How can you justify losing medical advances that would save human lives by stopping vivisection?
[PLANK A] The same way we justify not performing forcible research on unwilling humans! A lot of even more relevant information is currently foregone owing to our strictures against human experimentation. If life-saving medical advances are to be sought at all cost, why should nonhuman animals be singled out for ill-treatment? We must accept that there is such a thing as “ill-gotten gains”, and that the potential fruits of vivisection qualify as such. This question might be regarded as a veiled insult to the creativity and resourcefulness of scientists. Although humans have never set foot on Pluto, scientists have still garnered a lot of valuable scientific information concerning it. Why couldn’t such feats of ingenuity be repeated in other fields? –AECW [PLANK B] Forcible experimentation on humans is not the only alternative. Many humans would be glad to participate in experiments that offer the hope of a cure for their afflictions, or for the afflictions of others. If individual cho
Related Questions
- How can I possibly keep current with medical advances in the care of children, adolescents, adults, older adults, men, women, and pregnant women?
- How can you justify losing medical advances that would save human lives by stopping vivisection?
- Do AR people accept that vivisection has led to valuable medical advances?