As far as the language used is concerned humans get the same "cement brick" treatment in scientific papers. How would it help using a compassionate language? It would be just a distraction from the subject.
Humans can make informed choices when studied by science, and when they aren't society strongly disapproves - registering that disapproval by criticising the lack of compassion given - and expressed.
But how exactly how did JCharante lecture anyone?
it's not like humans are capturing wild pigs and using them. I would say that wild animals deserves the right to exist and not hunted (unless they're threatening human interests), but the same cannot be said for bred animals.
(I'm an omnivore that's relatively OK with animal testing, fwiw)
I hold the same distinction to fishing - i do not like wild fish, but farmed fishes (note: farmed, not fishes caught from the wild, then fattened) are ok (esp. in an enclosed, hydroponic system). Unfortunately, most "farmed" fishes refer to caught fish that is fattened...
Anything that humans create, live or dead, is fair game to be used for any purpose deemed desirable by the creator. The right to live doesn't exist for those organisms. But wild animals that exist without any human intervention should have that right to live.
Does that same distinction apply to human children?
The objection to animal testing or consumption isn't about the source of the animals, it's about the ethical treatment of them. The potential suffering/emotional responses from the animal are the same regardless of the source.
I'm more sympathetic to the exact opposite argument: it's more humane to take wild game than farmed. At least then they've lived a life relatively free of suffering, to the extent nature allows. That seems preferable to me vs. the typical feedlot life.
it would if it weren't for the universal application of human rights today. And it did apply in the past - a slave's children are also slaves. I'm sure one day humans will move past this idea, but it is not today.
Is it okay by extension to eat/do research on/torture on a human baby that was created in a lab and was came to term without a mother, but in vitro?
Animal experiments are legal because enough people voted to legalize it (or not enough people voted to make it illegal)
Whataboutism isn't an argument.