I guess it's a matter of how necessary and how evil. I'm a lot more comfortable with someone cutting into a rat than a cat. I am perhaps overly fond of cats. If this were a chimp I personally don't think it would be justified.
I pretty much agree with this. I
cats and they certainly tug at my heartstrings more than rats do if used experimentally. Monkeys and (especially) apes are kinda close to home but I think there probably are cases when research may be justified. I really don't know enough to have a definite opinion. I think the main thing is as you pointed out - how necessary and how evil.As for human volunteers, I have a few issues with that too as there is always a risk of coercion or of using people who are desperate (if subjects were paid for their participation) or of "undesirables" being used as has often happened in the past - mentally ill people, homeless people, members of the armed forces and so on. Extreme caution to make sure that anybody volunteering was totally aware of the risks and what will be happening and why would be paramount.
Also, gotta
PD for letting non-drug/social-type threads get waaaaaaay off-topic 
As far as humans volunteering for this type of research, I think you'd find enough volunteers for BCIs and probably not enough for testing cosmetics and whatnot.
PS: Do they still use animals for cosmetics? I thought that had been stopped years ago. Dunno about elsewhere but in the UK cosmetic products pretty much all have the "Not tested on animals" bit on the back. I suppose that if they still need to mention that they don't then some of the big international brands still do then. I don't think there's any justification for using animals for cosmetic testing. In fact I honestly thought the practise had been stopped years ago

Last edited:
