Animal rights activists, would you let these people die?

Newkirk is an odious hypocrite who campaigns against animal tested medicine while being kept alive by it herself.

I'm a human rights activist rather than an animal rights activist; but I am a vegan, and PETA is not representative of vegetarians and vegans, most of whom despise that organisation.

I'm vegan to minimise my personal contribution to animal suffering, but I value human life way, way over animal life.

As one poster already mentioned, Ingrid Newkirk is a hypocrite who unfortunately has taken (fooled is more accurate) a few followers with her However, these very people are currently in the peak of health (for the moment) so they can rant about it. But I think I can guarantee you as soon as it's THEIR life on the line, they would do everything to rid themselves of disease or illness no matter how the medicine was obtained or researched

There is also a so called "responsible and ethical" group of anti testing animal rights vegetarian physicians who have publicly stated that they are against animal testing even for medicines. Again nothing oe than a publicity gimmick and hypocritical exploitation of the animal welfare issue because all of these so called compassionate physicians will use animal tested medicines and procedures to save their patients' lives.

Pro animal rights does not mean against human rights. And Ingrid Newkirk is an idiot who speaks for PETA, not vegetarians and vegans.

No, I wouldn't let them die. I believe in being human to all creatures, human or other. That's why I don't eat meat or wear leather. I adopted a dog from the Humane society. I built houses for the homeless and support Invisible Children, a group that helps protect children in Uganda that are kidnapped by Kony's army and forced to fight.

You are assuming that vegetarians support PETA, and that animal rights activists are all focused on only one thing.

There are currently 6,803,600,000+ people in the world. Believe it or not, every one of us will die whether animals are used for experimentation or not, or whether we let them die or not. I am in favor of, as soon as possible, replacing animal experimentation with advanced tests, more closely resembling our own physiology so that both human and non-human animals will suffer less in the time we do have. I believe that's possible one day relatively soon. I'm 100% against testing of animals for less important things like wrinkle remedies and lip gloss. I also think it's crazy that some people who claim to believe in an afterlife paradise would go to extremes like drilling into a puppy's head to stay away from that paradise for a few more days. Long before we can cure all disease, we must cure our fear of inevitable death, and accept that we are mortal animals too.

A lot of vegans hate PeTA.

A vegan would probably look for medicine that hasn't be tested on animals, or accept the fact that something horrible created something beautiful that is beneficial to society, in the same way that you probably wouldn't discriminate against a rape victim's child.

Most vegans who are against animal testing on products are against it because it is unnecessary and inaccurate. For example, to test cosmetics and shampoo with animal testing, rabbits are constrained at the neck, their eyelids are cut off, and product is put into their eyes until they die, either from breaking their necks trying to get free, or from being poisoned by the product. The way of testing without animals is to use skin material grown in a lab that is identical to human tissue. It is much more accurate and causes no harm to anyone or anything.

PETA is messed up. A perfect example of disturbing priorities.