Shahnaz -

The treatment of other animals  by humans, in many cases, is appalling, in my opinion.  But then, the way humans treat each other is too often equally appalling.  In my opinion, there should be a very high standard met, and argued over, for any animal testing.  It must be essential to crucial research into quality of human life, before any animal testing is done, and it must be done with the very minimum of distress to the animals.  That is my attempt at realism. My immediate reaction is to want to say "No animal testing."  The very least we can do is show some compassion and not do it for trivial reasons.  That might meet a minimal standard of ethics, if seriously considered in every case.

Expediency and ethics can be very much at loggerheads, by definition.

I think it comes down to a matter of degree.  Which, case by case, is the least unethical: allowing human suffering, or imposing it on animals? 

Thank you for your question. 

Jim

Shahnaz -

The treatment of other animals  by humans, in many cases, is appalling, in my opinion.  But then, the way humans treat each other is too often equally appalling.  In my opinion, there should be a very high standard met, and argued over, for any animal testing.  It must be essential to crucial research into quality of human life, before any animal testing is done, and it must be done with the very minimum of distress to the animals.  That is my attempt at realism. My immediate reaction is to want to say "No animal testing."  The very least we can do is show some compassion and not do it for trivial reasons.  That might meet a minimal standard of ethics, if seriously considered in every case.

Expediency and ethics can be very much at loggerheads, by definition.

I think it comes down to a matter of degree.  Which, case by case, is the least unethical: allowing human suffering, or imposing it on animals? 

Thank you for your question. 

Jim

Should the animal testing justified ?

Depending on which ethical moral philosophy a person is subscribing i.e. Utilitarianism, Kantianism etc.  E.g. if a person / groups of people are subscribing Utilitarianism, they might think animal testing is justified as this will yield the maximum benefits to the majority of mankind.  Some people might think this otherwise i.e. it is not ethical to cause harm to animal for the benefits of mankind as animals have their own rights etc.

It cannot be justified as an ethical practice. Human survival instincts evolved from hunting behaviour which equalled the behaviour of other apex predators. 

The growth of human intellect however inspired exploitation of animals under utilitarian ethics which given alternative testing options is no longer vital to survival. Consent in any human context is taken very seriously yet not afforded to animals or considered under the stance that supports animal experimentation.