If a vegan has a position as a pharmaceutical sales rep, knowing that their product they are selling?!


Question: has been tested on animals, can they still call themselves a vegan? What are the lines between meerly making an income or making A LOT of money with a product that clearly conflicts with their beliefs?


Answers: has been tested on animals, can they still call themselves a vegan? What are the lines between meerly making an income or making A LOT of money with a product that clearly conflicts with their beliefs?

LOL! Good point, your genius!

My girl does it. She finds it ethically conflicting, but she has a LOT of debt to pay off. Once she's payed off though, she's going to quit. I should think there are no clear lines, nothing is black and white. Life requires a series of compromises, hopefully leading toward the greater good.

I would not want to be apart of that industry.

No would not do it, not because I am a vegan, but i think our current system is not a very good health care system.

sure, whatever

CS, you weren't a user of YA, much less V&V, in December were you? Whence comes this huge knowledge of what went on then and before?

The question: do you know a vegan with such a job? Is that what's prompted you to ask? Or are you running short of questions with which you hope (and consistently fail) to catch vegans out?

It's a lucky person who can pick and choose where they work; an even luckier one who can find a job in a workplace that coincides 100% with their personal ethics. I've done a lot of jobs over the last 40 years and I haven't found one yet.

The fundamental flaw with your questions is vegans have never claimed to be perfect, just to be trying to minimise their contribution to animal suffering as much as they can. That's why your questions always fall flat and you keep getting increasingly frustrated and asking increasingly silly questions.

Yes.

"selling hay to farmers who fatten their cattle"

Obsseeesssiiooonnnn.

Lo--C.S. admitted to who they are in my question.

Efforts to make others feel bad or hypocritical because you need justification as a "flexitarian" pretty much says it all to me. Let it go. Besides those would probably exempt them from anything that you had to say because the value of human life they are saving supersedes, to me, any attempts to break down their walls for your own self-significance. Take me for instance, as a vegetarian, the only real reason I do not eat animals is for health. I choose not to eat them because of potential dangers of long term meat stapled diets. I know very well that a piece of meat won't hurt me if I were to eat it every-so-often. However, the best way for me to ensure that I don't fall into "old practices" is to cut it out all together. That insures it from every angle. But make no mistake, if I were to go to the doctor and he told me for some god awful reason that I was risking my longevity by not eating meat, I'd be eating it for dinner that night. But I would no longer be a vegetarian. That's the real point here. You can find hypocrisy any where you look and vegans are no exception. But they already know this. So in reality you are offering nothing new by your comments. The point is that they do what they can and still function. That's what it is about, and just because you can't say the same, that you do all you can, doesn't give you the right to pick them apart. It's sad really, the only contributions you seem to ever make are snide and derogatory. Don't you have anything else to say... not ever?

I find it funny that so much anger can occur over something like this. Hypothetical questions are what they are. That said, I think that we fail to address a very important point here. A human life has more intrinsic value to a human being than an animal's does. This is simple Darwinism, the basis of evolution. A person instinctualy protects their own species. This is because evolution would dictate that we would want the human species to survive more than another one. Of course, that is the simple way to look at it. I say as a vegan that human life has more value than animal life, and I think most vegans would say the same. There are several arguments for and against that, but since 99.9% of the population would probably agree with me, I am not going to get into them. Assuming that by common consensus we can take it as moral fact that human life is worth more than animal life, the testing of a pharmaceutical that could save or dramatically change human lives on animals seems to me to be a given for the health of the human species. It would go against our evolutionary instinct and our common morals to say that something that could potentially harm or kill a human as much as help them shouldn't first be tested to rule out harm on an animal. Veganism can only go so far before sensibility must kick in. Try telling the parents of a two year old needing a heart transplant that their baby can't have it because rats would die in the process of testing the anti-rejection pills and you won't get a very favorable reaction, even if both parents were vegan.

CS

Please tell me, in this day & age who *doesnt* have to shoulder either moral or ethical conflicts while they struggle to earn a wage ?

Does it really matter what a person does as employment/a means of making a living ? So long as they know where their ethics & morals are whats the problem ?

Its a tuff world out there, these days you gota take your money where you can get because if you dont, there are 5 standing waiting to jump in & do it instead of you.

don't you have anything better to do than mess with veggies

The CEO of McDonald's is vegan. So what's your point? Some vegans, like all people, can be conflicted between jobs and personal belief.

Here is a better question:

Is it not better to try to reduce the pain inflicted upon others (animals), than to do nothing at all?

So you are all huffy about the fact that some vegans aren't perfect. well I think it is better that they are trying to minimize the damage they do to others even if they can't completely get rid of all the damage.
I mean, if someone could not reduce their carbon footprint to zero, don't you think they should at least make an effort rather than just give up, take jets everywhere, drive a gas guzzler waste electricity etc?
It is exactly the same thing!!! You might as well try to reduce your damage, whether it be to animals or to the environment.

If you were any smarter God would be jealous. Do you think that you could think about a tree that is so complicated even you couldn't think about it?

Oh yes, I'm sure there are many of them already. Its very hypocritical!





The consumer Foods information on foodaq.com is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions.
The answer content post by the user, if contains the copyright content please contact us, we will immediately remove it.
Copyright © 2007 FoodAQ - Terms of Use - Contact us - Privacy Policy

Food's Q&A Resources