PDA

View Full Version : Islam stance on Animal testing...#



unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 01:20 PM
Is Islam, for or against animal testing and why?






....?

YAH MATE - FOR

NAH MATE - AGAINST
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
aamirsaab
12-15-2008, 01:50 PM
:sl:
Islam is against animal testing since you are putting animals through pain, which would be counted as disrespecting God's creations.
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 01:58 PM
TY

What about for medical purposes?

Animals go through pain, so they can cure humans?

Rational or irrational?
Reply

crayon
12-15-2008, 02:04 PM
I'm not voting in the poll, because my answer is neither yes nor no, it depends on the situation. Testing cosmetics and other unnecessary stuff on animals I disagree with, but testing medicines and treatments, that could save human lives, I'm all for.

edit- Could we add a 'depends on the situation' to the poll choices, please?:)
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 02:07 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
I'm not voting in the poll, because my answer is neither yes nor no, it depends on the situation. Testing cosmetics and other unnecessary stuff on animals I disagree with, but testing medicines and treatments, that could save human lives, I'm all for.
TY

What about animal cloning?

Heard of dolly the sheep?

Do you agree or disagree with animal cloning and why?
Reply

crayon
12-15-2008, 02:09 PM
According to wikiperdia, muslim physicians were the ones who first began animal testing.

"Other innovations introduced by Muslim physicians to the field of physiology by this time include the use of animal testing and dissection"

"Ibn Zuhr was the first to employ animal testing in order to experiment with surgical procedures before applying them to human patients."

wiki
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 02:12 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
According to wikiperdia, muslim physicians were the ones who first began animal testing.

"Other innovations introduced by Muslim physicians to the field of physiology by this time include the use of animal testing and dissection"

"Ibn Zuhr was the first to employ animal testing in order to experiment with surgical procedures before applying them to human patients."

wiki
I don't take Wikipedia as a reliable source =(

But if it is true, interesting find! =)

One final question:

You said that you were against 'Cosmetic Safty Testing' what about Biomedical Reaserch? for example disecting a frog? Or taking out vital organs to analyse?
Reply

crayon
12-15-2008, 02:22 PM
I'm not too sure about animal cloning, don't know enough about it to make a judgment.

As for research, I also support that, because it's done to gain knowledge, in order to benefit people and other animals in the future. If it's just hacking away at a corpse though, then of course, that's just stupid.
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 02:47 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
I'm not too sure about animal cloning, don't know enough about it to make a judgment.

As for research, I also support that, because it's done to gain knowledge, in order to benefit people and other animals in the future. If it's just hacking away at a corpse though, then of course, that's just stupid.
JazakiALlahu khair,

sorry late reply!

Had to run out, someone put fire to my campus, :X :raging: Grr! All that unsaved work =(

End of question for Yu crayon thank you for helping =)

I do hope Aamir will come back!
Reply

Snowflake
12-15-2008, 03:10 PM
When humans ate naturally grown foods according to seasonal produce and healthy livestock, disease was rarely heard of. A healthy diet from birth gave the body enough defence to ward of the majority of illnesses. Alternative remedies were successful enough to treat and prevent a large number of diseases; such as Hijamah as recommended by the Prophet (pbuh).

That's not the case nowadays. Pesticides, unhealthy eating, over-consumption of food, chemicals in the food and environment. smoking, alcohol have resulted in more health conditions than ever before. Rather than reverting to a healthy way of life, man has chosen to harm innocent animals to find cures for diseases that could be prevented in the first place. What a shame that animals have to pay the price for man's greed and mistakes. I don't believe Islam allows animal testing considering the rights of animals, the recommended ways of living and especially when we are causing destruction to ourselves with our own hands.

It should be banned.
Reply

aamirsaab
12-15-2008, 05:37 PM
Originally Posted by unknown_JJ
TY

What about for medical purposes?

Animals go through pain, so they can cure humans?

Rational or irrational?
Medical purposes I don't know the Islamic ruling. Probably is allowed since A) it benefits humans and B) According to Wiki, muslims were first to do animal testing but don't know. Would have to consult an Imaam on the matter. Cosmetic purposes is definitely haram though.
Reply

crayon
12-15-2008, 05:46 PM
I just noticed that the poll is unclear, the question is "are you for OR against it?", and the choices are YES or NO. Yes i'm for it, or yes i'm against it, or no i'm not for it, or no i'm not against it? One can't tell... get me?
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
I just noticed that the poll is unclear, the question is "are you for OR against it?", and the choices are YES or NO. Yes i'm for it, or yes i'm against it, or no i'm not for it, or no i'm not against it? One can't tell... get me?
silly me..

Yu can just say it on the thread, thanks Yu.
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 07:32 PM
Originally Posted by aamirsaab
Medical purposes I don't know the Islamic ruling. Probably is allowed since A) it benefits humans and B) According to Wiki, muslims were first to do animal testing but don't know. Would have to consult an Imaam on the matter. Cosmetic purposes is definitely haram though.
TY for coming back,

So if Animal testing for cosmetic purposes is a big NO NO, for those Muslim/ah's that use cosmetics, are they bad Muslims?

In order to test cosmetics then, what alternative method can you use other than the use of animals?
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by Scents of Jannah
When humans ate naturally grown foods according to seasonal produce and healthy livestock, disease was rarely heard of.
So you are FOR animal testing, in cases of food and farming?

A healthy diet from birth gave the body enough defence to ward of the majority of illnesses. Alternative remedies were successful enough to treat and prevent a large number of diseases; such as Hijamah as recommended by the Prophet (pbuh).
Yeah cupping helps take away many impurities from your blood, but the use of animals to discover new things, through research may prevent any desieses from ever occuring, does this not outweigh what you're trying to say?

That's not the case nowadays. Pesticides, unhealthy eating, over-consumption of food, chemicals in the food and environment. smoking, alcohol have resulted in more health conditions than ever before. Rather than reverting to a healthy way of life, man has chosen to harm innocent animals to find cures for diseases that could be prevented in the first place. What a shame that animals have to pay the price for man's greed and mistakes. I don't believe Islam allows animal testing considering the rights of animals, the recommended ways of living and especially when we are causing destruction to ourselves with our own hands.

It should be banned.
The animals are protected by law from harm during testing btw,

BUT Wow, well argued! =) TY
Reply

Fishman
12-15-2008, 09:30 PM
:sl:
When humans ate naturally grown foods according to seasonal produce and healthy livestock, disease was rarely heard of. A healthy diet from birth gave the body enough defence to ward of the majority of illnesses.
Uh, what about plague, Cholera, smallpox, polio etc? What about all those wretched, filthy peasants living in hovels? Did they eat artifical food? And what about how the fact that people rarely lived over the age of forty-fifty?
That's not the case nowadays. Pesticides, unhealthy eating, over-consumption of food, chemicals in the food and environment. smoking, alcohol have resulted in more health conditions than ever before.
Alcholol and smoking are not modern inventions. Smoking was introduced when America was discovered, and alcohol has been consumed for thousands of years, often in much greater quantities than today. The reason why there is a tax on alcohol is because when people in Britian worked out how to make cheap gin in the 1700s, they all got drunk and the population actually started declining! So the government had to make alcohol more expensive to stop people dinking so much.
Pesticides are not really that bad either. They may have some health effects, but imagine if people stopped using them? Food production would plummet and millions of people would starve to death.
Overeating is a modern problem, but it is caused by the overabundance of wealth. Before overeating there was under eating, which is much worse for your body, just not as morally reprehensible.

Rather than reverting to a healthy way of life, man has chosen to harm innocent animals to find cures for diseases that could be prevented in the first place. What a shame that animals have to pay the price for man's greed and mistakes.
See above. Before modern medicine (and therefore animal testing) we had smallpox. We had plague. We had polio and we had many other horrible diseases. Now smallpox only exists in labs and munitions stores, and the others have been eliminated from the western world, with significant progress in developing countries as well. Before modern medicine, most people lived in horrible, filthy conditions, and they thought that they only way they could cure diseases was by butchering Jews!
:w:
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 09:50 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
Before modern medicine (and therefore animal testing) we had smallpox. We had plague. We had polio and we had many other horrible diseases. Now smallpox only exists in labs and munitions stores, and the others have been eliminated from the western world, with significant progress in developing countries as well. Before modern medicine, most people lived in horrible, filthy conditions, and they thought that they only way they could cure diseases was by butchering Jews!
:w:
Jews? :rollseyes

Alright akhi,

So you are against animal testing?

If yes,

Are you comfortable in using new medication (tablet form, liquid and ointment) & clothes etc that have not been animal tested?
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 10:12 PM
Treatment of animals

Printable Version
Islam and animals
Camels crossing a hill, representing early Islamic settlers

There is not an animal on earth, nor a bird that flies on its wings, but they are communities like you...Qur'an 6:38

Muslims believe that:

* all living creatures were made by Allah
* Allah loves all animals
* animals exist for the benefit of human beings
* animals must be treated with kindness and compassion

Muslims are instructed to avoid:

* treating animals cruelly
* over-working or over-loading animals
* neglecting animals
* hunting animals for sport
o hunting for food is permitted if the animals are killed humanely
* cutting the mane or tail of a horse
* animal fighting as a sport
* factory farming

Using animals is permitted

The Qur'an explicitly states that animals can be used for human benefit.

It is God who provided for you all manner of livestock, that you may ride on some of them and from some you may derive your food. And other uses in them for you to satisfy your heart's desires. It is on them, as on ships, that you make your journeys.Qur'an 40:79-80

Muhammad and animals

There are many stories and sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) that demonstrate his concern for the welfare of animals.

Once someone travelling with the Prophet took some eggs from a nest, causing the mother bird great grief. The Prophet saw this and told the man to return the eggs.

When the Prophet was asked if Allah rewarded acts of charity to animals, he replied: "Yes, there is a reward for acts of charity to every beast alive."

The Prophet said "Whoever kills a sparrow or anything bigger than that without a just cause, Allah will hold him accountable on the Day of Judgment." The Prophet explained that a killing would be for a just cause if it was for food.

Muslim ritual slaughter

Muslims are only allowed to eat meat that has been killed according to Sharia law.

This method of killing is often attacked by animal rights activists as barbaric blood-thirsty ritual slaughter.

Muslims disagree. They say that Islamic law on killing animals is designed to reduce the pain and distress that the animal suffers.
Islamic slaughter rules

These are the rules for Islamic slaughter:

* the slaughterer must be a sane adult Muslim
* the slaughterer must say the name of God before making the cut
o The name of God is said in order to emphasise the sanctity of life and that the animal is being killed for food with God's consent
* the animal must be killed by cutting the throat with the single continuous back and forth motion of a sharp knife
o the cut must sever at least three of the trachea, oesophagus, and the two blood vessels on either side of the throat
o the spinal cord must not be cut
* animals must be well treated before being killed
* animals must not see other animals being killed
* the knife must not be sharpened in the animal's presence
* the knife blade must be free of blemishes that might tear the wound
* the animal must not be in an uncomfortable position
* the animal must be allowed to bleed out

Is this a cruel way to kill an animal?

Some experts say that the animal killed in this way does not suffer if the cut is made quickly and cleanly enough, because it loses consciousness before the brain can perceive any pain.

Other experts disagree and say that the animal remains conscious long enough to feel severe pain.
Pre-stunning to prevent pain

Secular animal slaughter involves pre-stunning animals so that they are unconscious before they are killed. Until recently Muslim law has not permitted pre-stunning.

Muslims feared that pre-stunning might reduce the amount of blood that could drain from the carcase and also because they thought that the animal was sometimes killed by the stunning.

But recently (2004) Masood Khawaja, president of the Halal Food Authority, stated that it was not against halal practice to "immobilise" animals, provided they were not actually killed before their throats are cut.

Halal meat imported to the UK from New Zealand is stunned before slaughter. Masood Khawaja said that this was acceptable to Muslims, provided the religious rites were observed.

It is acceptable as long as the animal is not dead prior to slaughter, all flowing blood has been drained, and a Muslim has done the ritual slaughter.Masood Khawaja (President, Halal Food Authority), 2004

Experiments on animals

According to Al Hafiz B A Masri, using animals for research may be permitted in Islam. The animals must not suffer pain or mutilation and there must be a good reason for the experiment:

Actions shall be judged according to intention. Any kind of medical treatment of animals and experiments on them becomes ethical and legal or unethical and illegal according to the intention of the person who does it.Masri, B.A., Al-Hafiz. Animals in Islam. Great Britain:Athene Trust. 198

Source: BBC F Religion & Ethics.
Reply

Musaafirah
12-15-2008, 10:12 PM
I swear there was a thread like this some time ago?
I agree with a sister above, where she mentioned about not agreeing with animal testing for cosmetic purposes.
However, what about in the case of medical advances? Several successful studies have been undertaken, where the experimental use of mice confirmed theories and allowed for progression.
So, I can't say yes or no can I?
Reply

Fishman
12-15-2008, 10:15 PM
Originally Posted by unknown_JJ
Jews? :rollseyes

Alright akhi,

So you are against animal testing?

If yes,

Are you comfortable in using new medication (tablet form, liquid and ointment) & clothes etc that have not been animal tested?
:sl:
Yeah, Jews. Medieval Europeans, particularly in Germany, would regularly blame plague outbreaks on God's Punishment for letting too many Jews live among them. So they would go and kill a load of them, thinking that it would make God happy with them again.


I'm against animal testing for cosmetics, but support it for medicine if it needs to be done to save lots of lives. I wouldn't feel uncomfortable taking medicine that was not tested on animals though, as long as it was tested somehow.
:w:
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 10:19 PM
Originally Posted by Musaafir
I swear there was a thread like this some time ago?
I agree with a sister above, where she mentioned about not agreeing with animal testing for cosmetic purposes.
However, what about in the case of medical advances? Several successful studies have been undertaken, where the experimental use of mice confirmed theories and allowed for progression.
So, I can't say yes or no can I?
Ok TY.
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-15-2008, 10:23 PM
Originally Posted by Fishman
:sl:Yeah, Jews. Medieval Europeans, particularly in Germany, would regularly blame plague outbreaks on God's Punishment for letting too many Jews live among them. So they would go and kill a load of them, thinking that it would make God happy with them again.
Hmm..

I'm against animal testing for cosmetics, but support it for medicine if it needs to be done to save lots of lives. I wouldn't feel uncomfortable taking medicine that was not tested on animals though,
TY

as long as it was tested somehow.
:w:
What's the alternative? Or Yu don't care?

A question (or several),

Do religious rituals justify the killing of or mistreatment of animals?

One last question: Human rights or Animal rights, which takes precedence?
Reply

Fishman
12-15-2008, 11:23 PM
:sl:
What's the alternative? Or Yu don't care?
I'm sure scientists have some other methods.


Do religious rituals justify the killing of or mistreatment of animals?
I don't know of any religious rituals in Islam which involve mistreating animals. Qurbani involves killing an animal, but that is no different to killing an animal for any meal since the meat is eaten afterwards.

One last question: Human rights or Animal rights, which takes precedence?
Scientifically speaking, humans are more intelligent than animals, so we are probably be more aware of our own suffering. But then again a fetus or a small baby is not as intelligent as a human either, but nobody would want to take their life.
Islamically, humans have dominion over animals as stated earlier in this thread, but that does not mean that we should violate their rights. And mistreating an animal is very bad because they cannot speak out against it either. So I don't know the answer to this.
:w:
Reply

Snowflake
12-16-2008, 12:36 AM
unknown_JJ;1063474]So you are FOR animal testing, in cases of food and farming?
I was about to go and cook so I rushed my post lol. What I was refering to was food growing naturally and animals which was the diet of prehistoric man. I was thinking way back before farming began. (yes I know I used the wrong terms) I'm against animal-testing.



Yeah cupping helps take away many impurities from your blood, but the use of animals to discover new things, through research may prevent any desieses from ever occuring, does this not outweigh what you're trying to say?
Toxins upset the natural balance of the body, leading to poor immunity and causing disease to take hold.

The animals are protected by law from harm during testing btw,

BUT Wow, well argued! =) TY
Animals die and feel pain from tests. I don't see that as being protected.

Fishman;1063670]:sl:

Uh, what about plague, Cholera, smallpox, polio etc? What about all those wretched, filthy peasants living in hovels? Did they eat artifical food? And what about how the fact that people rarely lived over the age of forty-fifty?
As I mentioned above I was refering to prehistoric man. But anyway, Cholera was a result of poor sanitation. Polio - contaminated food/water etc. Smallpox - emerged about 10,000 BC in the human population. One way or the other at least two were preventable.


Alcholol and smoking are not modern inventions. Smoking was introduced when America was discovered, and alcohol has been consumed for thousands of years, often in much greater quantities than today. The reason why there is a tax on alcohol is because when people in Britian worked out how to make cheap gin in the 1700s, they all got drunk and the population actually started declining! So the government had to make alcohol more expensive to stop people dinking so much.
Pesticides are not really that bad either. They may have some health effects, but imagine if people stopped using them? Food production would plummet and millions of people would starve to death.
Overeating is a modern problem, but it is caused by the overabundance of wealth. Before overeating there was under eating, which is much worse for your body, just not as morally reprehensible.


See above. Before modern medicine (and therefore animal testing) we had smallpox. We had plague. We had polio and we had many other horrible diseases. Now smallpox only exists in labs and munitions stores, and the others have been eliminated from the western world, with significant progress in developing countries as well. Before modern medicine, most people lived in horrible, filthy conditions, and they thought that they only way they could cure diseases was by butchering Jews!
Compared to the age I was talking about smoking, alcohol related diseases are modern. I disagree with people starving without pesticide use in agriculture - impossible if man ate to live not lived to eat. Again the living conditions you describe were man-made.

Allah swt hasn't only told us to eat halal food but good and pure food.

‘O you who believe! Eat of the things good and pure that We have provided for you.’ [Sûrah al-Baqarah: 172]”
You may think pesticides aren't too harmful I disagree. They not only are toxic to living things but cause number of health problems including breast cancer, childhood sarcoma and birth defects.

How safe is something that is made to kill?

http://www.wsn.org/cbe/truthaboutpesticides.html

Allah has created a beautiful natural balance of the earth it's inhabitants and their role in maintaining that balance. It is when it is upset by the hands of man that problems arise - to the extent that disease control has us torturing innocent animals for cures. I don't have adequate knowledge to argue endlessly. Nor is it necessary. But I don't for one second believe Allah created animals to suffer needlessly.

assalamu alaykum.
Reply

unknown_JJ
12-16-2008, 10:45 AM
Ty!
Reply

Aqeel Ahmed
12-25-2008, 02:30 AM
:sl:
I read in a newspaper that some labrotories and butcher shops maybe in survillence( watched by the FBI) because the cruelty done to animals.
: sl;
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-10-2015, 12:06 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 03:35 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-07-2007, 11:18 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-23-2006, 06:01 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-15-2006, 01:01 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!