: i think animal testing is cruelwell then what are you going to argue if someone says "Yes, cruel it may be, but we have to do it to save the sick babies. If we didn't have animal testing we'd all be in the dark ages and dead by the age of 30 and we'll never find a cure of cancer aids, diabetes, etc etc"
You'll never ever win an argument or educate somone by saying "it's cruel". You'll look like an idiot and the other people will go away thinking "well if that's the opposition to animal testing, and if it saves people's lives (as the pro-animal research and animal rights propaganda says) then you've done nothing to educate them to the wiser or make the end of animal testing, and thus progress in defeating human health problems, one step closer.
Myself, I argue solely on scientific grounds, and I always win arguments because I know the facts: that the major medical breakthroughs have come NOT from animal reserach but from human research (observation of sick people, population studies of lifestyle factors, autopsies etc).
Animal Research is responsible for the deaths of and injuries to countless humans thorugh the drugs and procedures that are marketed as "safe for humans" after being found safe on the animal species tested.
For the scientific arguments against animal testing and for information about the large numbers of people killed and injured by orthodox drug medicine* please see the web-site of Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research at www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr go to the medical researhc section.
(*according to a 1994 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association there are 180,000 "medically-induced deaths" each year in the USA. (Over a million people in a decade in just the USA) THat is, deaths caused by prescription drugs and surgical stuff-ups. Mostly from drugs. THat figure is possibly a gross underestimate of the reality as it is well-know that many drug damage reports of unreported by doctors. A large proportion of these deaths are due to products that are not safe for human use - yet were marketed after being found safe on various animal species - species and individuals which all react differently in (most often) unpredictable ways.
You have the choice, you can either be a wishy-washy "oh, but it's cruel" moaner who will always look like an idiot and never be an effective force for change, or become informed about health issues and the lies that are promoted by the pro-animal research lobby and many infiltrated animal rights organisations.
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh - but the greatest obstacle to the abolition of unscientific medical practices such as animal research are those who voice an uninformed opinion that implies the only opposition to animal research is "that it is cruel". Of course, it's cruel, yet 99% of the population don't care so long as they believe that they can lead health-destroying lifestyles with the religious belief that science will find a cure through animal research for cancer or heart disease etc. by the time they get it.
Meanwhile, there are thousands of doctors, scientists and former-animal researchers who are trying to state their opinion in the mass-media that "animal research is unscientific, misleading, very dangerous and MUST be abolished in order to advance medicine and health care" but they are outshouted by those who talk on about "oh, but it's cruel" thus allowing the pro-vivsection lobby to put out unchallenged propaganda about supposed human health benefits of vivisection.
Please read some of the other posts i have put up on this issue as there are some quotes by many of these doctors. Please, please, please, have a look at the web-site - that's if you really care about this issue; about advancing human health-care as well as eliminating the harm inflicted on animals (and people) under the banner of "science".
None.
