Do animal rights supporters refrain from using life saving drugs which were developed through animal testing?
A few of them do. However, I personally do not believe that this is ethically required.
To explain, let us hypothetically suppose that while the Nazis were experimenting on prisoners during World War II, they had discovered the cure to cancer. Hypothetically suppose that the question before us, now that the Nazis have been defeated, is what to do with this cure. Should we use it, or should we discard it?
My answer to this question is an extremely controversial one, and it is one which many other animal rights activists and vegetarians strongly disagree with. My answer is use it. I believe that it would make no sense to discard the cure for cancer simply because it was obtained in an unethical way. We can condemn the means through which the Nazis discovered it, and vow to never repeat their mistakes, while at the same time use this cure to save as many lives as possible.
This is also my attitude with regards to the use of life saving drugs which were developed through animal testing.
Follow up questions:
Isn't it insulting to compare human beings with animals?
What if the cure to cancer could be produced by a hypothetical experiment on just a single animal?
What are the alternatives to testing on animals?
Aren't there laws regulating the use of animals in laboratories?
How is experimenting on animals any different from other situations where humans kill animals for survival?
What if you were in a burning building and could only save your child or your dog?
Back to the title page
Back to the list of the most commonly asked questions