For a large number of problems, there will be some animal of choice, or a few such animals, on which it can be most conveniently studied.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The problem with experiments has always been that human beings make the decisions on whether or not the animals have benefitted from the treatment.
It is an incontrovertible fact that if we want to make progress in basic areas of medicine and biology, we are going to have to use animals.
There are some four million different kinds of animals and plants in the world. Four million different solutions to the problems of staying alive.
When I began in 1960, individuality wasn't an accepted thing to look for; it was about species-specific behaviour. But animal behaviour is not hard science. There's room for intuition.
Of the seven experiments, the ones that have been most investigated so far have been the pets. The dogs who know when their masters for coming home, and the sense of being stared at.
Scientists should not do animal testing if there is any alternative, but subject to that, I would support it on grounds of the medical benefits.
Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.
Animals can adapt to problems and make inventions, but often no faster than natural selection can do its work - the world acts as its own simulator in the case of natural selection.
Animals need to understand other species, if only to prey on them or escape from them.
The only animals that we test on are the two of us and our kids.