Animal testing

[asher_]

No they arnt? they are still not self aware, smart yes, but not self aware, the human brain is infinatly more advancaed than that or an ape? Plus it would realy help if you actaly mentioned a SMART animal when trying to make this point, an octopus for exsample, is capable of advanced communiction, tactical team work, advanced judgment and is a pretty smart animal "/
Not sentaint, but very smart.

Actually, self awareness has been convincingly demonstrated on chimpanzees and orangutans. Have a read up on the mirror test if you're unaware of it.

[alexxxxx]

Cosmetics: No

Medical: Yes

[JonJon]

So you'd rather they test it on humans? Even the ones on "death row" it still think it'd be better to test it on animals, because that's just treating the dying poorly too. Or, why test it at all? Just put it straight on the market, and see if it injures anyone.

The best way is on animals, and the only other option is to stop making cosmetics.

[Virgin Mary]

So you'd rather they test it on humans? Even the ones on "death row" it still think it'd be better to test it on animals, because that's just treating the dying poorly too. Or, why test it at all? Just put it straight on the market, and see if it injures anyone.

The best way is on animals, and the only other option is to stop making cosmetics.

They're on death row for a reason, it's not like saying we should test it on people with terminal illnesses because they're going to die anyway.

[JonJon]

They're on death row for a reason, it's not like saying we should test it on people with terminal illnesses because they're going to die anyway.

Well, it'd be ok if they wanted to test it out before they die, if they're going to die anyway. But if they didn't accept the offer, they shouldn't.

[Virgin Mary]

Well, it'd be ok if they wanted to test it out before they die, if they're going to die anyway. But if they didn't accept the offer, they shouldn't.

They aren't asked if they want to be executed by injection or electrocution or whatever.

[:dallsgreen]

I'm against.

[Mentor]

Some lesser animals may not be sentient, but many are. Maybe not as much as humans but to some extent, plus an animal being intelligent or self-aware is sapience, not sentience and an animal doesn't need to be sapient to be sentient. I'm not fully against testing, I think it should just be carried out in a more humane manner.

No... sapience is about being wize, which is more todo with application of understanding, Nothing to do with self aware or capable or understanding emotive responces.

Sentient: Self-aware, choice-making consciousness.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=def...-US:unofficial

Actually, self awareness has been convincingly demonstrated on chimpanzees and orangutans. Have a read up on the mirror test if you're unaware of it.

The mirror test doesnt prove much, even simplistic robots have been desmostarted as haveing the abilty to succefuly aknolage its themselves as opposed to another being.. rats can also do that.. so can flys... and if plants had any optical receptors they probaly could too, all that shows is there of heigh intelgance than a table...

[BL!NKEY]

But he VETOED this bill. It wasent even him making this bill. Congress voted almost with out question for the allowing of stem-cell research. All Bush has to ever do is sign the damn thing. But for the first time in his 5 and 1/2 years as president, he didnt sign a bill and vetoed it. Out of all the bills, hundreds of them probably, he decided to veto one with importance such as this. It actually amazes me....

By the way, in recent polls, more than 3/4ths of the country supports stem cell research.

I kinda of poped into the thread but about the stem cell research

The Governator (Arnold Swarsanegger) of California decided to like disregard the thing abuot not giving money for research and I think he gave like a few hundred million to stem cell research in Californis.

I will try to find an article about it and give a link cuz i dont know much abuot it.

I am for stem cell cuz it will really help lots of people

edit: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/25/news/stem.php

[Virgin Mary]

Animals can think about thought
Tim Radford, science editor
Wednesday December 3, 2003
The Guardian

Monkeys can manage mathematics. Dolphins can be decisive. But US psychologists have broken new ground in the animal intelligence challenge. They have proved that animals are also smart enough to join the "don't-knows".

It means that animals, like humans, may be capable not just of thinking, but of thinking about thinking, of knowing that they don't know. Psychologists call this "metacognition", evidence of sophisticated cognitive self-awareness. Ordinary mortals know it as "dithering".

A team from the University of Buffalo, New York, the University of Montana and Georgia State University report in the December issue of Behavioural and Brain Sciences that they gave humans, bottlenose dolphins and rhesus monkeys nonverbal memory tasks. Some were hard, some easy.

"The key innovation in this research was to grant animals an 'uncertain' response so they could decline to complete any trials of their choosing," said John David Smith, of the University of Buffalo.

"Given this option animals might choose to complete trials when they are confident they know, but decline them when they feel something like uncertainty."

There is no doubt that animals can work things out. Laboratory monkeys have counted up to nine, while a New Caledonian crow at Oxford learned to bend wire into the shape of a hook to fish titbits from a bucket. These studies were evidence of thought, but not of thinking about thought.

But the evidence from the latest experiment showed that monkeys and dolphins, at least, could opt for the "uncertain" response, in a manner essentially identical to a human don't-know.

Humans underestimate animals far too much. An animal doesn't need to be able to build a rocket to be sentient. For all we know, there may be intelligent beings in the universe who are far more advanced than we are and who consider us to not be sentient because we aren't as advanced as they are.