You must log in or register to comment.

KosmicTom t1_jbahpgj wrote

Anyone else find it interesting that the overwhelming majority of questions they're actually answering are from brand new accounts with zero history?


very_humble t1_jbalzou wrote

All of the questions are so blatantly astroturfed, and then all receive an identical amount of upvotes.


KosmicTom t1_jbamnil wrote

I've reported the ama for the astroturfing.


CurlSagan t1_jbak5wf wrote

It's hilarious. PETA puts the "pet" in sockpuppeting.


TylerJWhit t1_jbaozxn wrote

Why do you choose to associate yourselves with an organization that is far removed from its actual claimed intent? PETA kills upwards of 90% of all animals it 'rescues':

Do you think it's OK that PETA members dressed up in KKK robes to protest the Westminister Kennel Club Dog Show?

Are you concerned with the garbage disinformation that PETA spread regarding milk causing Autism?

Do you stand by PETA's criticism of Steve Irwin?

Do you maintain that meat consumption is a form of toxic masculinity?

Do you maintain that people should not have pets?

Are you concerned about the lies PETA spread about sheep shearing?

Why not work for a more reputable animal rights organization? There are plenty here:


SmackEh t1_jbaiphr wrote

I've read that PETA claims dairy products are linked to autism. Is that claim truthful and what is the official stance of PETA (re: dairy products)?


huh_phd t1_jbaerl4 wrote

What are your scientific credentials?

Define "animals"?

Would you agree that human beings, members of the mammalian tree of life, are animals? Is abortion ethical under the auspices of PETA?


bigkinggorilla t1_jbahd5r wrote

In cases where animal testing is deemed necessary, what steps can be taken to improve quality of life after testing?

Are there times where the most ethical course would be euthanasia simply because the testing has such a negative impact on the animal?


[deleted] OP t1_jbaibao wrote

Unfortunately, animals used in laboratories suffer both during procedures and just from living life in a laboratory, where they are denied everything that is important to them.


bigkinggorilla t1_jbanvcb wrote

Yes, but in cases where the testing is necessary because the models aren’t able to fully replicate the animal, what steps can be taken to minimize their suffering afterwards?


Magicteapotbeliever t1_jbafo69 wrote

If people are the first animal to use a new product, can we read the results of testing after continued use by a human? Would that be made public?


[deleted] OP t1_jbah8hk wrote

We're not sure exactly what you mean. Can you clarify your question?


[deleted] OP t1_jbadz4i wrote



Magicteapotbeliever t1_jbaewks wrote

Once you deem eye makeup safe without testing on animals, who should use it first? Anyone? People above the age of 18?


ActualActivist t1_jbaikka wrote

How does the recently passed FDA Modernization Act differ from the Research Modernization Deal that you're proposing?


[deleted] OP t1_jbak7pv wrote

They are related, but not the same. The FDA Modernization Act gave the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the statutory authority to consider evidence from non-animal methods—including data from in silico tools and complex in vitro models of human physiological systems, like organoids and organs-on-chips—when assessing whether a new compound can enter clinical trials with human volunteers. And the Research Modernization Deal can take us the rest of the way, providing a path to phasing out experiments on animals in non-regulatory research!


motherof3kitties t1_jbakhz2 wrote

In your experience, is the general public with you or against you on this issue? I feel like most people claim they are against animal testing but not sure most people are actually informed on the issues?


[deleted] OP t1_jbampoa wrote

The majority of people in the U.S. are in agreement that they want to see the use of animals in research completely replaced. Public opposition to the use of animals in experiments has increased steadily, from 8% in 194842 to 52% in 2018.


melon_23 t1_jbaly1t wrote

What can an everyday person do to encourage fewer animals in laboratories/stop animal testing?


[deleted] OP t1_jbanekm wrote

Good question, u/melon_23! Anyone can encourage research funders or institutions to replace the use of animals in experiments by contact their representatives to support the Research Modernization Deal (you can take action at the bottom of this page: You can also contact your local colleges and universities to let them know you don't support animal testing. And be sure to always buy products labeled cruelty free (! If you are a student in the sciences and are feeling pressured to test on animals, we can help! Reach out to us:


fcklikeakennedy t1_jbag6kg wrote

Rand Paul talks about animal experiments being really expensive. If we replaced animal tests w/ these other ones that give us human relevant data overnight, how would the cost compare?


[deleted] OP t1_jbagntx wrote

Part of the reason that experiments on animals are so costly is because most of the data they generate does not actually turn out to be useful, so time and money have been wasted. Non-animal methods will save a lot because they will result in human-relevant data that can be utilized by researchers and clinicians. Also, many non-animal methods can be re-used (while most animals are killed at the end of experiments).


[deleted] OP t1_jbajm2m wrote



[deleted] OP t1_jbal960 wrote

This is the question of the hour u/that1dyke. There are a few things holding NIH and other agencies back. One would be inertia from the biomedical sector (it's hard to try something new!). Another is the billion-dollar industry that exists to maintain testing on animals (selling animals and all the equipment that is used to house them and perform procedures on them).