Are there any animal testing pros?

Heard someone debating the pros and cons of animal testing the other day and it got me thinking, Are there any pros?

That's what I always ask myself. I wouldn't think there are.
I would guess that a pro could be 'It is easier to test on animals, rather than humans. If an animals dies it doesn't matter because they have no feelings. We can save human's lives by testing on animals'. --Something stupid like that. People say that testing on animals helps to see how the body would react to certain procedures. And some people may say that it helps scientists and police solve crimes. It's just for Man's selfish needs? Maybe I'm being slightly harsh but I feel that there is no need to test on innocent animals who can't help themselves.

The question is, do you want new drugs, medications, and such to be developed that save lives, or make them better?
If you rule out live animal testing, then the only replacement is live people testing.
Volenteers? Anyone?
Computer models are only crude approximations of living systems. They help, and are being used, but they do not give anywhere close to the final answers.

I think humans have sufficiently established a willingness to use animals to suit our own purposes, be it for the mere pleasure of eating meat, or for testing. The benefit of animal testing, is that it ensures a much higher level of safety in human trials.

Do you value humans more than other animals? I do.

I used to work in a science lab and I can tell you that from my experience, almost all scientists are NOT sadistic torturers of animals and neither are they totally apathetic. Scientists have worked hard in the past few decades to find new ways to do research that either reduces or eliminates the need for certain animal testing. Of course, some types of testing will most likely always have to be done on animals. It's a shame but the lives these animals have are likely no worse than the cruel fates they would meet in the wild.

I also was a researcher and I stopped any testing on animals. the lives these animals have in a research facility are much worse that the fate they would meet in the wild. in the wild, they roam free. I am sure that during your tenure you witnessed the cage syndrome. research animals, raised in small cages will stay within the diameter of their cages upon release. in other words, they move in a rectangle. that is the least of the problems inflicted upon these innocent animals. we all know the cruelty involved and even with humane researchers, most of the animals are in pain at some point.
animal research has existed for many, many years and if all the data were collected and entered into one central base most testing would not be needed. the researcher could just look up the effects of the different components of whatever they were developing.
I do not value a rat's life over a human's life when it comes to pharma research. but I do not ever believe in animal cosmetic testing. surely you do not think that an animal's life spent in a cosmetic research lab is no worse than the cruel fates they would meet in the wild. death in the wild is natural. death in a lab is not.
and as for humane researchers... yes, there are many but there are also many who dispose of their animals in ways that are neither humane nor painless.

Cindy,

The types of research we did were very different from the cosmetic research you've described. Certainly I do not think all testing is the same nor do I think all types of testing is right.

I can only speak from my limited experience in the lab and in the world. I've seen hurt, tortured and killed animals in the wild and it breaks my heart. I don't like to see animals used in lab research either but it's not always the grim spectacle some people make it out to be.

I strongly advocate for alternatives when they are available and for as much compassion as we can give when they are not.

that makes sense. but I still would choose a life of freedom with a known brutal death to a life of caged solitude and the possibility a brutal death. but that's just me.
as scientists, we need to understand and bring forth an enlightened attitude towards all life.

yes there is animal testing pros out there because I am one of them. I beleive in animal testing because all the medications that we use are tested on animals first. if we did not use animal testing we will not have any cures for siknesses that we have today.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/monkey-abuse-peta-undercover/1845103709

If you are able to watch the whole thing without crying, and you still think animal testing is right...I dont know what esle to say.
...just because they can't talk doesnt men they dont have any feelings or dont feel pain, I think its disgusting...

It's a very hard subject. I absolutely love animals.

But, humans have to come before animals, at the most basic level. It's sad. But so many of the drugs, the cures, the medicines we have today, wouldn't be available if it weren't for animal testing.

There are so many cons to animal testing. The question of ethics and fairness. But to answer your question are there are any pros at all, the answer is yes.