Animal testing.

midnight murderer:

Best Name I Ever Had:

I don't see why they can't just use us useful humans for testing. If it's for humans, then I think it should be tested on humans.

because its too cruel to do on humans. i did a report on this. its very...cruel. they say its too cruel to do on humans so they do it on animals. because they have no 'feelings'

That's bull shit. What's crueler doing it on harmles inocent animals or saddam husein?
That's if members of the KKK say it's ok to do it on black people.
Saddam husein is just sitting in jail, they should use him for testing, he did worst things than that.

I hate animal testing! It's inhumane and mean. I personally think it should be banned but ya know. I'm actually reading a book at the moment about animal testing. It's interesting.

I am against animal testing. A colleague of mine is a neuro trauma surgeon that used to be a vivisector. He is part of Europeans for medical advancement. www.curedisease.com.

Can I ask a question? Anyone who agrees with animal testing: Do you actually know anything about it?

When refering to medical testing ( much experimentation is NOT medical) Animals and human animals do not shre 95% of the same disease. This means we all react differently to disease. Drugs that have reacted differently on a monkey and are then used on humans kill over 100,000 people a year. That is way more than illegal drugs and all cancers put together.

I'll use the worlds biggest conract research lab as an example. Huntingdon Life Sciences.
This lab kill 500 animals a day. They test chemicals. This is done with whats called a lethal dose 50/50 test. Beagle dogs are commonly used for this. A tube is forced in to the beagles stomach and the dogs are fed concentrations of the chemical to see how much it takes to make half of them die. The vivisectors note details such as:

Dog 2100045: Shaking, vomiting, seizures, sweaty fur, convultions, death at 2 days etc.

If you bother to look, the majority of experiments are for pointless reasons and are just plain barbaric. Experiments such as 'Fear, decompression, maternal depravation, heat exposure, burning' etc. This is all done without the use of anaesthetic, as it may 'interfere' with the 'experiment'.

Animals in labs have their vocal chords so they don't scream.



This monkey was found inside Huntingdon life sciences, they lied about the purpose of doing this. You will find that they can get away with whatever they want inside labs, and they do.

http://www.shac.net/MERCHANDISE/videos.html (this is a video taken inside that lab)

Animals in labs are stolen from the wild, missing pets also turn up in labs.
Vivisection is a big business...



Drugs for depression, schitzophrenia are being tested on monkeys. By doing this, we are saying they are capable of feeling what we do. Either way, they dont suffer any less, nor do they naturally suffer from what we do.

This cat has had its back broken and has been burned and scarred.


You cant say this monkey doesnt look terrified


The restraints used in experiments such as the unreliable LD50

Avantidrummer:

I am against animal testing. A colleague of mine is a neuro trauma surgeon that used to be a vivisector. He is part of Europeans for medical advancement. www.curedisease.com.

Can I ask a question? Anyone who agrees with animal testing: Do you actually know anything about it?

When refering to medical testing ( much experimentation is NOT medical) Animals and human animals do not shre 95% of the same disease. This means we all react differently to disease. Drugs that have reacted differently on a monkey and are then used on humans kill over 100,000 people a year. That is way more than illegal drugs and all cancers put together.

I'll use the worlds biggest conract research lab as an example. Huntingdon Life Sciences.
This lab kill 500 animals a day. They test chemicals. This is done with whats called a lethal dose 50/50 test. Beagle dogs are commonly used for this. A tube is forced in to the beagles stomach and the dogs are fed concentrations of the chemical to see how much it takes to make half of them die. The vivisectors note details such as:

Dog 2100045: Shaking, vomiting, seizures, sweaty fur, convultions, death at 2 days etc.

If you bother to look, the majority of experiments are for pointless reasons and are just plain barbaric. Experiments such as 'Fear, decompression, maternal depravation, heat exposure, burning' etc. This is all done without the use of anaesthetic, as it may 'interfere' with the 'experiment'.

Animals in labs have their vocal chords so they don't scream.



This monkey was found inside Huntingdon life sciences, they lied about the purpose of doing this. You will find that they can get away with whatever they want inside labs, and they do.

http://www.shac.net/MERCHANDISE/videos.html (this is a video taken inside that lab)

I know that alot of times that it can be a failure. But if it wasn't for testing insulin on animals my best friends, and millions more like her would be dead. And of course their are side effects. Like that drug they used in the 70's to stop morning sickness in pregnant women. Their children were born with limbs. And I would much prefer it if they could find other ways instead of testing on animals.

True there have been drugs that have been tested on other species that have helped humans, but you have to ask how many of them could have been developed without the use. If you look at the bigger picture, far more life is destroyed than life saved.

Vivisection started centuaries ago in Rome because the catholic church wouldn't allow the cutting up of 'dead human bodies' to study (even though far more has been learned about our species by doing this than any other way). So what did they do? A well known writer, researcher 'Galen' decided to cut up living animals and apply it to the human animal. He cut open sheep and with what he found, he applied it to our species and ended up killing 1000's of people.

You also have to look at other reasons we use other animals.
They don't speak back, they're easy to breed, there's a huge business in the production of animal cages, lab tools, the breeders themselves.

Ask a vivisector this: Why is it okay to test on other animals.
They will tell you: Because they are like us

Ask them why it is 'okay' to test on other animals
They will tell you: Because they are NOT like us.

It lies on a contradiction, and profit.

We are all animals, we are all capable of suffering. Humans are animals too, but we see ourselves as some sort of a supreme being. This isn't based on logic, it comes from early philosophy and religion. (Speciesism)


Through- out history, there has always been oppression, whether it be against sex, skin colour, race, religion, etc. Currently the biggest oppression is against non-human animals. Past victims of oppression have spoken up for their rights, told of their pain. Non-human animals do not speak our language, this makes the struggle to end oppression even harder.

same as you Jess, I'm a mix of both

It's easier to vivisectors to believe that animals have less feelings than us. Intelligence doesnt even come in to it, because that doesnt determine how much a being can suffer.

The only reason they say they experiment on monkeys is because they are 'the most similiar to us'. It's a contradiction. How can they be similiar enough to experiment on, but not similar enough to suffer? It doesnt make sence. It's all outdated belief.

Why do they cut dogs and monkeys vocal chords in labs? : Because they howl and scream.
Why?: Because they're terrified!

Like I said, if you want to see what really happens in labs instead of believing what Tony Blair tells you, check out this undercover footage from a lab in Cambridgshire England. It's the worlds biggest.

http://www.shac.net/MERCHANDISE/videos.html


its under 'cruelty footage'

Avantidrummer:

It's easier to vivisectors to believe that animals have less feelings than us. Intelligence doesnt even come in to it, because that doesnt determine how much a being can suffer.

The only reason they say they experiment on monkeys is because they are 'the most similiar to us'. It's a contradiction. How can they be similiar enough to experiment on, but not similar enough to suffer? It doesnt make sence. It's all outdated belief.

Why do they cut dogs and monkeys vocal chords in labs? : Because they howl and scream.
Why?: Because they're terrified!

Like I said, if you want to see what really happens in labs instead of believing what Tony Blair tells you, check out this undercover footage from a lab in Cambridgshire England. It's the worlds biggest.

http://www.shac.net/MERCHANDISE/videos.html


its under 'cruelty footage'

As technoligy is improving I do hope that they find another way instead of testing on animals. I couldn't imagin them expermenting on my cat or dog

I'm in two minds about the whole thing....

There are other ways already, the government dont advocate leaving your body to science. A huge amount of experiments are actually repeats. There are several alternatives already available. Most people assume that 'animal testing' refers to medical research but many experiments are toxicology (poisons), basically they can use non human animals for anything they want.

Can I just point out that there are filing cabinets on this planet full of details of experiments regarding:

Blinding, Burning, decompression, Centrifuge, crowding, crushing, freezing, starvation, Experimental neurosis, Heating, Hemmorgae, Hindleg beating, Immobilization, Isolation, Multiple injuries, Protein depravation, PUNISHMENT, radiation, Shock, starvation, Stress, Thirst and many more.

Imagine how they did all of those? and what on earth were their purposes?

Can I just point out that by analzying shock, stress and punishment on other animals, you are admitting that they are so similiar to us. Like I said, it all lies on a contradiction.

XxXflowerfairyXxX:

I'm in two minds about the whole thing....

Alot of people are....the details of experiments aren't presented to the public, so we believe what the press, the media and the government tell us. You have to look for the information yourself...I've been studying it for years but I never cease to be surprised.

Did you watch the video footage? This one is called 'wasted lives' http://www.animalaid.org.uk/videos/

There is also the one I mentioned above, the undercover footage.

It always helps to read up on it, because most people who agree with animal testing don't actually know anything about it, or they make money from it.

Avantidrummer:

XxXflowerfairyXxX:

I'm in two minds about the whole thing....

Alot of people are....the details of experiments aren't presented to the public, so we believe what the press, the media and the government tell us. You have to look for the information yourself...I've been studying it for years but I never cease to be surprised.

Did you watch the video footage? This one is called 'wasted lives' http://www.animalaid.org.uk/videos/

There is also the one I mentioned above, the undercover footage.

It always helps to read up on it, because most people who agree with animal testing don't actually know anything about it, or they make money from it.

I totally see your point but some medical research has no alternatives....

if any of you want free things on saving animals goto... www.peta.org or
www.petakids.com or www.peta2.com
I dont support animal testing

animal testing is wrong i hate it we can make somany mistakes using it

When testing is conducted on animals, under the Ethics of Australia harm should be minimized. Its absolutly sickening that animal testing is carried out... make sure to buy animal testing free products i.e. Body Shop has fantastic stuff.
People today are going to extreme lengths just for vanity. Being beautiful in our society has sadly become a nessecity ; these companies take advantage of the fact and will go to extreme lengths to be the best sellers.
Its also shows how many people abuse their power as humans.
Animal testing sucks

I am very against animal testing for cosmetics. But for medical I'm very undecided.

We need animal testing, for the good of Science and Medical development.