Labradoodle & Goldendoodle Forum
I've been thinking about this a lot recently. I believe that almost every controversial topic has some merit on both sides of the argument, and this is no different.
On the one hand, testing has caused pain and suffering for countless animals. Many animals are euthanized as soon as the experiment is over. It is hard not to feel disgusted when you read about animals injected with diseases. Cosmetics are even worse, as nobody actually needs cosmetics. It's not going to save lives. Needless torture of animals, just so we can look better. It feels like we should be doing everything we can to stop this.
Yet on the other side of the spectrum, animal testing has saved countless lives. Animal testing has definitely benefited me personally. It might even have saved my life. When I was a kid, I had cancer and had to go through a year of Chemo treatments. And it wasn't just Chemo. I took countless drugs to aid my recovery. But more that, drugs have changed everyone's lives. The effect that vaccines have had on the human race is immeasurable.
So what side of the argument do you fall on? Do you support medical testing but not cosmetic? Do you support both? Neither?
I think for many reasons large parts of the prison population would not be good subjects for medical research. Whether due to a history of drug abuse or some such thing. It would also be an ethical quagmire as to whether inmates would really be volunteers or whether they might feel some coercion to volunteer. You would also be basing important information on a generally unreliable population as far as historical data and other things go. In fact, aside from the desperately or terminally ill, I find it remarkable that there are volunteers for drug studies at all. Oftentimes though, depending on the screening criteria for a particular test, it is very difficult to find test subjects.