Yes they should ! For our protection the products needs to be tasted first but without any crueltly to the animals

poor animal

Due to those experiments we don't need to suffer pain without pain killers - and the same goes for the pets we take to the vet. So, the matter is quite ambiguous, particularly because, on the other hand, a large number of animal experiments are indeed superfluous, for example we don't need to invent new food additives, new pain killers etc. coz we've already got those we need/want.

Tests on animals have no scientific or moral justification, and didn't contribute to the development of science, nor its medical work. This outdated and barbaric method never has given enough good results, even though it slowed the progress of medicine,because the scientists involved in it too long instead of searching relevant, safer and more advanced methods.There are many ways to eliminate tests on animals,today we have the technical assistance such as computer modeling, the analysis of swabs, epidemiological studies and clinical trials.

And I'm vehemently against experiments on animals,it is morally wrong to harm one species due to the assumption that it uses to another. Animals are not natural resources or products, but equally species with whom we share this planet. Unfortunately, animals don't have the choice,because they can't say no, they are in complete helplessness exposed to all that the scientist is planning for them.They can't even understand or demand their right to life. In humans is therefore to identify, recognize and protect these rights for them in the same way as they have a moral obligation to protect children, retarded or mentally ill.

Nope!

Well we r misusing GODs creation and it is wrong

I don't think there is any alternative where animals are needed. Those using them must just be extra careful while handling them.

Good post. . . . ,.,

But the experiments need to be carried out before using them on human...so they can't test it on human first..so they need animals