|
 Post in Forums
Create a Profile
Upload Pictures
|
Keep a Journal
Meet Friends
It's FREE!
|
|
Sign Up!
|
Forum Index > News & Politics > Animal Rights
|
daifu
Über Master Debater
8595 points
Deleted
42/M/somewhere in the south, German
Join Date: Jun 2007 | treacle said:
You wear make up right? You use shampoo and
conditioner to wash your hair? Soap? Bubble bath??? You use perfume
and spray deoderants right?
What do you wash your clothes with?
All these things get tested on animals so I assume you do not use any
products that proctor and gamble test ie ariel, oil of olay/ulay
whatever it is etc?
What would your attitude be if we tested on humans, perhaps young
children?
From a medical point of view:
animal tesing for cosmetics is not necessary any more these days,
Procter and Gamble do know this I think, so IF (and I doubt it) they
are still using animal testing for these purpouses instead of
metabolic lab test and cell cultures that are equaly efficient, well
then they do it because it is cheaper.
Main part of pharmaceutics do not present advantages to be tested
with animals. The biggest example is still these days Tallidomide (a
painkiller of the 70th that caused terrible mutilations in the
newborns). It had been authorized as safe for pregnancy because
extensively animal tested. Oooops, it is only that the methabolism of
animals and their genetics are not the same than the one of humans.
So this gives us not more advantage.
To the sad fact: do you want it to be tested on children. Oh, you did
not know??? We extensively do. In the African countries our
industries do regularly test for free with new pharmaceutics. So far
so good, you may say, they would die without treatment anyway. Yeap,
it's only that once the new therapy is on the market.......they throw
the people out of the programm and do tell them: you want the
drugs....now pay them. You are too poor? Too bad for you.
There is always a level of meaness that we a willing and able to get
to, in order to make more money.
"If it is to your advantage, make a forward move; if not, stay where you are." Tsun Zu (The Art of War) |  | |
|
tigerlilly10
Über-Commander
172 points
45/NA/Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
Join Date: Aug 2007 | daifu said:
From a medical point of view:
animal tesing for cosmetics is not necessary any more these days,
Procter and Gamble do know this I think, so IF (and I doubt it) they
are still using animal testing for these purpouses instead of
metabolic lab test and cell cultures that are equaly efficient, well
then they do it because it is cheaper.
Main part of pharmaceutics do not present advantages to be tested
with animals. The biggest example is still these days Tallidomide (a
painkiller of the 70th that caused terrible mutilations in the
newborns). It had been authorized as safe for pregnancy because
extensively animal tested. Oooops, it is only that the methabolism of
animals and their genetics are not the same than the one of humans.
So this gives us not more advantage.
To the sad fact: do you want it to be tested on children. Oh, you did
not know??? We extensively do. In the African countries our
industries do regularly test for free with new pharmaceutics. So far
so good, you may say, they would die without treatment anyway. Yeap,
it's only that once the new therapy is on the market.......they throw
the people out of the programm and do tell them: you want the
drugs....now pay them. You are too poor? Too bad for you.
There is always a level of meaness that we a willing and able to get
to, in order to make more money. | | | |
|
tigerlilly10
Über-Commander
172 points
45/NA/Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
Join Date: Aug 2007 | kit said:
Well yeah, for makeup etc is just plain cruel, and some of the "medicinal" experiments are sick, but most makeup products will at one time had been tested on an animal, and it's pretty important to find cures for diseases. I hate testing too, but if we didn't have it then we wouldn't be able to cure anything without testing on humans first...
Opps sorry. I agree it is all about money for most of the time. Drugs companies chare a mint for their products. In the Uk we are at the mercy of them because the NHS has to consider, reguardless of the effectiveness of the drug, wether or not they can afford to give it to sufferers.
It makes me sob sometimes at the pure nastiness, hatred and disreguard that the human race has not just for other life on this planet but also for their own kind.
By the way that very attitude of thinking else but the human race matters is the very thing that will be our own end. | | | |
Top
|
Aug 08, 2007 @ 16:30:47
