I have found that feeding my dogs a food high in fish has improved their allergies. This was plainly ethical, right?
I was suggesting that people test on themselves. Which is we something we already don and can only avoid by outsourcing all our choices. If I expect a given behavior to be net-beneficial and I carefully document and publish my findings who is harmed?
What set of behavior, specifically, are you looking to legislate away? The fewer people looking for drugs and treatments the more expensive those will be. Every restriction is another price hike.
Maybe not? We could even have a discussion whether it's ethical to have a pet at all. But that's not even the point. You should probably be able to tell the difference between food that has been known to be consumed since forever vs. experimental drugs (or food for that matter).
> I was suggesting that people test on themselves
Ok, if that's your point, I'm completely on board with that. It wasn't very clear from your comment.
I was suggesting that people test on themselves. Which is we something we already don and can only avoid by outsourcing all our choices. If I expect a given behavior to be net-beneficial and I carefully document and publish my findings who is harmed?
What set of behavior, specifically, are you looking to legislate away? The fewer people looking for drugs and treatments the more expensive those will be. Every restriction is another price hike.