moral dilemma (animal tested medications)

[Paulette]

How can one morally justify taking medications when one is against animal testing ? I despice the pharmaceutical industry very much, but I take medication for a thyroid condition. It is a moral dilemma and people keep nagging me about it. Any ideas how to verbally counteract accusations that I partzipate on animal suffering ? Or is there no justification whatsoever and one should dropp all medicine ? How do you handle this ?

[karenlovessnow]

I take heart medication that I would not consider giving up. I think you have to go back to what has been said here many times, that we each have to make these decisions for ourselves and do the very best we can to minimize animal suffering. I believe that any effort should be applauded. I don't think that lacto/ovo vegetarians are any less admirable than someone who is a strict vegan. You have to do what you are comfortable with. I, personally, am not willing to jeopardize my health, however hypocritical it may sound to others.

[Sevenseas]

How can one morally justify taking medications when one is against animal testing ? I despice the pharmaceutical industry very much, but I take medication for a thyroid condition. It is a moral dilemma and people keep nagging me about it. Any ideas how to verbally counteract accusations that I partzipate on animal suffering ? Or is there no justification whatsoever and one should dropp all medicine ? How do you handle this ?Would your "boycotting" of medication reduce animal testing?

[zoebird]

i think that boycotting elective pharmacuticals will decrease profit margins of pharm companies and therefore decrease animal testing for products that are not necessary in general (like sudafed or the like--mostly OTCs). (7seas--i thought on this extensively since you last posted it, and it posed a lot of great questions. unfortunately, due to time constraints, i wasn't able to continue the discussion with you--a number of them actually--on the topic. but, i do feel that reducing the numbers of elective medications that we take will reduce the profit margins of pharmacutical companies, and in turn decrease animal testing on a number of 'non-essential' medications.)

but, i think that when necessary, it's absolutely ok to take a medicine.

[vegangirl]

Just think about it like this: how can you help animals when you're ill? You'll do more good by taking the medication and being well enough to help animals. If you're feeling guilty, why don't you donate to an anti-animal-testing charity or do volunteer work?

[sexyjacksparrow]

I agree with all the responses so far. I think there's been a lot of discussion on here in the past about how it is impossible to be 'perfect' in the sense of not using ANYTHING that has directly or indirectly been made with animal ingredients or animal testing.

I work for an anti-vivisection organisation in the UK and this is one of the questions on our FAQs sheet. This is the response we have to it - I hope it's helpful, Paulette.

"Unfortunately most pharmaceuticals will indeed have been tested on animals without your consent, regardless of the fact that animal testing offers no guarantee of human safety. However, taking these drugs does not exclude you from voicing your opposition to animal testing. Nor does it mean that you subscribe to the notion that the drug was necessarily developed in the safest and most reliable or ethical way. It is an entirely coherent position to take such drugs and yet firmly believe that there are safer, more reliable and humane techniques for developing and safety testing medicines for human conditions.

Some pro-vivisection groups promote pledge cards for anti-vivisectionists to carry asking not to be given any drug or treatment that has been tested on animals. In doing so, this rather strange PR stunt completely misses the point. Anti-vivisectionists aren’t anti-drugs or anti science. On the contrary, we believe that using non-animal techniques is a far safer and scientifically reliable method of developing drugs that will really make a difference in the treatment of human illnesses. Most drugs have been tested on animals, but this does not mean that they could not have been developed in other, more humane ways.

Unfortunately almost everything in modern society has been tested on animals at one point or another. The dye in the carpet we walk on, the chemicals in the plastics from which our computers are made, the colouring in our food, even water. Clearly, it is impossible to live without water and unless all anti-vivisectionists condemn themselves to a virtually hermitic lifestyle excluding all interaction with the outside world, it is clearly impossible as citizens to either explicitly or implicitly avoid animal testing altogether. It is to the advantage of only the pro-vivisectionist to convince those who object to vivisection, that a pre-requisite for that position is total abstention from pharmaceuticals. That simply is not a valid argument because its only logical conclusion is that we should in fact abstain from everything.

There may well be reasonable health limits to how far an individual can boycott certain products such as prescription drugs, and certainly limits to how far any of us can totally eliminate animal testing from our lives. Sometimes that’s a matter of personal choice, other times it’s a matter of medical necessity. As anti-vivisectionists we cannot alter what has been done to animals in the past, against our wishes – in years past the UK city of Liverpool was the centre of the British slave trade responsible for the suffering and death of thousands of individuals around the world, but boycotting Liverpool won’t bring those lives back. The important point is that animal testing should stop now and for the future."

[Paulette]

Thanks so much, sexyjacksparrow ! That sums it up beautifully- exactly what I was looking for !

I didn't know about the pledge cards, but yesterday I came across a dubious website http://www.fbresearch.org/education put up by Pfizer and other pharma giants. They sell hidious anti-animal-activists posters and even ask for donations.

[catswym]

when people ask me about things like this i usually say something along the lines of: yes, i'm a hypocrite. but everyone is. i just know that i am doing the best i can to live out my beliefs.

that usually quiets them because most people know that they are NOT doing the best they can to live out their beliefs.

[bluegrrrl79]

You can think of it as you're against animal cruelty, and by you making yourself ill from stopping the medications, that IS cruelty to animals(people are animals too!). I take medications, and I need them to function. Why am I going to torture myself and not let myself be a productive member of society?

[Medesha]

We can easily give up meat, eggs, and dairy because we don't need them to survive, and there are alternatives. Sometimes it's difficult, but we do it because we can and because we care.

There are no alternatives to animal-tested medicine. The laws of most countires prohibit selling medicine unless it's tested on animals. Do everything you can to manage your condition. Eat healthy, exercise, strive for good mental health. Volunteer, have a pet. And supplement that regimen with your necessary medicine.

When people question your committment (which is none of their business anyway), you might try being honest. "I know, it's horrible. I feel so guilty, and wish there were alternatives." See what reaction you get.