Posted by
Greg England on Monday, July 28, 2008 7:29:08 PM
How would an animal rights activist answer this question? I presume that they would answer no. Because under no circumstances will they use anything that has been tested on animals. Never, ever, ever. Animal testing is cruel. Their dog will only be treated using medicines that have not been tested on animals thank-you very much.
Okay, well what if their own dog suffers a violent allergic reaction?
No, no, no they say. That won't happen. This is the modern age. Nowdays, you don't need to test drugs on animals. The drug can be de-risked through computer modelling, and tests on tissue cultures etc.
Okay then. Let's see if I understand what you are saying.
If it is possible to de-risk a drug using computer modelling and tests on tissue cultures, and you are absolutely sure that it is safe ... then why not humour me? If you are that sure that all these tests have proved that the drug is safe, why not perform one last confidence check on a single dog, before you release this drug out to the big wide world?
Surely even you can see that it is better for one dog to be exposed to a small risk, than for thousands of dogs to be exposed to that same risk? Come on, for the sake of the doggies.
Test the drug on one dog before certifying the drug as safe. It's the only moral choice.
And given that we all agree that human beings are more valuable than animals:
Is it too much to ask that all human medicines are finally tested on an animal subject as well?
PS: I am not necessarily pro-vivisection. And I know I have simplified a lot of issues. But this question fascinates me, because when you explore the veterinary angle, it exposes some of the inherent contradictions and anti-human agendas of the animal rights movement. I can see only one logically viable moral argument for not testing drugs on animals:
The animal didn't give you consent for the tests.
But given the arguments I have outlined above, the rest just turns to dust.
PPS: Yeah, yeah I know animal physiology is not the same as human physiology. Presumably then, if Fido keels over when you give him a small amount of a new wonder drug, you are perfectly happy to ignore these test results and still give the drug to human beings.
Hello? Any activists still there? Why are you fuming?
PPPS: I started to post this whimsy on PajamasMedia, in response to a blogger who was suggesting that executing murderers was itself murder. My reply in effect was that if you take this to its logical conclusion then the last person remaining on the planet will have to jump off a cliff.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/its-not-just-muslims-christians-play-the-victim-card-too/