Personal tools

Argument: Animal responses to tests can be different than human responses

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 18:31, 5 May 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting quotations)
← Previous diff
Current revision (15:51, 29 May 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(Parent debate)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Parent debate== ==Parent debate==
-*[[Debate:Animal Experimentation]]+*[[Debate: Animal testing]]
- +
==Supporting quotations== ==Supporting quotations==

Current revision

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Marymoose. "The Case Against Animal Testing". Helium - "One of the main arguments against the use of animals in research is that animal studies can't actually confirm or refute hypotheses about human physiology or pathology. In straightforward terms, it can be argued that only research done with humans is relevant to humans."

"Animal Experiments". Updated August 17th, 2004 - "Animal experiments can be misleading. An animal's response to a drug can be different to a human's"

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits