Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
F: We ought not to test the safety of new drugs on sentient [#permalink]
19 Nov 2005, 10:20
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
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 Fâ€™s point of view to counter Gâ€™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.
I'll take E. By being at an early stage, the un-hatched chicen would probably not feel any pain.
I considered choice A but decided against picking it. It mentions cosmetics, but there's not mention that testing cosmetics on sentiment animals cost an enormous amount of pain. For instance, does powedring a rabbit cause pain? I doubt so...
Check out this awesome article about Anderson on Poets Quants, http://poetsandquants.com/2015/01/02/uclas-anderson-school-morphs-into-a-friendly-tech-hub/ . Anderson is a great place! Sorry for the lack of updates recently. I...