If so, then you logically also must agree with this (which equates): "I don’t agree with condemning the research because it involves myself," else please compelling explain the difference between yourself and any other animal you like, but also describe how one can ignore or shed the moral horror that is animal research, that only first includes violent interference with the natural right of all alive... to live unmolested, has endless torture in the middle, and ends in unnatural and premature death. Just how does one adopt sweeping callous attitudes, devoid of empathy, towards another living creature?
> but you don’t even need to assume they’ll be involved in experiments. That’s what this article is about right?
...and then be so blindly, comically optimistic? Or sarcasm, duh.
FWIW, if only you were being used for animal research, I would still be against it, though only on moral grounds.
> Like all lemurs, mouse lemurs live only in Madagascar, and some species are critically endangered. But the common mouse lemurs are so abundant that they can be studied easily in the wild
> Mouse lemurs are among the most abundant primates on Earth
What I found of note is the article's reinforcing contradictions, like there's an underlying notion of abundant uniqueness. Truffula trees.