instead of the death penalty we should be testing on violent criminals. As animals react to things differently than humans.

Yes, but only if it passes an ethical test

Only if no other options are available

Yes, but only for medical purposes, and only if humane treatment of the animals is defined and enforced

No, we have prisons full of rapists and pedophiles. Test on them.

For drugs, vaccines and medical devices

Yes, but not for cosmetics and only animals that are considered highly populated in the area they are gathering the animals from, such as “pests”

This question is so broad! No for cosmetics, but yes for things necessary for life, however it should be regulated, suffering should be minimised for the animal and we should be developing ways of testing that don't rely on animals.

As long as animals are not harmed

Yes, but only is extreme circumstances where there is no alternatives

Yes, but with the strictest of measures against unnecessary animal cruelty.

Yes, so long as it is regulated to avoid animal cruelty

Yes, but not if the risk of death is above 50%.

Difficult one. Overall no. At bare minimum, no suffering allowed.

This should be done on multiple crime offenders that fail to be rehabilitated and will spend their life in prison

Yes, Only if it's for fat

Yes, but only if they use human testing as well since animals and humans should be treated equally with the exception of livestock.

Definitely not, it has been proven the results aren't reliable for comparison against use in humans.

no, they should use high rated criminals

Very difficult question but nrcessary under strict legislation and oversight

No testing on dogs

Yes but should be heavily regulated to avoid abuse and suffering.

No test on people who have broken the law by hurting people or animals. It's the best deterent!

No suffering for the animal

No, they should use criminals who have committed heinous crimes!

No, they should use human trials.

Increase funding into more ethical testing options

Yes, but only when the drugs have been thoroughly tested

Yes but only where there is no suffering

Yes, if the products are for the good of human kind. (Not retail products).

No, any testing of human products should be conducted on humans

No, use rapists and pedophiles instead

Yes, but fund research into alternatives so we can eventually stop animal testing completely.

Yes but not for cosmetics or 'flavour development' or any other thing short of strictly medical and only within very strict guide lines which ensure minimal discomfort and suffering for the animals. Also, we need a system of information sharing in order to minimise the need for repeat experimentation.

As long as it's humanely carried out and for medical studies and the like that will further the human race

Yes, but only where the option presents a possibility of yielding new knowledge and / or safety improvements (in design, or implentation).

Yes, but should always be humane

Yes, but only if it is for animal related needs such as vaccines or medication, not human needs

No, test on humans. If you’re dumb enough.

No. They should use rapists, instead.

depends on the animal and how they will be treated

I hate to say it, but drugs , etc need to be tested before human consumption . Cosmetics definitely NO

Yes, if it does not induce damage or pain , and of which that is tested prior.

Only if humans treatment and animals do not suffer and not for cosmetics

Only for medical needs where no alternative proxy is required available.

No, unless there is absolutely no alternative and is for an incurable, life-threatening/quality disease or illness.

test them on vegans

Get me to test them

God created the amimals for us to care for them and food

No, but use down-syndromes or mentally ill humans instead

No, they should use death-row prisoners instead

Yes, but only bugs/rodents

Yes but with strict and careful regulations to make sure it is as humane as possible.

Not cosmetics, only medical units that are humane and will not make the animal suffer

Yes, but only in the final stages of testing.

Yes, Most basic testing first to make percentage of negative effect below 20%

Yes, but only if it is scientifically proven but past results and future indicators and strengthen unjustified animal testing regimes and practices

Yes, but only when absolutely neccisary, not for cosmetics

Yes, as long as there are no endangered animals being tested on

No, we can always use inmates that have committed crude crimes (serial killers, child molesters, etc) to test these things as animals don't mimic the human body better than the actual human body.

Yes, if done following ethics procedures

If there are now other ways around it for important medical research studies. As long as it's done as 'cruelty free as possible'. Pain killers etc provided. Not for cosmetics & mediocre things

No, they should use criminals on a death sentence.

No, should use convicted murderers and paedophiles instead

Yes, but only if animals are treated with respect and testing ceases as soon as issues become clear. Also only if products are strongly suspected to be safe for the animals.

It depends whether it is life threatening.

As long as its ethical

yes but only for medicinal purposes, and only if it is unavoidable

Yes, but only because there is no better alternative, and if you don't test these things, things can go bad.

only on pests like rats

This should Never be Allowed in any circumstance

yes except for medical devices and cosmetics

Only if the animal isn't well.

Yes and no only small animals

Use Down Syndrome humans instead

Absolutely never. Testing on animals for any medicine, cosmetics etc. should be outlawed.

Yes, if it is first risk assessed of what could happen to the animal

Depends on what’s being tested and why. No blanket yes or no

Rats and mice 🐭

Screw drugs i have an immune system! unless they the happy one.