CULTURECULTURE
POLITICSPOLITICS
ENTERTAINMENTENTERTAINMENT
SPORTSSPORTS
RESULTSRESULTS
☰

Should testing on live animals be banned? | The Tylt

FINAL RESULTS
Should testing on live animals be banned?
A festive crown for the winner
#BanAnimalTesting
#AnimalTestsNeeded

Critics of live animal testing say the practice is cruel and unnecessary. Instead, researchers can use alternatives like computer modeling to conduct their research. Researchers say animal testing is essential to accurately assess the effects of a drug or vaccine. Computer models cannot capture the complexity of a live animal. What do you think?

Dataviz
Real-time Voting
Should testing on live animals be banned?
#BanAnimalTesting
#AnimalTestsNeeded
#BanAnimalTesting

Critics argue technology provides viable alternatives to animal testing. Computer models are able to accurately replicate complex systems. In vitro methods allow scientists to see the mechanisms and effects of a substance. There are few good reasons to test on animals. 

Today—because experiments on animals are cruel, expensive, and generally inapplicable to humans—the world’s most forward-thinking scientists have moved on to develop and use methods for studying diseases and testing products that replace animals and are actually relevant to human health. These modern methods include sophisticated tests using human cells and tissues (also known as in vitro methods), advanced computer-modeling techniques (often referred to as in silico models), and studies with human volunteers. These and other non-animal methods are not hindered by species differences that make applying animal test results to humans difficult or impossible, and they usually take less time and money to complete.
#AnimalTestsNeeded

Animals have contributed to major advances in science and medicine. The alternatives put forward by critics are unable to truly replicate an animal's biological system.

Primate research has been the bridge from the lab to the clinic for a number of groundbreaking treatments, including vaccines for mumps, measles, yellow fever, anthrax and hepatitis B.Yet critics of animal research claim that such testing is unnecessary. They argue that computer models can effectively replace animal models.They're delusional. Consider, for example, the complexity of the human brain, which has about 100 billion neurons and 1 quadrillion synapses.In 2014, researchers in Japan attempted to simulate brain activity by using a supercomputer with over 700,000 processor cores. It took the computers 40 minutes of whirring to effectively replicate what the brain does in one second.Primates, on the other hand, can effectively imitate human brains. And that fact has led to numerous treatments.
#BanAnimalTesting

Here are perspectives from people who want to see animal testing ended for good. 

#BanAnimalTesting
#BanAnimalTesting
#BanAnimalTesting
Post by Sasha Patrick.
#AnimalTestsNeeded

Here are perspectives from people who think animal testing is necessary. 

#AnimalTestsNeeded
#AnimalTestsNeeded
#AnimalTestsNeeded
Post by Kim Kingsbury-Taylor.
FINAL RESULTS
Should testing on live animals be banned?
A festive crown for the winner
#BanAnimalTesting
#AnimalTestsNeeded
All Debates
VIEW ALL
Advertising, Media and Partnerships
© 2016 The Tylt
Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our  User Agreement,  Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement,   and  Your California Privacy Rights  (each updated 1/1/20).
© 2020 Advance Local Media LLC. All rights reserved (About Us).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed,transmitted,cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Local.