It is true that most people would save their child from a burning building before saving a dog. Most people would also save their own child before saving a stranger’s child. These choices are not necessarily immoral. But that does not mean it is acceptable to experiment on someone else’s child to find a treatment for your own child.
The most important thing to remember is that in many cases there are alternative ways to conduct medical research without testing on animals. Moreover, animals used in these experiments often suffer a fate far worse than death. The original answer gives as an example the claim that researchers who use dogs commonly remove their vocal cords so they will not be disturbed by the dogs’ cries.
Regardless of what we think about the most controversial aspects of animal rights, such as medical experiments on animals, we should remember that vegetarianism is not a choice between saving your child and your dog.
Continue with these questions:
- What are the alternatives to animal testing?
- Do animal-rights supporters avoid life-saving medicines developed through animal testing?
- Are there laws regulating the use of animals in laboratories?
- What if a cure for cancer could be produced through an experiment on just one animal?
- Is it insulting to compare humans with animals?
- Are animals also killed during crop harvesting and road construction?
- How is animal testing different from other situations where people kill animals to survive?