Forum Index > News & Politics > Animal Rights
 Sep 22, 2007 @ 15:26:54 | #1 | casezilla
Apprentice
23 points
22/NA/Superior,
Join Date: Sep 2007 | My thoughts, as I finally get to write them for something other than a school paper, I will share here.
Animal testing is right, morally, and medically. It's one of the best things to ever happen to man kind.
In a situation where we have to choose 'us or them', 'our medicine or the animals lives and feelings', I would much rather choose our lives. The choice is very obvious and clear, and I don't know how anyone other than animal-loving freaks, who love animals more than any person, could think otherwise.
I don't know how to exaggerate this to be a long post, so I'll just end with this:
Would you rather have your best friend's eyes burned out because no one knew if the medicine could burn your eyes, and he wasn't careful becasue nothing said not to, or would you rather have some random dog on the street, some random dog with rabies, get their eyes burned? |   | 0 Kudos   | Edited: September 24, 2007 @ 22:23 |  |
|
| Sep 22, 2007 @ 22:46:55 | #8 | sango
General
349 points
22/F/Asheville, North Carolina
Join Date: Sep 2007 | They don't use rabid animals unless they're testing for a rabies vaccination or cure.
I think personally, that animal testing is wrong. Animals are not our playthings and we shouldn't be able to test anything on them. Here, let's play this situation: let's say aliens invaded Earth, and wanted to use humans as research subjects. They're much more powerful than us and we really don't have a choice: do you think it's right for them to be able to play God and test their medicines on us? They wouldn't care about us because we're different from them, and they would see us as lesser beings.
Just because animals can't talk doesn't mean they don't feel pain, and doesn't mean they don't think and aren't conscious. I know it's undeniable what animal testing does for people, but for some unexplainable reason I still think it's wrong, even if it would save my own life. On the other hand, I can totally see how people can be for it, because it does in fact save lives.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann W. Von Goethe | | | | 0 Kudos | Edited: September 22, 2007 @ 22:53 | |
|
| Nov 07, 2007 @ 12:01:35 | #12 | veggo_dude
Recruit
12 points
23/M/Perth, Australia
Join Date: Nov 2007 | buffalobill90 said:
The vast majority of animals are not conscious, they do not suffer. Animal testing is completely moral.
In fact, a vast majority of animals used in biomedical and/or cosmetic research are fully conscious when they are tested on. Administering anaesthetic, pain killers or sedation in a lot of tests can affect research outcomes, and because of this, the animals are not given anything to ease their suffering. Also for people who think animal testing is worthy, have a read below:
Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never are.
At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in lab animals. They are allowed because it is admitted that animal tests are not relevant.
When asked if they agreed that animal experimentation can be misleading because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans, 88% of doctors agreed.
Rats are 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer in humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.
According to animal tests lemon juice is deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulin are safe.
40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.
Over 200, 000 medicines have been released most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organization, 240 medicines are "essential".
Thousands of drugs passed safe in animals have been withdrawn or banned due to their effect on human health.
Aspirin fails animal tests, as do digitalis (heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would be banned if results from animal experimentation were accurate.
When the producers of thalidomide were taken to court, they were acquitted after numerous experts agreed animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.
At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.
Morphine puts humans asleep but excites cats.
95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.
One is six patients in hospital are there because the drug they have taken had been passed safe for us on humans after animal tests.
Worldwide, at least 22 animals die every second in labs. In the UK one animal dies every five seconds.
The contraceptive pill causes blood clots in humans but it had the opposite effect in dogs.
We use aspirin for aches and pains. It causes birth defects mice, rabbits and rats.
Researchers refused to believe that benzene could cause cancer in humans because it failed to in animal tests.
Dogs failed to predict heart problems caused by the cardiovascular drugs encainide and flecainide, which led to an estimated 3, 000 deaths in the USA.
Heart by pa** surgery was put on hold for years because it didn't work on dogs.
If we had relied on animal tests we would still believe that humans don't need vitamin C, that smoking doesn't cause cancer and alcohol doesn't cause liver damage.
It was denied for decades that asbestos caused disease in humans because it didn't in animals.
Polio researchers were mislead for years about how we catch the disease because they had experimented on monkeys.
As one researcher points out, "the ultimate dilemma with any animal model of human disease is that it can never reflect the human situation with complete accuracy." | | | |
| Nov 07, 2007 @ 12:29:23 | #13 | alexkidd
Monk
36919 points
23/M/in a bog, Ireland
Join Date: Sep 2006 | vego_dude said:
In fact, a vast majority of animals used in biomedical and/or cosmetic research are fully conscious when they are tested on. Administering anaesthetic, pain killers or sedation in a lot of tests can affect research outcomes, and because of this, the animals are not given anything to ease their suffering. Also for people who think animal testing is worthy, have a read below:
Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never are.
At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in lab animals. They are allowed because it is admitted that animal tests are not relevant.
When asked if they agreed that animal experimentation can be misleading because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans, 88% of doctors agreed.
Rats are 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer in humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.
According to animal tests lemon juice is deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulinum are safe.
40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.
Over 200, 000 medicines have been released most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organization, 240 medicines are "essential".
Thousands of drugs passed safe in animals have been withdrawn or banned due to their effect on human health.
Aspirin fails animal tests, as do digitalis (heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would be banned if results from animal experimentation were accurate.
When the producers of thalidomide were taken to court, they were acquitted after numerous experts agreed animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.
At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.
Morphine puts humans asleep but excites cats.
95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.
One is six patients in hospital are there because the drug they have taken had been passed safe for us on humans after animal tests.
Worldwide, at least 22 animals die every second in labs. In the UK one animal dies every five seconds.
The contraceptive pill causes blood clots in humans but it had the opposite effect in dogs.
We use aspirin for aches and pains. It causes birth defects mice, rabbits and rats.
Researchers refused to believe that benzene could cause cancer in humans because it failed to in animal tests.
Dogs failed to predict heart problems caused by the cardiovascular drugs encainide and flecainide, which led to an estimated 3, 000 deaths in the USA.
Heart by pa** surgery was put on hold for years because it didn't work on dogs.
If we had relied on animal tests we would still believe that humans don't need vitamin C, that smoking doesn't cause cancer and alcohol doesn't cause liver damage.
It was denied for decades that asbestos caused disease in humans because it didn't in animals.
Polio researchers were mislead for years about how we catch the disease because they had experimented on monkeys.
As one researcher points out, "the ultimate dilemma with any animal model of human disease is that it can never reflect the human situation with complete accuracy."
actually bill contends that animals don't actually ever feel pain consciously,
thats reserved for humans.
so you can do whatever you want to them really.
but anyway,
i don't really agree with the stuff cited here,animal testing is just one step in a long process of establishing the viability of a drug or procedure, and you can't say that its not worth it just because it sometimes, rarely it has had bad consequences for people, but obviously not as bad as if we just went straight to experimenting on people.
i don't think it can be argued that animal testing hasn't overall been extremely beneficial to mankind so the only valid argument against it is a moral one really, that we don't have to right to do those things to animals just to protect human lives.
and i love animals and I'm all about animal rights, but that's a hard case to make, especially when you get sick and end up in hospital and you need drugs or medical procedures else you die.....
i think we should try do it as humanly as possible, i'm unfamiliar with the practicalities of it, maybe there's room for better treatment since it should definatly be done as humanly as possible but certainly still do it.
 | | | | 0 Kudos | Edited: November 07, 2007 @ 12:54 | |
|
Top
|
