I still don't see why I can't prefer these were tested on humans. The question should he would you refuse these advances had they been tested on humans instead
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Hello; From my point of view you can "prefer" human testing. Am I correct in thinking that you "prefer" human testing over animal testing?
If the "good science" issue can be fixed then the moral question of human testing remains. At some stages there are human tests of many things including medicine and cosmetics. I suppose these human test subjects are volunteers now days.
People have been used in testing and experiments against there will in the past. In at least one case without their knowledge. I am thinking of such things done during WWII and later in the USA. As far as I know the knowledge gained from such testing and experimentation has been added to the general knowledge base and not rejected.
To me it is not that I think new knowledge could not be gained from involuntary human testing. I guess it could. I am against involuntary human testing however at this point in my life.