fanatico wrote:
F: We ought not to test the safety of new drugs on sentient animals, such as dogs and rabbits. Our benefit means their pain, and they are equal to us in the capacity to feel pain.
G: We must carry out such tests; otherwise, we would irresponsibly sacrifice the human lives that could have been saved by the drugs.
Which of the following, if true, is the best objection that could be made from F’s point of view to counter G’s point?
(A) Even though it is not necessary for people to use cosmetics, cosmetics are also being tested on sentient animals.
(B) Medical science already has at its disposal a great number of drugs and other treatments for serious illnesses.
(C) It is not possible to obtain scientifically adequate results by testing drugs in the test tube, without making tests on living tissue.
(D) Some of the drugs to be tested would save human beings from great pain.
(E) Many tests now performed on sentient animals can be performed equally well on fertilized chicken eggs that are at a very early stage of development.
to support F's statement, we need to find something that is justifiable to say we should not perform tests on sentient animals: lets see who does it:
A -- it doesn't say that we shouldn't test the other products that are necessary., so eliminated.
B -- this doesn't suffice to tell we need to invent new products. there by doesn't talk about testing. eliminated
C -- supporting G's statement somewhat. so, wrong answer.
D -- supporting G's statement somewhat. so, wrong answer.
E -- this shows us the alternative to testing on sentient animals. Thereby telling testing on sentient animals can be avoided. this is what F wanted and
hence the correct answer...
_________________
If you like my post, please press Kudos+1
close
45% (02:02) correct
