Saving animals. .. Experimenting on human beings because they don't fit your ideal of the human condition...
Click to expand


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#23 - thegamegestapo (07/16/2013) [+] (12 replies)
Experimenting on human beings because they don't fit your ideal of the human condition...
#2 - mraye (07/15/2013) [+] (7 replies)
Because if we accidentally create a fast-spreading super virus, we'd prefer if it would be used to spreading through rabbits before it figures out how to kill people.
User avatar #15 - remsaman ONLINE (07/15/2013) [+] (5 replies)
because **** human rights. right?
#25 - joeballs (07/16/2013) [+] (6 replies)
If you actually want to know why they don't, here it is:

For one: even prisoners have rights. But that is looking at it from a moral perspective, which is dumb at the root.
The biggest reason why scientists wouldn't do it is because you need to establish a experimental control. The rodents they test on are severely inbred to the point to where they have little genetic differences, leaving little room for variations of results not created by the actual drug. By the time the drug leaves the rodent-testing stages, it is most likely already declared safe for humans, and is tested by those who actually were in need of what the drug has to offer.
Please inform yourself before you spread ignorance! Especially you zigzak

pic because it is funny and relatable
#35 - widar (07/16/2013) [-]
Wow. Reading through the comments, I totally see how the Nazis got so popular back in the day.
#74 - jjholt ONLINE (07/16/2013) [+] (10 replies)
Human rights?   
Eighth amendment?   
any of this ringin' a bell?
Human rights?
Eighth amendment?

any of this ringin' a bell?
#33 - widar (07/16/2013) [+] (9 replies)
Well, for one thing, they're still human. We also don't torture prisoners, no matter what they did. I for one am glad that we were able to overcome mob justice.

On a side note, I think it's interesting how it seems to be socially accepted that rape and child molesting are worse than murder. What the **** ? They're both terrible crimes, but at least the victims have a chance of continuing with their lives. Even though they're probably traumatized, that's not as bad as being dead.
#84 - pridefulmatthew (07/16/2013) [-]
It would be funny as **** to test makeup on Inmates...
User avatar #28 - redrex (07/16/2013) [-]
just because said prisoner did something illegal, doesn't mean he/she has no rights.
#8 - grandreddragon (07/15/2013) [-]
Yeah, I think the Holocaust kind of ended all testing experiments on humans first.
User avatar #40 - anonymoose (07/16/2013) [-]
False convictions.
#54 - Common Pepe (07/16/2013) [+] (4 replies)
Hitler would probably agree
User avatar #60 to #54 - snakefire (07/16/2013) [-]
I'm sick of this reductio ad hitlerum that this site falls in love with.

You can make anything evil by comparing it to hitler.
User avatar #1 - worlddestroyguy (07/15/2013) [-]
like his music... dont like his opinion

User avatar #101 - ningenpoop (07/16/2013) [-]
Because it's a ******* rabbit not a human being
#91 - knowstoomuch (07/16/2013) [-]
Every time I see this, I feel like I have the need to explain why prisoners still have rights.

Prisoners. Are. People. They have thoughts and feelings just like you and me. The justice system is flawed (at least in America) and people get life in prison for stupid reasons. California alone has a law that committing three crimes will get you life in prison. There was one case where a guy had one strike on his record already and he stole two dvds from walmart. Walmart had the dvds counted individually so the guy had two strikes with one theft. The case went to the supreme court who ruled in favor of Walmart.

Would you want to be experimented on without your consent if you were that guy?

Animals is a whole other can of worms that I don't want to get in to in this post.
User avatar #32 - cleverguy (07/16/2013) [+] (6 replies)
its already been said, but yeah, prisoners do have rights. there are a lot of regulations on human testing. also animal testing is very well controlled and does not have as many variables. there are a lot of laws behind this and it makes sense. prisoners can be tested on though, if human subjects are needed, its just not any easier, and actually can be harder legally than just getting regular volunteers. its because prisoners are actually very susceptible to coercion and that is not good for the informed consent laws.
#31 - kameli (07/16/2013) [-]
Too many variables and not reliable ennough. Thats why.
#17 - Common Pepe (07/16/2013) [+] (2 replies)
Because of basic scientific methodology. You have to keep as many variables controlled as possible. Lab rats/mice/rabbits are bred quickly and can easily be selectively bred for specific criteria for testing. People are just too diverse for early testing processes to get any reliable data. Hell even when a human trial includes thousands of people they have to tack on dozens of extra side-effects just in case they ever pop-up - that's why every pill's side effects sound horrendous, not because they actual cause a lot of problems, but because companies have to cover their asses incase you have a weird 1 in a billion reaction.
User avatar #18 to #17 - nicolbolas (07/16/2013) [-]
This, this answered the question.
#97 - karlossacramento (07/16/2013) [-]
lab rats are specially breed to have (almost) the same genetic properties, so you can do your test in a controlled environment. that wouldn't work with humans. also: we would need a ******* of people.
#48 - Common Pepe (07/16/2013) [-]
That rabbit took my ******* trix is what he did
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)