animal testing

Thank you for posting an informative response, now here's my argument: Firstly, Yes Humans can only be tested on if they give their consent and yes animals do not have that choice. But surely that would support the against side? If an animal clearly does not have the logic to make it's own decisions, speak, work out mathematical problems etc. So humans are rightfully, more powerful than animals, meaning we should be entitled to do what we wish. If you completely disagree with this, then you must disagree with society? In the current UK government - cuts are made left right and centre, no-one gets a say in this because the government are more powerful than the middle and lower class and as we can see the government have Control over us. Just like we have control over animals. Basically, there's a hierarchy in this world > world leaders at the top > government workers > councillors > upper class > middle class > lower class > animals > plants. (Plants wouldn't technically count) and the item that is to the left of the item on the right, has more power / dominion e.g. the councillors are more powerful than the upper class and everything (but plants) has more power over animals. It's the basic hierarchy in life which we all follow and are accustomed to in society, obviously something which has little or 0 intelligence, remains at the bottom = animals. Secondly, Cloning can actually benefit people quite a lot. Let's take a cow for an example. We all know cows produce milk which makes cheese, yogurt, butter, ice cream etc. and each cow has something slightly different about them e.g. 1 may produce 2 litres more milk per month, 1 may run away when getting ready to be 'milked'. However if a farmer identifies a cow which always has a higher concentration of milk in it's udders , such as 5 litres more every week than the average cow, then to try and get a 'herd' which produces more milk - cloning would easily come in handy here. It benefits the farmer, who faces less chance of losing money. It benefits the cow because..it has more milk? But it benefits the people and the economy - by providing more food and helping to pour cash flow into the economy. So you can see that cloning isn't always a negative thing. Thirdly, Many breakthroughs in medicine have occurred from animal testing. To name a few; Paracetamol, Allergy tablets, Ibuprofen, 'stem cell research' + many vaccines such as MMR (measles, mumps and rubella). Also, I remember in 1 incident in .. 1960's? Of a drug called thalidomide (I think) - which was given to pregnant women to stop morning sickness, but a huge error had occurred - the drug was never tested on any female / pregnant animals. So when the babies were born they were deformed e.g. having 3 arms or 2 foreheads. Now stop and look at this situation, 10,000 - 20,000 victims from this drug..simply because it wasn't tested on a pregnant ANIMAL. What would you rather have? 20,000 babies with defects or 10 animals who will end up with 'problems' and possibly being killed but who will stop 20,000 lives from being ruined. Finally, I'm pretty sure you don't place laundry detergent in your eyes, and if you did it would probably hurt a lot, so I'm fairly sure that was a bad example to use. You simply don't realise, I guarantee you, that you are wearing a piece of make up now or have before...did it ever hurt you (if you're not allergic), did your eyes start burning, did your teeth start dissolving? No. All because animals were there to protect you from being hurt - I'm pretty sure an animal (if it had a brain as complex as a humans) would feel proud that they're dying to protect another species from pain. I look forward to your next argument (I may not answer until the next day though - Incredibly tired).