Try the political quiz

0 Reply

 @9D78JPFACTanswered…8mos8MO

Test on convicted criminals, such as murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and terrorists.

 @9FZKSK2answered…6mos6MO

If they can do this without using animals it would be preferable but if that is the only option then yes

 @9G6SD2Janswered…6mos6MO

Use of testing on people who are convicted of sexual assault and murder, not manslaughter, but murder

 @9FL692CGreenanswered…6mos6MO

Regulations need to be rigorous and reviewed that the new product has a legitimate chance of causing harm and whether existing tests for similar products are sufficient. I don't agree for cosmetics

 @9FL5JBKanswered…6mos6MO

 @9FKBFXYanswered…6mos6MO

 @9FJXF32Labouranswered…6mos6MO

Yes, but only where there are no other testing alternatives and the product is considered life saving

 @9FJTJMRanswered…6mos6MO

Yes but there should be rules on how this happens. No cosmetics for example and the tests shouldn’t cause pain

 @9FJJ6HCOpportunitiesanswered…6mos6MO

Medical life changing chemicals after all other avenues have been researched

 @9DRY639Labouranswered…7mos7MO

Only if there is no other more animal friendly way and strict humane methods applied

 @9DRXV7Hanswered…7mos7MO

 @9DQYZF2answered…7mos7MO

 @9DPM46Danswered…7mos7MO

Only humans who are imprisoned as part of their sentence which include heinous crimes like rape and murder should receive this by force.

 @9DNC7CGanswered…7mos7MO

Use humans. We are animals. And to be quite frank it's not ok to force our wants on any other species to benefit us and us alone. It's really messed up.

 @9DHFD3Ranswered…7mos7MO

 @9DG648Yanswered…7mos7MO

 @9DDSG5VNationalanswered…7mos7MO

Yes, but not repeatedly. Once you get the scientific result the animal should nevet have to suffer for those results again needlessly.

 @9DBJYX7answered…7mos7MO

Use criminals who are convicted behind a doubt of serious crimes ie murder/rape

 @9DB5P9Fanswered…8mos8MO

Drugs, medical devices, and vaccines as long as they would be happy giving it to a human. Don't actually give it to a human, test on the animal, but don't give it to the animal if you are not 100% happy with it

 @9D9ZM25answered…8mos8MO

No, rather test it on prisoners serving a life sentence for murder or rape.

 @9D9M8WYanswered…8mos8MO

maybe like sickly dying animals or pests or ones that aren’t so conscious

 @9FNF6CLNationalanswered…6mos6MO

 @9FN5WC8New Zealand Firstanswered…6mos6MO

It's an awful thought either way, I just cant answer this as there is repercussions and moral issues either side

 @9FGWBZYanswered…6mos6MO

 @9FGTRHMNewZealanswered…6mos6MO

What is the alternative? I don't like the idea of animals being used for testing.

 @9FGPC3XNationalanswered…6mos6MO

No, animals are to be let out and roam freely and not held against their will.

 @9FFN3DSanswered…6mos6MO

If you won’t try it on yourself why would you try it on a poor defenceless furbaby

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...