Animal testing.

Magne:

that_bass_line:

Sure, test on animals if it'll save a humans life but you gotta remember that animals have different build up then humans, so if something doesnt affect them, it doesnt mean it wont affect us.

which is why these drugs are after extensive testing are realised to people for testing.

And then you end up with a case like that one in London not so long ago. What happened again?. Oh yes. They tested this drug on some monkeys, it swelled up their glands, but the German firm involved failed to mention that.

Cue six blokes all critically ill in hospital after their organs swelled up like baloons. See, that doesn't always work.

Bloodraine:

Magne:

that_bass_line:

Sure, test on animals if it'll save a humans life but you gotta remember that animals have different build up then humans, so if something doesnt affect them, it doesnt mean it wont affect us.

which is why these drugs are after extensive testing are realised to people for testing.

And then you end up with a case like that one in London not so long ago. What happened again?. Oh yes. They tested this drug on some monkeys, it swelled up their glands, but the German firm involved failed to mention that.

Cue six blokes all critically ill in hospital after their organs swelled up like baloons. See, that doesn't always work.

put that against to all the medication that is actaually doing good, that is one case, i dare say there are more but if it takes a few animals for me and my kids to stay alive i would rather have the rats/ mice die.

Magne:

Bloodraine:

Magne:

that_bass_line:

Sure, test on animals if it'll save a humans life but you gotta remember that animals have different build up then humans, so if something doesnt affect them, it doesnt mean it wont affect us.

which is why these drugs are after extensive testing are realised to people for testing.

And then you end up with a case like that one in London not so long ago. What happened again?. Oh yes. They tested this drug on some monkeys, it swelled up their glands, but the German firm involved failed to mention that.

Cue six blokes all critically ill in hospital after their organs swelled up like baloons. See, that doesn't always work.

put that against to all the medication that is actaually doing good, that is one case, i dare say there are more but if it takes a few animals for me and my kids to stay alive i would rather have the rats/ mice die.

But the point is, even when the drug is tested upon animals first it isn't 100% foolproof.

Bloodraine:

Magne:

Bloodraine:

Magne:

that_bass_line:

Sure, test on animals if it'll save a humans life but you gotta remember that animals have different build up then humans, so if something doesnt affect them, it doesnt mean it wont affect us.

which is why these drugs are after extensive testing are realised to people for testing.

And then you end up with a case like that one in London not so long ago. What happened again?. Oh yes. They tested this drug on some monkeys, it swelled up their glands, but the German firm involved failed to mention that.

Cue six blokes all critically ill in hospital after their organs swelled up like baloons. See, that doesn't always work.

put that against to all the medication that is actaually doing good, that is one case, i dare say there are more but if it takes a few animals for me and my kids to stay alive i would rather have the rats/ mice die.

But the point is, even when the drug is tested upon animals first it isn't 100% foolproof.

no nothing is fool proof. Have you ever been given medication that made you feel sick, and then you went to the Dr who changed it and then you were ok? that is called the process of elimination

animal testing is outdated, overused and completely POINTLESS! animal DNA is so different to ours that its totally pointless to test drugs, because they are so different to us. even chimps, our closest living relatives, react differently to many things. heres an example: if penecillin had been tested on guinea pigs, millions of soliders would have DIED because penecillin is toxic to guinea pigs. MS cures are being tested on rats, but rats DO NOT GET MS. there are cheaper, more reliable and less cruel ways to test drugs than animal testing, this is a well known fact. what isnt so well known is that for every rat/mouse/guinea pig/ WHATEVER used in experiments around 30 are gassed to death in carbon monoxide chambers as surplus to requirements. these innocent creatures are MURDERED because the 'scientists' breed more than they need for experimentation. yes, maybe it has produced some cures, but it has produced many things that, when used on humans were found to be toxic. cosmetic testing is POINTLESS TORTURE! LD50 testing (injecting lethal substances into a group of animals until half have died from it,) is pure, pointless, vicious murder. i dont think i need to say more, but you can probably guess my views are very strong.

anti-christ of suburbia:

animal testing is outdated, overused and completely POINTLESS! animal DNA is so different to ours that its totally pointless to test drugs, because they are so different to us. even chimps, our closest living relatives, react differently to many things. heres an example: if penecillin had been tested on guinea pigs, millions of soliders would have DIED because penecillin is toxic to guinea pigs. MS cures are being tested on rats, but rats DO NOT GET MS. there are cheaper, more reliable and less cruel ways to test drugs than animal testing, this is a well known fact. what isnt so well known is that for every rat/mouse/guinea pig/ WHATEVER used in experiments around 30 are gassed to death in carbon monoxide chambers as surplus to requirements. these innocent creatures are MURDERED because the 'scientists' breed more than they need for experimentation. yes, maybe it has produced some cures, but it has produced many things that, when used on humans were found to be toxic. cosmetic testing is POINTLESS TORTURE! LD50 testing (injecting lethal substances into a group of animals until half have died from it,) is pure, pointless, vicious murder. i dont think i need to say more, but you can probably guess my views are very strong.

lets hear about these Cheaper, better ways. Everything else you said was completely innacurate. Animal testing does work for medicla purposes. Every drug you have taken in your entire life was at one time or another tested on an animal. So seeing as how you're still living, I'd say it isnt pointless.

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

animal testing is outdated, overused and completely POINTLESS! animal DNA is so different to ours that its totally pointless to test drugs, because they are so different to us. even chimps, our closest living relatives, react differently to many things. heres an example: if penecillin had been tested on guinea pigs, millions of soliders would have DIED because penecillin is toxic to guinea pigs. MS cures are being tested on rats, but rats DO NOT GET MS. there are cheaper, more reliable and less cruel ways to test drugs than animal testing, this is a well known fact. what isnt so well known is that for every rat/mouse/guinea pig/ WHATEVER used in experiments around 30 are gassed to death in carbon monoxide chambers as surplus to requirements. these innocent creatures are MURDERED because the 'scientists' breed more than they need for experimentation. yes, maybe it has produced some cures, but it has produced many things that, when used on humans were found to be toxic. cosmetic testing is POINTLESS TORTURE! LD50 testing (injecting lethal substances into a group of animals until half have died from it,) is pure, pointless, vicious murder. i dont think i need to say more, but you can probably guess my views are very strong.

lets hear about these Cheaper, better ways. Everything else you said was completely innacurate. Animal testing does work for medicla purposes. Every drug you have taken in your entire life was at one time or another tested on an animal. So seeing as how you're still living, I'd say it isnt pointless.

whats cheaper and more reliable? any retard knows that. scientists can use human cell cultures for research, that fact is well known. okay, some people think thats 'unethical' but whats worse, askning someone to give you a few samples, or taking it from bodies that have died naturally, or murdering thousands of innocent creatures with totally different reactions to drugs to us and hoping it works on humans?

im sorry if i sound arsy but this is a subject i feel very strongly about.

anti-christ of suburbia:

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

animal testing is outdated, overused and completely POINTLESS! animal DNA is so different to ours that its totally pointless to test drugs, because they are so different to us. even chimps, our closest living relatives, react differently to many things. heres an example: if penecillin had been tested on guinea pigs, millions of soliders would have DIED because penecillin is toxic to guinea pigs. MS cures are being tested on rats, but rats DO NOT GET MS. there are cheaper, more reliable and less cruel ways to test drugs than animal testing, this is a well known fact. what isnt so well known is that for every rat/mouse/guinea pig/ WHATEVER used in experiments around 30 are gassed to death in carbon monoxide chambers as surplus to requirements. these innocent creatures are MURDERED because the 'scientists' breed more than they need for experimentation. yes, maybe it has produced some cures, but it has produced many things that, when used on humans were found to be toxic. cosmetic testing is POINTLESS TORTURE! LD50 testing (injecting lethal substances into a group of animals until half have died from it,) is pure, pointless, vicious murder. i dont think i need to say more, but you can probably guess my views are very strong.

lets hear about these Cheaper, better ways. Everything else you said was completely innacurate. Animal testing does work for medicla purposes. Every drug you have taken in your entire life was at one time or another tested on an animal. So seeing as how you're still living, I'd say it isnt pointless.

whats cheaper and more reliable? any retard knows that. scientists can use human cell cultures for research, that fact is well known. okay, some people think thats 'unethical' but whats worse, askning someone to give you a few samples, or taking it from bodies that have died naturally, or murdering thousands of innocent creatures with totally different reactions to drugs to us and hoping it works on humans?

Personal Attacks are not allowed in this forum, don't call me a retard again

I think you need to do your research on stem Cells, its very exspensive and they are taken from embyro's. Thats a life, something that was living, a human being. And you're saying it's ok to murder that?

Anaimals provide accurate models of Humans, they are not as different as you're making them out to be. Where is your evidence of this? My evidence is all the drugs in America that were tested on animals that save lives.

Animals are playing a key role in Cancer research. They aren't dying for no reason, they are dying to save humans lives. If I see a dog effected by scientific research and a kid with Lukemia, I can tell you I will be taking the Humans Side.

You use animal testing everday day. Shots and Vacines you have recieved that are preventing you from getting disease were tested on animals. Animal Testing for medical purposes is absolutely needed.

anti-christ of suburbia:

im sorry if i sound arsy but this is a subject i feel very strongly about.

I really don't care how strongly you feel about it, you have no grounds to call anyone a retard. You stated your opinion vaguely in some spots and I aksed you to explain. I see no reason to get hateful because of that.

All against it.

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

im sorry if i sound arsy but this is a subject i feel very strongly about.

I really don't care how strongly you feel about it, you have no grounds to call anyone a retard. You stated your opinion vaguely in some spots and I aksed you to explain. I see no reason to get hateful because of that.

your not a retard I_worship_tre_Cool your just head strong.

but what i think is this many people will be dead if animal testing wasnt being done me included, and if kept to a minimum then i cant see the problem.

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

im sorry if i sound arsy but this is a subject i feel very strongly about.

I really don't care how strongly you feel about it, you have no grounds to call anyone a retard. You stated your opinion vaguely in some spots and I aksed you to explain. I see no reason to get hateful because of that.

i apologise for calling you a retard, if you percieved it that way, it wasnt a personal attack, and i am sorry. can we make up and be friends?

anti-christ of suburbia:

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

im sorry if i sound arsy but this is a subject i feel very strongly about.

I really don't care how strongly you feel about it, you have no grounds to call anyone a retard. You stated your opinion vaguely in some spots and I aksed you to explain. I see no reason to get hateful because of that.

i apologise for calling you a retard, if you percieved it that way, it wasnt a personal attack, and i am sorry. can we make up and be friends?

Sure, Im just warning you, not all people would have taken it that way and calling people that can get you banned. I'm use to it, I anger people in here on a daily basis

Lunchbox:

I'm against animal testing. We can test that stuff on people it would give better results. I don't mean inocent people, I mean like Saddam Husein and Bush

ha yeah i agree!

basketcase123:

Lunchbox:

I'm against animal testing. We can test that stuff on people it would give better results. I don't mean inocent people, I mean like Saddam Husein and Bush

ha yeah i agree!

So you would become the second hitler there is no differance between him expiermenting on the polish and jews and many other people than what you just said

TreCoolIstSoGeil:

All against it.

Magne:

basketcase123:

Lunchbox:

I'm against animal testing. We can test that stuff on people it would give better results. I don't mean inocent people, I mean like Saddam Husein and Bush

ha yeah i agree!

So you would become the second hitler there is no differance between him expiermenting on the polish and jews and many other people than what you just said

they should test on people who have given their consent to have it done, then a lot of the really cruel tests like LD50 or retesting substances they already know are toxic.

I'm anti animal testing.

lost angel:

Magne:

basketcase123:

Lunchbox:

I'm against animal testing. We can test that stuff on people it would give better results. I don't mean inocent people, I mean like Saddam Husein and Bush

ha yeah i agree!

So you would become the second hitler there is no differance between him expiermenting on the polish and jews and many other people than what you just said

they should test on people who have given their consent to have it done, then a lot of the really cruel tests like LD50 or retesting substances they already know are toxic.

If they tested it on people, I dont think you realize how many people would die. What would happen is the poor would be manipulated into it with money and lose their lives before anything is accomplished.