Debating Vivisection Using the Scientific Argument
An Animal Rights Article from


People for Reason and Science in Medicine (PRISM)
September 2012

When PRISM members debate vivisection with anyone, be they doctors, researchers, biologists, high school students, strangers or family members, there are five basic, easy-to-learn facts to remember.

But before enumerating the following points, be firm in stating that the moral issue is self-evident and resist any attempts to be drawn into any pointless, discussions regarding cruelty or philosophy. The erroneous supposition that “it’s your baby or your dog” is what the vivisection proponents have used for years to obfuscate the issue and portray animal rights activists as caring more about animals than humans. Philosophizing about the right of animals to be treated humanely has been going on for centuries and accomplished nothing regarding the abolition of vivisection.

The fact is the vast majority of human beings care more about themselves and their loved ones than they do about animals. It is up to us to help people understand that vivisection harms THEM.

  1. Every species of animal is different physiologically from each other and from humans, therefore, extrapolation of experiments from one species to another, including from any animal to humans is scientifically impossible.
  2. Since different species of animals react differently to drugs and chemicals, animal testing gives no indication as to what the reaction in humans will be. Human beings are the real experimental subjects in clinical trials. But when drugs are released on the market in spite of the negative reactions in humans, drug companies are legally protected because of the unscientific, useless animal tests.
  3. Experiments on animals kept in laboratory cages cannot even be extrapolated to the same species which are still living in their natural environment, let alone human beings.
  4. Mock symptoms of human disease, artificially recreated in an animal, are NOT the same as diseases which have occurred spontaneously in human beings.
  5. Vivisectors try to justify their use of animals by claiming they are “similar”. In true science the word “similar” is meaningless.

When debating vivisectors, almost any one of us is better equipped to discern the facts than “scientists” and doctors are. We have not been relentlessly programmed by medical educators to believe in drugs, vivisection and the precepts of the unforgiving pharmaceutical/medical/ industrial complex. We have retained our open, questioning, perceptive intellects untainted by the brainwashing of medical schools, and can clearly see the truth.

So when you engage someone in a debate regarding vivisection and they say, “What do you know? Are you a doctor?” You can answer; “Thankfully I’m not or I would know as little as many of them do about the fraud of vivisection and staying healthy.”

Yes, it helps to read SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENT, THE NAKED EMPRESS and other books about vivisection, but just knowing the basic principles empowers you to debate anyone. The scientific argument is as simple as the five basic points listed above. Do not allow yourself to be intimidated by those who wear white lab coats, have “doctor” in front of their names and recite unpronounceable Latin names for body parts and diseases in order to confuse lay people. Always remember, you have the truth on your side and all it takes to understand the truth is your own good common sense.

And if you ARE a doctor and understand that vivisection is unscientific and harmful to humans and the environment, so much the better; we appreciate having you on our side.

Return to Animal Rights Articles
Read more at Alternatives to Animal Testing, Experimentation and Dissection