If you think animal experiments are necessary consider the following:

Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never are.

At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in lab animals. They are allowed because it is admitted that animal tests are not relevant.

When asked if they agreed that animal experimentation can be misleading because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans, 88% of doctors agreed.

Rats are 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer in humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.

According to animal tests lemon juice is deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulin are safe.

40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.

Over 200, 000 medicines have been released most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organisation, 240 medicines are "essential".

Thousands of drugs passed safe in animals have been withdrawn or banned due to their effect on human health.

Aspirin fails animal tests, as do digitalis (heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would be banned if results from animal experimentation were accurate.

When the producers of thalidomide were taken to court, they were aquitted after numerous experts agreed animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.

At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.

Morphine puts humans asleep but excites cats.

95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately disgarded as useless or dangerous to humans.

One is six patients in hospital are there because the drug they have taken had been passed safe for us on humans after animal tests.

Worldwide, at least 22 animals die every second in labs. In the UK one animal dies every five seconds.

The contraceptive pill causes blood clots in humans but it had the opposite effect in dogs.

We use aspirin for aches and pains. It causes birth defects mice, rabbits and rats.

Researchers refused to believe that benzene could cause cancer in humans because it failed to in animal tests.

Dogs failed to predict heart problems caused by the cardiovascular drugs encainide and flecainide, which led to an estimated 3, 000 deaths in the USA.

Heart by pass surgery was put on hold for years because it didn't work on dogs.

If we had relied on animal tests we would still believe that humans don't need vitamin C, that smoking doesn't cause cancer and alcohol doesn't cause liver damage.

It was denied for decades that asbestos caused disease in humans because it didn't in animals.

Polio researchers were mislead for years about how we catch the disease because they had experimented on monkeys.

As one researcher points out, "the ultimate dilemma with any animal model of human disease is that it can never reflect the human situation with complete accuracy."

I REALLY think they should do testing they do on animals, on prison inmates on death row. Their dying anyways, and atleast that way they'd be doing humanity a favor.

The whole 'they have rights' thing I think is rather foolish. they did not care about other peoples rights when they decided to murder someone or molest a child, they really shouldn't have any rights either.

I agree with the above comment 100%, you should be stripped of your rights if you murder, molest, rape, or brutally attack someone. If you comment a violent crime against another human you should lose your rights!!!

Scotty, that sounds rather harsh, but I agree with it as well! I always felt sad when thinking of test animals and what they have to go through. Especially when it was found that local shelters used to be FORCED to turn over companion animals that were once loved to these freaks who do the experimenting. Now that is sad.

Inmates should give up their rights, when they decided to take away someone else's freedom to be safe. We have laws in place for a reason.

How sad that animal testing is sworn on so much, yet has done little to nothing to help in our medical advances.

That sounds like a plan to me. I think you're on to something.

I also agree with the above post. They could implement this idea by changing the way death row inmate die. Instead of lethal injection then used them instead as laboratory test, but in a humane way. However it’s okay to strip the death row inmates their rights if they are proven guilty. But there are some incidents that people are wrongly jailed and die. This is the dilemma if inmates would be used for lab test.

Animals as test subjects are okay to me if they are culture like mice. Rather than bringing up the way testing was done hundred of years before. It’s kind of brutal don’t you think testing on human lives. The laboratory test item could be a beggar on the street or anyone no one is looking for.

Well they would have to implement with laws and regulations so that it was not just homeless people and what not but as far as I'm concerned, if they chose to take someones life, then they should atleast help out by being our guinea pigs lol

I think that some animal testing is neccessary, because tests on rats and monkeys can help us understand how to start making the drugs, although I personally like the idea of doing the testing on prisoners. It would sure be an incentive not to kill.

I know at least one person who makes money by participating in drug tests.

He doesn't have pets, though.

ah, between mice and men...tough choice!

yes there are people who participate in drug tests...like AIDS victims who hope for a cure and thus offer their bodies for cocktail upon cocktail of drugs. Should they be cured, that's great! Should they not be cured but the tests mean inches towards achieving a cure - at least the thought would somehow salve their minds and spirit.

i go for human testing, with consent form the person participating...