Is it cheaper to test on animals or use alternative ways for research?!
Thanks
Answers:
I know these may not be the preferred sources, but hopefully they'll get you started! :)
1) TESTING chemicals on live animals can be expensive and slow, and newer test-tube methods may work better, the National Research Council of the US have reported - giving hope to activists that animal testing could be outlawed
2) .Besides saving countless animal lives, alternatives to animal tests are efficient and reliable. Unlike crude, archaic animal tests, non-animal methods usually take less time to complete, cost only a fraction of what the animal experiments that they replace cost, and are not plagued with species differences that make extrapolation difficult or impossible. Effective, affordable, and humane research methods include studies of human populations, volunteers, and patients as well as sophisticated in vitro, genomic, and computer-modeling techniques.
3) Six Reasons why Animal Testing Doesn’t Work
?Human and animal testing agree only 5-25% of the time, according to Huntingdon Life Sciences
?88% of stillbirths are due to drugs posed to be safe in animal testing
?According to World Health Organization out of 200,000 released mediations only 240 are labeled as essential
?Corneal transplants were delayed for 90 years and blood transfusions were delayed 200 years due to animal studies
?Animal experiments can be replaced by at least 450 methods known at this time
?Less then 2% of human illnesses or 1.16% are ever seen in animals
1) http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifesty…
2) http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-…
3) http://www.aboutmyplanet.com/science-tec…
No!!! Um...what so-called alternatives are there? Whatever "alternatives" you are thinking of is absurd.
there's nothing wrong with animal testing
It is better to test on animals, so if they die, it is not like anyone died. It is just a stupid animal.