Forums > Social Discussion > Is Testing on Animals Acceptible?
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
chemical attraction
1,097 posts
Location: Ilkeston, Derbyshire, England
chemical attraction
1,097 posts
Location: Ilkeston, Derbyshire, England
Posted:
I am interested in everyones opinion as to whether they agree or
disagree with testing new drugs or products on animals before
they are released on to the market.If you do not agree how else
would you make sure they were safe and if you do agree please
tell me why...thanks
I am interested in everyones opinion as to whether they agree or
disagree with testing new drugs or products on animals before
they are released on to the market.If you do not agree how else
would you make sure they were safe and if you do agree please
tell me why...thanks
GOLD Member
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
You'd be surprised how many binding sites are common throughout species to certain drugs. Certain cells and tissues will also react the same way in different species. I guess without suitable scientific education you may find this hard to understand.
In no way do I support animal testing in cosmetics, in no way do I support cruelty to animals. HOWEVER, I feel that for advances to be made in medicine, testing on animals is a neccisity.
As a matter of interest, can I ask (and I apoligise if this has been asked before in this thread) those who are against animal testing, are you vegetarians?
Written by: CrazyHippyChick
oh yeah silly me i forgot how simular i am to a rat
You'd be surprised how many binding sites are common throughout species to certain drugs. Certain cells and tissues will also react the same way in different species. I guess without suitable scientific education you may find this hard to understand.
In no way do I support animal testing in cosmetics, in no way do I support cruelty to animals. HOWEVER, I feel that for advances to be made in medicine, testing on animals is a neccisity.
As a matter of interest, can I ask (and I apoligise if this has been asked before in this thread) those who are against animal testing, are you vegetarians?
Member
152 posts
Location: London, england
152 posts
Location: London, england
Posted:
doc lightning i have written some stuff wrong or you have read it wrong. i laready owe my life to medical science, i have had kidney failure on top of laods of stuff and i wouldnt be here without.
i think animal testing is necessary sometimes, but ONLY if it is beneficial to necessary MEDICAL research, that benefits both animals and humans. i think testing stuff that isnt needed, or stuff like make up is completely unesccary, and the conditions these animals are kept in mostly are disgusting. i just think sometimes it is unecessary and that some people forget where their medicine ocmes from.
i also beleive that there is a cure for everything in the forests and jungles of our world, yet we continue to kill these regions.
doc lightning i have written some stuff wrong or you have read it wrong. i laready owe my life to medical science, i have had kidney failure on top of laods of stuff and i wouldnt be here without.
i think animal testing is necessary sometimes, but ONLY if it is beneficial to necessary MEDICAL research, that benefits both animals and humans. i think testing stuff that isnt needed, or stuff like make up is completely unesccary, and the conditions these animals are kept in mostly are disgusting. i just think sometimes it is unecessary and that some people forget where their medicine ocmes from.
i also beleive that there is a cure for everything in the forests and jungles of our world, yet we continue to kill these regions.
Kiss me now, You're beatiful, For these days are truly the last.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
But buzzingtalk... if that's you in the picture, you do wear make-up and hair dye...
I also don't really understand how it's okay for animals to have been used for things like kidney failure, and being considered worth less than you, but it's not for other medical research to help other people because the animals don't benefit?
But buzzingtalk... if that's you in the picture, you do wear make-up and hair dye...
I also don't really understand how it's okay for animals to have been used for things like kidney failure, and being considered worth less than you, but it's not for other medical research to help other people because the animals don't benefit?
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
Member
152 posts
Location: London, england
152 posts
Location: London, england
Posted:
thats what im saying though - we will never know if these things benefit animals or not, we will never know the sick statistics of how many animals die for silly reasons. i think it is OK if a animal dies and a human dies in the name of CONCLUSIVE medical research, if a human dies then its the same. i hate animal testing i really do, but there is nothing i can do about it except protest and write letters, theres no escape form animal testing in this age.
and i meant that humans and animals are the saame right, so if an animal or a human dies to benefit both then it is better than them just dying to test some useless crap, cos either way it is going to happen, if it has very high benefit to animal life saving and human too then it makes it a bit better. the worst one is when they test bleach, i dunno what we think were doing but we know what bleach does, stop trying to make new bleach that dosent burn peoples skin, if a kid opens the bleach bottle and it burns the skin then people should just learn to hid the bleach form kids, not test new bleach on poor animals that cant defend themselves.
i probably ocme out well wrong when i write i cant writie what i think a lot of the time and end up digging my own hole
thats what im saying though - we will never know if these things benefit animals or not, we will never know the sick statistics of how many animals die for silly reasons. i think it is OK if a animal dies and a human dies in the name of CONCLUSIVE medical research, if a human dies then its the same. i hate animal testing i really do, but there is nothing i can do about it except protest and write letters, theres no escape form animal testing in this age.
and i meant that humans and animals are the saame right, so if an animal or a human dies to benefit both then it is better than them just dying to test some useless crap, cos either way it is going to happen, if it has very high benefit to animal life saving and human too then it makes it a bit better. the worst one is when they test bleach, i dunno what we think were doing but we know what bleach does, stop trying to make new bleach that dosent burn peoples skin, if a kid opens the bleach bottle and it burns the skin then people should just learn to hid the bleach form kids, not test new bleach on poor animals that cant defend themselves.
i probably ocme out well wrong when i write i cant writie what i think a lot of the time and end up digging my own hole
Kiss me now, You're beatiful, For these days are truly the last.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
You know, a lot of supposedly "useless" animal testing (such as in asking such questions as "is there crosstalk between the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the coagulation cascade?") winds up being amazingly useful.
Ever taken prednisone? It saves millions of lives every year. That came from an entire field where they were trying to come up with a completely unrelated question and discovered something amazing.
And they did it on rats.
You know, a lot of supposedly "useless" animal testing (such as in asking such questions as "is there crosstalk between the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the coagulation cascade?") winds up being amazingly useful.
Ever taken prednisone? It saves millions of lives every year. That came from an entire field where they were trying to come up with a completely unrelated question and discovered something amazing.
And they did it on rats.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
small member
116 posts
Location: Hastings
116 posts
Location: Hastings
Posted:
I think testing on chavs is acceptible
I think testing on chavs is acceptible
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Lord knows they reproduce quickly enough.
Lord knows they reproduce quickly enough.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
member
33 posts
33 posts
Posted:
Can we test on people? We have so many!
NO NO NO NO NO animals should NOT be tested on.
I think if people agree with it, they should donate themselves to the horrors of testing. I heard this, not sure its true, but some razorblade companies test their products on bunnies. Now I'm all for the eating and hunting of animals, but to torture them is !!!!!!really messed!!!!!!!
its makes me sooooooooo mad.
EDIT If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
EDITED_BY: SugarCoatedHell (1142926081)
Can we test on people? We have so many!
NO NO NO NO NO animals should NOT be tested on.
I think if people agree with it, they should donate themselves to the horrors of testing. I heard this, not sure its true, but some razorblade companies test their products on bunnies. Now I'm all for the eating and hunting of animals, but to torture them is !!!!!!really messed!!!!!!!
its makes me sooooooooo mad.
EDIT If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
EDITED_BY: SugarCoatedHell (1142926081)
There are no witholding taxes on the wages of sin.
~ It ain't a sin to crack a few laws, just don't break them. ~
~ I lost my reputation young, and never missed it. ~
~ She's the kind of girl who climbed the ladder of success, wrong by wrong. ~
newbie
24 posts
Location: Tucson, Arizona
24 posts
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posted:
I'm wondering if I should say anything... I am getting a university degree in science, so I suppose my position is relatively assumed...
Personally, I would love to test on people. In fact, many scientists would love testing on people all the time. Many similarities exist between animals and humans, but sometimes it is the few differences that make or break the case. Of course, this is coming from someone who laughs at slasher movies but hates to see Old Yeller die.
The problem is that humans do not have A) quick metabolism and B) quick/prolific generations. There is simply a feasibility issue with human testing that has been shown; humans do not have litters. There is also the moral debate about humans vs. other creatures.
Luckily, I am not in a position to have to choose a side. I declined working in a lab that used animals in the experiment, but I am still a scientist. Both sides have valid points, as have been discussed in this thread and countless other places. I believe we are at an impass where graphic misuses of animal testing have been halted, but the general practice remains alive. For those who lean toward testing, you still have your rights to test. For those who lean towards avoiding animal testing, you can rest slightly easier knowing that worse treatment has been halted. Only time will tell which way the balance will swing in the future.
Of course, with advancements in genetic/protein drugs, a lot of testing is now done in a test tube. One day, we might be able to move into purely glassware tests, but until that technology is advanced enough, the accepted route is "rat, cat, monkey, man"
And SugarCoatedHell, I understand your point, but there are still viable discoveries that have generally "improved" the world. It is just a matter of how you view it.
I'm wondering if I should say anything... I am getting a university degree in science, so I suppose my position is relatively assumed...
Personally, I would love to test on people. In fact, many scientists would love testing on people all the time. Many similarities exist between animals and humans, but sometimes it is the few differences that make or break the case. Of course, this is coming from someone who laughs at slasher movies but hates to see Old Yeller die.
The problem is that humans do not have A) quick metabolism and B) quick/prolific generations. There is simply a feasibility issue with human testing that has been shown; humans do not have litters. There is also the moral debate about humans vs. other creatures.
Luckily, I am not in a position to have to choose a side. I declined working in a lab that used animals in the experiment, but I am still a scientist. Both sides have valid points, as have been discussed in this thread and countless other places. I believe we are at an impass where graphic misuses of animal testing have been halted, but the general practice remains alive. For those who lean toward testing, you still have your rights to test. For those who lean towards avoiding animal testing, you can rest slightly easier knowing that worse treatment has been halted. Only time will tell which way the balance will swing in the future.
Of course, with advancements in genetic/protein drugs, a lot of testing is now done in a test tube. One day, we might be able to move into purely glassware tests, but until that technology is advanced enough, the accepted route is "rat, cat, monkey, man"
And SugarCoatedHell, I understand your point, but there are still viable discoveries that have generally "improved" the world. It is just a matter of how you view it.
There was once a man who dreamt he was a butterly, and when he awoke, he wished he would wake again to find his wings.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
SugarCoatedHell - please don't take this the wrong way!
You say all those who approve of the use of animals should volunteer for testing. I think if anything it should be the other way round, those who don't approve should all volunteer. Why should those who accept it change it? That's like saying those who support the government should start a revolution, when it actually is the people that oppose it who should put all their efforts into change. Fortunately, it's never going to happen, so scientists are spared putting you to sleep and examining all your organs, and you're spared waiting for 30 or 40 years to see if the substance you were treated with causes cancer or not, etc. But after a year or so of that, those who are left might reconsider.
Have you ever talked to anyone doing animal experiments? Their aim is to cause as little pain as possible, not to torture. Which is more than can be said about some pet owners.
Whenever new, less painful methods come up and are proven to work they HAVE to be used by law. If rules are broken, prosecution by vets and the home office can be quite severe, and the same if more animals than necessary are used. People have to go to a course showing they can safely and painlessly (wherever possible) handle animals, interpret the signs they give when in discomfort, and know all the legalities, before getting a licence. Then the facility they work in needs a licence, and the type of work they do needs a superior with another licence for each single method that is used.
Each of these licences can be lost when things aren't kept to. If a certain number of animals get sick in a trial or die, it has to be stopped, to AVOID the torture and "heartless killing" some of you are talking about.
Animal experimentators certainly aren't saints, but in general they are very responsible people who try and avoid causing more distress than they have to. I'm a bit tired of that image of the evil scientist enjoying to poke needles wherever they can.
SugarCoatedHell - please don't take this the wrong way!
You say all those who approve of the use of animals should volunteer for testing. I think if anything it should be the other way round, those who don't approve should all volunteer. Why should those who accept it change it? That's like saying those who support the government should start a revolution, when it actually is the people that oppose it who should put all their efforts into change. Fortunately, it's never going to happen, so scientists are spared putting you to sleep and examining all your organs, and you're spared waiting for 30 or 40 years to see if the substance you were treated with causes cancer or not, etc. But after a year or so of that, those who are left might reconsider.
Have you ever talked to anyone doing animal experiments? Their aim is to cause as little pain as possible, not to torture. Which is more than can be said about some pet owners.
Whenever new, less painful methods come up and are proven to work they HAVE to be used by law. If rules are broken, prosecution by vets and the home office can be quite severe, and the same if more animals than necessary are used. People have to go to a course showing they can safely and painlessly (wherever possible) handle animals, interpret the signs they give when in discomfort, and know all the legalities, before getting a licence. Then the facility they work in needs a licence, and the type of work they do needs a superior with another licence for each single method that is used.
Each of these licences can be lost when things aren't kept to. If a certain number of animals get sick in a trial or die, it has to be stopped, to AVOID the torture and "heartless killing" some of you are talking about.
Animal experimentators certainly aren't saints, but in general they are very responsible people who try and avoid causing more distress than they have to. I'm a bit tired of that image of the evil scientist enjoying to poke needles wherever they can.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
SILVER Member
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom
Posted:
Why say this when you're not COMPLETELY against it? you said it was ok for medical research?
Birgit, I think you know the score, girl
Written by: buzzingtalk
i think animal testing is sick. im completely against it.
Why say this when you're not COMPLETELY against it? you said it was ok for medical research?
Birgit, I think you know the score, girl
Hoppers are angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly.
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
You should take off that black eye patch then
and the evil laugh isnt helping either...
Written by: Birgit
I'm a bit tired of that image of the evil scientist enjoying to poke needles wherever they can.
You should take off that black eye patch then
and the evil laugh isnt helping either...
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
stop picking on the diabetics, at least I don't stick the needles in bunnies
stop picking on the diabetics, at least I don't stick the needles in bunnies
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
Ok. Walk naked to the nearest forest, chase after whatever it is that you're going to eat, kill it or dig it up with your bare hands, and eat it raw.
We didn't have cars before the 1900's.
We didn't have supermarkets before about the same time. (i think. i know open air markets and general stores have been around a while).
We didn't have shoes and clothes before about, what, 15000 years ago.
between me and you, i'd rather sleep nice and warm in a comfy bed than outside in whatever weather is going on. I'd rather be able to choose what i have for dinner at night, rather than go by what i'd caught that day.
There was always a before. There will always be an after. And now, we're before something. An invention or development of some type, i'm guessing.
The point i'm getting at here is that without development, we'd still be wandering around going 'oog' and sleeping in the rain.
-----------------------------------------------------
A question: What if, tomorrow, all animal testing got banned, effective immediately. Then, a week later, someone developed a drug that could definitely cure cancer, AIDS, leprosy, herpes, the common cold, depression, alzeimers (sp?), and pretty much any other ailment around today. And they were pretty sure there were no side effects.
But they couldn't test it to make sure.
Would people support animal testing then?
people are animals, too, by definition. ergo, by being against animal testing, you're against testing anything on all beings that may have a reaction to the testing taking place.
And animals have, in a way, been testing things for millions of years. A bird eats a certain fruit, and it dies. Another bird sees it eat that fruit, but eats it too. It dies as well. a third bird doesn't eat it, and recognises it as bad.
Enter people. They see two birds die from eating a berry. They, too decide not to eat said berry.
Sound much like what happens now? Very simplified, i know. But its something thats been happening for a while.
Written by: Sugarcoatedhell
If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
Ok. Walk naked to the nearest forest, chase after whatever it is that you're going to eat, kill it or dig it up with your bare hands, and eat it raw.
We didn't have cars before the 1900's.
We didn't have supermarkets before about the same time. (i think. i know open air markets and general stores have been around a while).
We didn't have shoes and clothes before about, what, 15000 years ago.
between me and you, i'd rather sleep nice and warm in a comfy bed than outside in whatever weather is going on. I'd rather be able to choose what i have for dinner at night, rather than go by what i'd caught that day.
There was always a before. There will always be an after. And now, we're before something. An invention or development of some type, i'm guessing.
The point i'm getting at here is that without development, we'd still be wandering around going 'oog' and sleeping in the rain.
-----------------------------------------------------
A question: What if, tomorrow, all animal testing got banned, effective immediately. Then, a week later, someone developed a drug that could definitely cure cancer, AIDS, leprosy, herpes, the common cold, depression, alzeimers (sp?), and pretty much any other ailment around today. And they were pretty sure there were no side effects.
But they couldn't test it to make sure.
Would people support animal testing then?
people are animals, too, by definition. ergo, by being against animal testing, you're against testing anything on all beings that may have a reaction to the testing taking place.
And animals have, in a way, been testing things for millions of years. A bird eats a certain fruit, and it dies. Another bird sees it eat that fruit, but eats it too. It dies as well. a third bird doesn't eat it, and recognises it as bad.
Enter people. They see two birds die from eating a berry. They, too decide not to eat said berry.
Sound much like what happens now? Very simplified, i know. But its something thats been happening for a while.
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
SILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Posted:
This is possibly one of the most damaging mindsets. You may be basing your strongheld beliefs on misinformation and hear-say.
Antiseptics, anaesthetics, a surplus of food, clean water, antibiotics, communication and spread of information, locomotion, huge medical advances, targeted drug products, minimal scaring and surgery with keyhole techniques, paper clips, art, shelter, fire, disease control, vaccinations, the alphabet, the abacus, sterile bandages, bar codes, bikinis, calculus, techniques to explore and understand the earth and the Universe, building materials, condoms, understanding of DNA and our origins, Kevlar wicks, paraffin, Home Of Poi, money, democracy, a banking system, chocolate, saxophones, sunscreen, teflon, Velcro, wheelchairs - - -
Before? Before when? What do you mean by product?
Written by: SugarCoatedHell
I heard this, not sure its true,
This is possibly one of the most damaging mindsets. You may be basing your strongheld beliefs on misinformation and hear-say.
Written by: SugarCoatedHell
If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
Antiseptics, anaesthetics, a surplus of food, clean water, antibiotics, communication and spread of information, locomotion, huge medical advances, targeted drug products, minimal scaring and surgery with keyhole techniques, paper clips, art, shelter, fire, disease control, vaccinations, the alphabet, the abacus, sterile bandages, bar codes, bikinis, calculus, techniques to explore and understand the earth and the Universe, building materials, condoms, understanding of DNA and our origins, Kevlar wicks, paraffin, Home Of Poi, money, democracy, a banking system, chocolate, saxophones, sunscreen, teflon, Velcro, wheelchairs - - -
Before? Before when? What do you mean by product?
Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
hehe, domino sounds like someone that's been playing civilisation...
hehe, domino sounds like someone that's been playing civilisation...
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
SILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Posted:
Not in a long, long time
- Edit -
Also, I may be sticking my neck out here but...
1] What's wrong with shaving rabbits?
2] Why bother?
EDITED_BY: Domino (1142943974)
Not in a long, long time
- Edit -
Also, I may be sticking my neck out here but...
1] What's wrong with shaving rabbits?
2] Why bother?
EDITED_BY: Domino (1142943974)
Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
For the record, I am a vegetarian.
For the record, I am a vegetarian.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
yeah, but what has it done for us lately?
cole. x
Written by: DominoWritten by: SugarCoatedHell
If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
Antiseptics, anaesthetics, a surplus of food, clean water, antibiotics, communication and spread of information, locomotion, huge medical advances, targeted drug products, minimal scaring and surgery with keyhole techniques, paper clips, art, shelter, fire, disease control, vaccinations, the alphabet, the abacus, sterile bandages, bar codes, bikinis, calculus, techniques to explore and understand the earth and the Universe, building materials, condoms, understanding of DNA and our origins, Kevlar wicks, paraffin, Home Of Poi, money, democracy, a banking system, chocolate, saxophones, sunscreen, teflon, Velcro, wheelchairs - - -
yeah, but what has it done for us lately?
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
GOLD Member
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
'Home of poi' That one should have been in bold, or at least put first
Sugar coated hell... your not a vegetarian yet your so against testing? You ARE aware that animals are treated extremely poorly in many cases where they are raised just to be killed and eaten. You are also aware that you can live just a healthy life without eating meat. Eating meat does not improve peoples quality of life in my opinion, BUT allowing progression in medicine by animal testing does!
I would respect your opinion more if you were against all animal cruelty, but as it seems to be selective...
Written by: Domino
Antiseptics, anaesthetics, a surplus of food, clean water, antibiotics, communication and spread of information, locomotion, huge medical advances, targeted drug products, minimal scaring and surgery with keyhole techniques, paper clips, art, shelter, fire, disease control, vaccinations, the alphabet, the abacus, sterile bandages, bar codes, bikinis, calculus, techniques to explore and understand the earth and the Universe, building materials, condoms, understanding of DNA and our origins, Kevlar wicks, paraffin, Home Of Poi, money, democracy, a banking system, chocolate, saxophones, sunscreen, teflon, Velcro, wheelchairs - - -
'Home of poi' That one should have been in bold, or at least put first
Sugar coated hell... your not a vegetarian yet your so against testing? You ARE aware that animals are treated extremely poorly in many cases where they are raised just to be killed and eaten. You are also aware that you can live just a healthy life without eating meat. Eating meat does not improve peoples quality of life in my opinion, BUT allowing progression in medicine by animal testing does!
I would respect your opinion more if you were against all animal cruelty, but as it seems to be selective...
SILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Posted:
[Inserts Monty Python "What have the Romans ever done for us" joke]
[Inserts Monty Python "What have the Romans ever done for us" joke]
Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
Bad Sunbird.
Non-Https Image Link
*Smacks with rolled up newspaper* (but I agree completely)
Bad Sunbird.
Non-Https Image Link
*Smacks with rolled up newspaper* (but I agree completely)
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
SILVER Member
old hand
722 posts
Location: United Kingdom
old hand
722 posts
Location: United Kingdom
Posted:
Post deleted by Sunbird
Post deleted by Sunbird
To you who has been accessing my online accounts, changing my login details, locations and posting 
about me, realise, you are not worth revenge, you are not worth my attention, you are nothing, and that is all you ever will be.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
you should get Nick and the firewhip in, and I'll make a video and sell it in Holland.
Now back to the topic...
you should get Nick and the firewhip in, and I'll make a video and sell it in Holland.
Now back to the topic...
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
veteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
Yes, because back when we lived in tribes where the average lifespan was about 20-something years due to constant violence, deaths during childbirth or from pretty much any illness or injury that came along it was so much better?
Do people actually think that life before science was some kind of utopian paradise? Primitive tribes have the highest rates of violent death per person of any society on the face of the planet, and that includes counting the last two World Wars.
Written by: SugarCoatedHell
EDIT If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
Yes, because back when we lived in tribes where the average lifespan was about 20-something years due to constant violence, deaths during childbirth or from pretty much any illness or injury that came along it was so much better?
Do people actually think that life before science was some kind of utopian paradise?
Primitive tribes have the highest rates of violent death per person of any society on the face of the planet, and that includes counting the last two World Wars. "Moo," said the happy cow.
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
look up...
cole. x
Written by: Domino
[Inserts Monty Python "What have the Romans ever done for us" joke]
look up...
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
GOLD Member
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
The more I read this comment, the more I laugh. Are you honestly suggesting that everything humanity has done is a waste? Are you living in the stone-age?
Oh and does that bad "progression" include the internet? Because if so, why are you posting on an internet forum and not on a cave wall in chalk?
Written by: SugarCoatedHell
EDIT If we didn't have the product before, WE DONT NEED IT!!! Look at what our "progression" has done for the world!
The more I read this comment, the more I laugh. Are you honestly suggesting that everything humanity has done is a waste? Are you living in the stone-age?
Oh and does that bad "progression" include the internet? Because if so, why are you posting on an internet forum and not on a cave wall in chalk?
SILVER Member
old hand
722 posts
Location: United Kingdom
old hand
722 posts
Location: United Kingdom
Posted:
Touché 
Written by: Asena
Oh and does that bad "progression" include the internet? Because if so, why are you posting on an internet forum and not on a cave wall in chalk?
Touché
To you who has been accessing my online accounts, changing my login details, locations and posting about me, realise, you are not worth revenge, you are not worth my attention, you are nothing, and that is all you ever will be.
SILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Posted:
Oh marf, didn't realise that was a direct quote
EDITED_BY: Domino (1142948229)
Written by: coleman
look up...
cole. x
Oh marf, didn't realise that was a direct quote
EDITED_BY: Domino (1142948229)
Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
Guys, stop it!
That was a very very bad comment about the world, made either in haste or though ignorance. Is kicking someone when they're down help anything?
Please remember to respect others views. Look at the telling offs we got in the ID vs evolution thread, where someone was posting something the to us seemed very silly - there is no difference here at all...
Guys, stop it!
That was a very very bad comment about the world, made either in haste or though ignorance. Is kicking someone when they're down help anything?
Please remember to respect others views. Look at the telling offs we got in the ID vs evolution thread, where someone was posting something the to us seemed very silly - there is no difference here at all...
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [testing animal * acceptible] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Is Testing on Animals Acceptible? [305 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com