Why can't we use people on death row for medical testing?!
I would much rather know that my medicine was tested on Bubba rather than on an innocent monkey. What about you?
Answers: This only applies if you believe in the death penalty. If you don't, then this question is irrelevant to you (and I respect that).
I would much rather know that my medicine was tested on Bubba rather than on an innocent monkey. What about you?
If i don't believe in captical punishment why can i not have a view on testing on death row people ?
I don't fire a gun, does that mean i am not allowed to have a view on murder.
I don't eat animals, am i not allowed to have a view on how they are reared ?
Is it only those that exploit are allowed to comment on the situation ?
Your "logic" for excluding a range of answers is illigical.
Shame, i had lots to say, but i will obide by your "rule". but please, don't use the word "respect" when laying down those rules in future, its not respect, its rejection.
I always thought that exact same thing. Why are we testing on innocent animals when there are killers, rapists, and what not just sitting on death row for years and years eating up our money. We should test this stuff on people to get a better answer rather than the poor defenseless animals!!!
Because innocent people are on death row, and die from death row after spending forever in jail, because the system has failed them.
I am also against the death penalty.
Why can't *we* *use* the people who wouldn't mind? (i.e people who think the suffering of animals/humans are cool or contribute to it)
It's inhumane, and it leads down a very scary road. If we decide it's ok to test on them, then we would be able to infect them with diseases to test cures. What happens if one of them is found innocent of their crime. It's bad enough that they were imprisoned for years before their release, but what if they were also infected with AIDS for the sake of medical testing?
If we can treat them as animals, do they become property? Can we also sell them to hunters to hunt as game? If it's ok to murder criminals for sport, will it become acceptable for people to sell themselves for the same purpose to help support their families? We could even make it a game show, as long as they're consenting, right?
Are there agencies who will fight for their rights and try to free them like people try to free lab animals? A lose monkey is one thing, a lose serial rapist and murderer infected with a contagious disease is much scarier.
I am for the death penalty, btw, but I'm not a fan of torture. Everyone who is convicted of a crime is considered guilty beyond doubt but we are human beings, and there will be mistakes. Those mistakes MUST be considered at all times lest we become monsters.
They did that sort of thing in Nazi concentration camps. It is universally frowned upon by sane human beings. This is the kind of thing that everyone agrees is evil. People calibrate their moral compass by it.
Additionally, since the population of death row is disproportionately African-American, one would conclude that only evil racists would be in favor of experimenting on death row convicts.
From a moral-neutral point of view, you would want to use a population of test subjects that are easily replaceable. This is why scientists use animals with a high rate of reproduction and short life spans. With the time it takes a suspect to go through the trial phase and exhaust his appeals, it just isn't logical to do it. It would take years to get a replacement if one died.
Good luck. They seem to have more rights than us out here in the free world. Great idea, but it would never happen.
Yeah, no one will offer his own flesh for testing, though he may still claim that a righteous or truthful one.
I believe animal testing is a bit of a money making business, they get grants for it and it acts like a safety barrier, can't remember the name, but one drug gave people heart attacks... but it was ok because they said "oh well it was ok when we tried it on animals".
"So don't be too forthright about what you think that I should be, And I'll willingly accept your low opinion of me" Source(s) Science may accept those animals sacrifice themselves for the sake of the world. But, Humans—who enslave, castrate, experiment on, and fillet other animals—have had an understandable penchant for pretending animals do not feel pain. A sharp distinction between humans and ‘animals’ is essential if we are to bend them to our will, make them work for us, wear them, eat them— without any disquieting tinges of guilt or regret. What a ungrateful bas3rd !
It would be nice if that could happen.
Prisons also operate on a social justice ideal - being an equitable and humane as possible.
People must remember the Holocaust as a insult to humanity. Doctors have always been thought of as the saviors of mankind, the healers, and caretakers of our utter existence.This is why the practice of medicine by the doctors of the Third Reich is egregious, outrageous, and shocking. The Nazi doctors violated the trust placed in them by humanity. The most painful truth is for the most part the doctors escaped their crimes against Humanity and lived a life, unlike their victims.
The Experiments
Freezing / Hypothermia
Genetics
Infectious Diseases
Interrogation and Torture
Killing / Genocide
High Altitude
Pharmacological
Sterilization
Surgery
Traumatic Injuries
Freezing / Hypothermia
The freezing / hypothermia experiments were conducted for the Nazi high command. The experiments were conducted on men to simulate the conditions the armies suffered on the Eastern Front. The German forces were ill prepared for the bitter cold. Thousands of German soldiers died of freezing or were debilitated by cold injuries.
The experiments were conducted under the supervision of Dr. Sigmund Rascher at Birkenau, Dachau and Auschwitz . Dr. Rascher reported directly to Himmler. Dr. Rascher publicized the results of his freezing experiments at the 1942 medical conference entitled "Medical Problems Arising from Sea and Winter".
The freezing experiments were divided into two parts. First, to establish how long it would take to lower the body temperature to death and second how to best resuscitate the frozen victim.
The two main methods used to freeze the victim were to put the person in a icy vat of water or to put the victim outside naked in sub-zero temperatures.
The icy vat method proved to be the fastest way to drop the body temperature. The selections were made of young healthly Jews or Russians. They were usually stripped naked and prepared for the experiment. A insulated probe which measured the drop in the body temperature was inserted into the rectum. The probe was held in place by a expandable metal ring which was adjusted to open inside the rectum to hold the probe firmly in place. The victim was then placed in the vat of cold water and started to freeze. It was learned that most victims lost consciousness and died when the body temperature dropped to 25 C.
Two Russian men were seen by a prisoner doctor in the cold vat. They were very strong men and had said a comment to the SS doctor performing the experiment. The prisoner doctor was shocked at how long the Russian men could take the cold without loosing consciousness. He asked the directing doctor to take them out of the tank. He did not allow this and increased the temperature slightly to prolong their pain. They died after a long painful stay in the tank.
The second way to freeze a victim was to strap them to a stretcher and place them outside naked. The extreme winters of Auschwitz made a natural place for this experiment.
The resuscitation or warming experiments were just as cruel and painful as the freezing experiments.
Sun Lamp
The victims were placed under sun lamps which were so hot they would burn the skin. One young homosexual victim was repeatedly cooled to unconsciousness then revived with lamps until he was pouring sweat. He died one evening after several test sessions.
Internal Irrigation
The frozen victim would have water heated to a near blistering temperature forcefully irrigated into the stomach, bladder, and intestines. All victims appeared to have died from the treatment.
Hot Bath
The victim was placed in warm water and the temperature was slowly increased. This method proved to be the best. Many victims died do to shock if they were warmed up to quickly.
Warming by Body Heat
Heinrich Himmler sugested to Dr. Rascher that he try to use women to warm the frozen men. He suggested that the victim and a women copulate. This perverted experiment occured with some success. However it was not as successful as the Warm Bath.
Genetic Experiments
The Nordic or Aryan Race was the most important goal of the Nazis. It was the largest part of the over all plan. The blonde hair, blue eye, super men were to be the only race. The Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and anyone else that did not meet the race requirements were to by cleansed from society through genocide. Hitler and the German High command made a list rules for the fellow Nazis to follow. The new rules required all SS before marriage must submit to general testing to insure racial purity. The rules for marriage were unbelievably complex. Thousands of marriages were denied. If the laws for marriage were broken it could mean the death penalty.
Dr. Sigmund Rascher and his wife learned what not following the marriage laws would hold for their lives. Mrs. Rascher was sterile. They were not illegally married; they adopted two children. They were later investigated by the Gestapo and executed for the crime. In this case, after his medical experimentation, it seems fitting that this killer was caught up by his own party.
Early in power the National Science groups were pushed into research of the race and experiments commenced. First the party needed propaganda to prove all other races were inferior. Measurements of heads, eyes, nose, blood were required. The vast majority of the early experiments were a propaganda sham. It was determined Gypsies had different blood and were inclined to criminal behavior. The same type of findings were made of all races other than the Nazis.
After the camps were started, vast genetic experiments were undertaken. The range of the testing was broad and specialized. The two major groups of experiments were first to refine the master race and second to determine the cause of defects.
Dr. Josef Mengele research on twins and Gypsies exemplifies the quest for the genetic studies. Dr. Mengele was known as the "Angel of Death". He would be at every selection when the new trains would arrive at Auschwitz. After the victims were unloaded off the trains and stripped naked and divided into men, women, and children, he would sort through the thousands of people. Most went straight to the gas chambers and others to hard labor in the camps. The twins, dwarfs, and unique physical specimens were selected to be assigned to the experimental blocks. In many ways the majority who where killed in the gas chambers were much better off than the survivors that had no idea what horrors awaited them.
Experiments on Twins
The twins were examined from head to toe. Measurements of every inch were taken. Dr. Mengele demanded specific and careful exams. I will not go into details of what experiments took place they are horrific, but this is what happens when you devalue human life. When you state a certain group deserves worse treatment due to prejudice.
As you can see that Nazi Germany saw that Jews and other people such as homosexuals and even children were ok to carry out medical experiments on. So where does it end with minority groups firstly prisoners on death row it could be old people are a waste of space (they are going to die anyway) and then somebody in power might say disabled children, or people without health insurance or children born out of wedlock are ok to perform medical experiments on. Where does it actually end? Who has the right to make these decisions? Why are these decisions made? - they usually are associated with a political, religious, social prejudice, for example how the Germans treated the jews. Thats why we dont do medical experimentation of prisoners in death row because we recognise they have rights even if they are on death row. We recognise that we ttempt to keeps our communities as just as possible because we (People in power) ae thinking, intelligent and compassionate human beings who promote human rights. At least most do but there are other countries that undertake these atrocities on other humans being that are deemed inferior. Although these prisoners haver perpertrated terrible crimes we must treat them humanely or we risk opening up the door to do medical experiments on any vulnerable group and that would be wrong.
In Australia we don't have the death penalty and that has to be a good thing.
because currently, all over the world, as a universally accepted principle, HUMAN RIGHTS are much more important than animal rights. Bleeding heart sentiments over animals and animal rights found mostly in the west does not apply or is not considered important in the rest of the world.
If that is your premise, if you take human life as an expendable commodity, then where do you really draw the line? Who is next? Down syndrome babies? Senior citizens who are going to die soon anyway? How about those with missing limbs? paraplegics and quadriplegics? Those in a coma? Heck, how about those who simply don't belong? A minority race perhaps? Maybe those who are not of average height or weight? The homeless? Those without jobs or skills? What if it is decided that since vegetarians are a minority and that they feel for those animals, that vegetarians/vegan and animal rights activists should volunteer to take the place of animals instead? Care to put your money where your mouth is or is this animal rights thing just something you mouth off to be cool?
A government tried something similar before and did a whole lot of medical experiments on people it has already condemned to death or on those they deemed unfit for the society. But the rest of the world said no to the nazis and the rest is history.
Remember the saying: "those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it" Have you forgotten already?
Tell me, have you ever heard of the Nazi’s?
Because they use to do something very similar during the holocaust.
Need I say more?
.
Because that would make us inhumane. Trenardy explains the situation well.
Couldn't agree more. As long as it was a certainty that they had committed a terrible crime. It's about time all these paedophiles, rapists and murderers had a taste of their own medicine. Why do it to innocent animals? It's disgusting. People who do terrible things like rape, murder etc. should have NO human rights. And as for the person above who said...what about the nazis, they did the exact same thing....actually, the victims of the holocaust were innocent victims of a sickening regime from a disgusting man.....these convicted murderers are not innocent victims, they deserve it. The jews didn't.
Don Minamissino "Dr. Josef Mengle reborn"
ARE YOU IN YOUR SENSES?
They're human you knobhead -you don't experiment on human beings. No matter how heinous the crime just put the sodding bastards to death and let God take care of their black souls.
SIGH............. !!!!
Many Veg*ns also choosing to agree to the abortion as their argues are: the women rights, its women's body, they can't take care of the baby, foetus can't feel the pain etc.... etc... etc.....However most veg*ns won't eat eggs as the eggs would turns into chicks.HELLO!!!!!
And now THIS....................????????
All animals, including humans, should have rights. No animal should be tested on against its will, or detained against its will. Of course, to protect these rights, some others liberties sometimes have to be sacrificed, e.g. the psychopathic killer has to be locked up to preserve other people's right to life. I'm against the death penalty, because locking them up is the only thing that is required to protect others, it just seems like bloody revenge to me, which is not what a justice system should be based on. If they were absolutely certain that the testing would result in less net suffering, then it might be different, but you can never be sure what the results of a test will be.
I think testing on volunteers and non-aware human cells grown in the lab is still the best.
'lovelybg': just for the record, vegans don't not eat eggs because they will turn into chicks - they're non fertile, non-aware cells, duh. They don't eat them because the chickens are always exploited, even in 'free-range' and 'organic' systems.
Brilliant answer exsft, I wish I'd written it.
The very idea of testing drugs on non-consenting human beings is chilling, bringing to mind horrific images of Nazi experiments.
I'm not patriotic, but I'm proud to live in a country that doesn't have a death penalty. Given that many countries don't, and that the number of death row prisoners in America is finite, where would governments look next for humans to experiment on? People who were in prison but not convicted of a capital offence? People who had committed three or more minor offences? People unlikely to be missed. People who, like me, had already had cancer or another life threatening disease and so might be expected to die sooner than the average person anyway?
Someone has already mentioned the disproportionate number of black prisoners on death row in the US; the poor and the uneducated are also disproportionately represented. The stench of corruption and prejudice in the US sentencing system that this suggests doesn't seem to bother supporters of the death penalty. And now you want to start torturing them too?
I'd always assumed the years prisoners are on death row is used for appeals and counter appeals; are you suggesting that they be experimented on during this time?
The only excuse for making or supporting this suggestion is extreme youth. Only someone without the life experience to realise that things are not as black and white as they seem in adolescence could support it
Discuss and campaign for alternatives to animal testing by all means; your knee-jerk stereotyping of all death row prisoners as 'Bubba' is not helpful to the debate.
Because international laws that were put into place after WWII forbid it. Why you may ask? Because of crazy zealots like yourself would be using people for experiments. What would happen if you run out of prisoners? Go for the elderly or the insane, since they don't matte rin society? This is how lunacy begins with zealots like yourself.
yes, use the useless no good doers. the monkey and dogs dont stand there and say the hell they want their heads cut open and have their brains attached to some electrodes for experiment.
Instead of letting death row people die, make use of them, let these useless people serve and give something back to society.
People in prison have more rights than you might think.
It would not be possible to conduct experiments without their consent; prison inmates get free legal counsel. When I worked for a prison they were constanting suing the medical staff over silly things. One guy sued the doctor because he said the prostate exam caused post traumatic stress disorder.
I have been in two medical studies for psychiatric medications. It wouldn't surprise me if that is already being done with prison inmates; whether they are on death row on not doesn't make any difference.
Because it's against the law. Complain to the ACLU.