Lucifers Angel King For A Couple Of Days Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 4751
January 8th, 2007 at 07:49am
Gallifreyan Insomniac.:
I don't trust animal testing.
I mean, okay it saves lives yadda yadda yadda but it's like...I dunno...how do you know that one species is gonna react in the same way as another? Not every medicine and not every chemical will react the same way with mice as humans.
I'd rather tempt prisoners with it so they could get more luxuries. but that'd be against Human Rights or something.
so how would you test medicines? Bearing in mind that you cant use peopel has lab rats.
I mean, okay it saves lives yadda yadda yadda but it's like...I dunno...how do you know that one species is gonna react in the same way as another? Not every medicine and not every chemical will react the same way with mice as humans.
I'd rather tempt prisoners with it so they could get more luxuries. but that'd be against Human Rights or something.
so how would you test medicines? Bearing in mind that you cant use peopel has lab rats.
Technically you can. And people would be more careful if using humans, instead of just chopping them open then throwing them away.
There was a massive outcry when 6 volunteers got ill coz of drugs testing they had put themselves up to. Scientists do that to animals every day and no one gives a shit.
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.
Clinical drugs tests (human drug testing) happen all the time. And yes poor countries are being manipulated. "Nearly 40% of all clinical trials are now conducted in poorer countries such as Russia and India, where costs are lower and patients more vulnerable. And that's raising questions about ethics and oversight. Fortune Magazine: Drug Testing Goes Offshore (August 8, 2005)
I think ADT is completely necessary to develop cures and treatments for otherwise fatal and unmanageable diseases. I wish there were realistic alternatives but at the moment there aren't.
Lucifers Angel King For A Couple Of Days Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 4751
January 10th, 2007 at 05:50am
anti-christ of suburbia:
Lucifers Angel:
Gallifreyan Insomniac.:
I don't trust animal testing.
I mean, okay it saves lives yadda yadda yadda but it's like...I dunno...how do you know that one species is gonna react in the same way as another? Not every medicine and not every chemical will react the same way with mice as humans.
I'd rather tempt prisoners with it so they could get more luxuries. but that'd be against Human Rights or something.
so how would you test medicines? Bearing in mind that you cant use peopel has lab rats.
Technically you can. And people would be more careful if using humans, instead of just chopping them open then throwing them away.
There was a massive outcry when 6 volunteers got ill coz of drugs testing they had put themselves up to. Scientists do that to animals every day and no one gives a shit.
they can not test a medicine on people just in case ti kills them, i would rather see rats, mice, die for the sake of a cure for aids, or cancer, and many other illnesses,
I mean, okay it saves lives yadda yadda yadda but it's like...I dunno...how do you know that one species is gonna react in the same way as another? Not every medicine and not every chemical will react the same way with mice as humans.
I'd rather tempt prisoners with it so they could get more luxuries. but that'd be against Human Rights or something.
so how would you test medicines? Bearing in mind that you cant use peopel has lab rats.
Technically you can. And people would be more careful if using humans, instead of just chopping them open then throwing them away.
There was a massive outcry when 6 volunteers got ill coz of drugs testing they had put themselves up to. Scientists do that to animals every day and no one gives a shit.
they can not test a medicine on people just in case ti kills them, i would rather see rats, mice, die for the sake of a cure for aids, or cancer, and many other illnesses,
however, rats, mice etc dont GET a lot of the diseases theyre looking for cures for. Plus they react completely differently to chemicals and medicines than people. Even monkeys react completely differently to humans to many things. Plus, its the humans choice, they know the dangers, and if they are aids or cancer patients or whatever, what do they really have to lose? theyre gonna die in agony anyway unless something is discovered that works. And if they want to be tested on, they have that choice, the animals dont.
The people that test products on animals should burn in hell!!!!
The people who stop life saving medical testing should burn in hell.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
January 12th, 2007 at 02:02pm
Lucifers Angel:
they can not test a medicine on people just in case ti kills them
They can/do.
Clinical Trials often take place on humans. It just isn't a free-for-all like on mice. I mean, face it, what cures AIDS in mice won't necessarily cure a human. They need to be sure.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
January 12th, 2007 at 02:42pm
Bloodraine:
Lucifers Angel:
they can not test a medicine on people just in case ti kills them
They can/do.
Clinical Trials often take place on humans. It just isn't a free-for-all like on mice. I mean, face it, what cures AIDS in mice won't necessarily cure a human. They need to be sure.
though it's fair to point out these people do it out of free will and for the most part are paid for their services. i know uni students who do it to pay off fee's.
i think we should test on animal right acitivist, u know the phychotic ones that go crazy and attack the scientists that perform them
they'll be getting what they want - 'mon the rats!
Not all animals rights activists are psychotic though. The ones who do choose to do ignorant things such as that cause a nasty stereotype to be placed on others and it isn't true. I love though, how those are the people who are so strongly against medical testing, but they would never ever be part of a human clinical trial in their life. And the benifit from the drugs tested on animals all their lives. it doesnt make much sense.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 22nd, 2007 at 10:25am
NeoSteph:
Bloodraine:
Lucifers Angel:
they can not test a medicine on people just in case ti kills them
They can/do.
Clinical Trials often take place on humans. It just isn't a free-for-all like on mice. I mean, face it, what cures AIDS in mice won't necessarily cure a human. They need to be sure.
though it's fair to point out these people do it out of free will and for the most part are paid for their services. i know uni students who do it to pay off fee's.
Don't they also to drug testing on inmates on death row? I heard it somewhere that since these people are going to die anyway, they decide they might as well do some good in their last days.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 22nd, 2007 at 10:39am
Rectophobia Rachel:
AntiAntiAnti. Don't hurt those poor animals.
If we never tested on animals, we wouldn't have penicillin, doctors wouldn't know how to do organ transplants, we wouldn't have a clue how germs were spread, we would only have crude ways of treating diabetes, we wouldn't have a leprosy anti-biotic, and a lot more. Are you condeming all the people unfortunate enough to need these treatments to a life in misery, living without any way to cure their disease?
im all in favour of animal testing, for medical not cosmetic reasons. The scientific breakthroughs achieved through a few animals discomforts is totally worth it in my opinion, and its a bit of a generalisation to say all these animals are poorly treated, a lot are very well looked after. Theres a good group to check out called 'pro-test' not sure of the site exactly, but they've been protesting (peacefully) against these ignorant and violent animal rights protesters, who are some of the biggest contradictory hypocrites going. I think its more wrong sending death threats to scientists who are doing a lot to cure fatal diseases in the world than it is to test medicine on animals.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 26th, 2007 at 09:28am
Darkromance:
Hey! I have an idea! Why don't we take prisoners on death row and instead of killing them, est them. That can be their sentence, since they wouldn't really matter. They're n death row anyway. At least you won't have experiment with INNOCENT animals.
Ah hah, happy first post, and now I will take your quote virginity.
I already said that. That's what they do to some of them.
You know.. so much of the knowledge we have comes from animal testing. This isn't for medical or cosmetic reasons, it's for environmental knowledge and to help us understand animals. For example, I, being the nerd that I am, love animal planet and I was watching Jeff Corwin's show last night. He was in the Amazon rainforest. For one segement of the show, it showed the proccess by which they use nets to catch these electrical fish. After they catch the fish they were taken to local labs. There, they were placed in tanks where the amount of electrical impulses they exerted were measued. It showed the graph with the waves and explained how the frequency should remain constant, and if it wavered it was due to pollution and environmental upsets. Changes in fish behavior is one of the most effiecent ways to see how the water quality is, and they can be used to detect major changes early on. These fish are part of research that was put in place to conserve the life in the amazon rainforest and the biome built around it. The fish were released after they were monitored.
In the same episode, he also accompanied some scientists who studied sloths, and how the loss of rainforest was harming them because they are losing their habitats. The animals are very calm and relaxed, so its easy to monitor them. They are caught long enough to have a tag collar thing placed on them, so that they can be studided. They weren't harmed or taken out of their natural environment.
Alligators, crocodiles and caimen are temporarily caught in the wild alot too. Herpetologists travel on rivers they live in and catch them long enough to pump their stomachs to see what they've been eating as a way to study their diet and how it changes. It might soung cruel, but it isn't. It doesn't hurt them physically, and it helps them as well. Along with other species. If 5 years ago fish x was found in their stomachs and now we are finding less of that fish, it would signal that maybe something is happening to fish x and we may be able to help it.
Those are all forms of animal testing, and I totally and completely support them.
wfougoafoihqfe Falling In Love With The Board Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 9656
April 27th, 2007 at 02:36pm
I'm against animal testing.
Especially for cosmetics.
But also I'm kinda of against testing for the sake of disease in a way.
I realise we need to do these tests for the good of us, but I think human volunteers would be better. Even though I doubt anyone would put themselves up for it, and the animals don't get a choice.
You know.. so much of the knowledge we have comes from animal testing. This isn't for medical or cosmetic reasons, it's for environmental knowledge and to help us understand animals. For example, I, being the nerd that I am, love animal planet and I was watching Jeff Corwin's show last night. He was in the Amazon rainforest. For one segement of the show, it showed the proccess by which they use nets to catch these electrical fish. After they catch the fish they were taken to local labs. There, they were placed in tanks where the amount of electrical impulses they exerted were measued. It showed the graph with the waves and explained how the frequency should remain constant, and if it wavered it was due to pollution and environmental upsets. Changes in fish behavior is one of the most effiecent ways to see how the water quality is, and they can be used to detect major changes early on. These fish are part of research that was put in place to conserve the life in the amazon rainforest and the biome built around it. The fish were released after they were monitored.
In the same episode, he also accompanied some scientists who studied sloths, and how the loss of rainforest was harming them because they are losing their habitats. The animals are very calm and relaxed, so its easy to monitor them. They are caught long enough to have a tag collar thing placed on them, so that they can be studided. They weren't harmed or taken out of their natural environment.
Alligators, crocodiles and caimen are temporarily caught in the wild alot too. Herpetologists travel on rivers they live in and catch them long enough to pump their stomachs to see what they've been eating as a way to study their diet and how it changes. It might soung cruel, but it isn't. It doesn't hurt them physically, and it helps them as well. Along with other species. If 5 years ago fish x was found in their stomachs and now we are finding less of that fish, it would signal that maybe something is happening to fish x and we may be able to help it.
Those are all forms of animal testing, and I totally and completely support them.
ELLIE.:
Especially for cosmetics.
But also I'm kinda of against testing for the sake of disease in a way.
I realise we need to do these tests for the good of us, but I think human volunteers would be better. Even though I doubt anyone would put themselves up for it, and the animals don't get a choice.
I agree cosmetic testing is wrong, and pointless.
But, what about medical testing for animal use? New drugs are developed for animals all the time, and they require testing. Without that testing millions of animals would die. The animals have no choice in the matter, but what other option do we have? Without it millions would die.
but that'd be against Human Rights or something.