Actually that's like saying because you are complicit
with a crime
, you are absolved
of it. Corporations are not forced
to make money at gunpoint
, nor do they HAVE to develop
, and then sell drugs
. The people involved have the freedom
to go elsewhere, and find another profession
to earn their cash that doesn't involve the infliction of needless pain and suffering
on animals. And it *is* needless
The specious example of the foetuses is a good example in itself of what I speak about. Foetuses vary enormously across species in their response to a particular drug. That's why we don't for example use the same pregnancy drugs on different species of animals that are looked after by vets. The reason for this is quite simple.
Different species have different body chemistries.
While they may in broad terms both drop dead from a particular poison, it's difficult to detect more subtle effects because quite simply a rat's foetus's biochemistry engine isn't nearly as sophisticated as ours. Foetuses are also highly sensitive to these drugs, and it is difficult to know that a drug given to a rat foetus which seems fine on the surface won't be altered in some subtle way that won't show up until the development cycle is complete. For example, there would never have been a drug test on animals for Downs syndrome.
This doesn't absolve us of our moral responsibility to protect our children, but it does force us to use our conscience. Look, companies are the economic powerhouses of our society. They shouldn't be generating corpses to heat the fires of capitalism and warm up their profit figures, no one should! I'm all for a good economy, but it would be nice to have a government that didn't try to cut corners morally to achieve safety for it's citizens.
In short, stick em on a list. Name and shame them, and make those responsible sweat until it's too much for them.