Anyone here against tests on animals that cause them to suffer?

I've heard this too. Not only do they advertise to consumers, but they also go straight to doctors to push their products. I've also heard of big pharma hiring specially trained nurses to teach consumers how to use their products and get the best results out of them. That way, people will be more likely to consume that drug everyday for the rest of their life.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I fail to see your logic in this, since giving animals equal consideration to humans can in no way make you a threat to other humans.
Without organisations such as PETA, Greenpeace, WWF, etc, then this planet would not be worth living in for either humans or animals.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And if you value human life beyond all other life, than youre a threat to the *entire* ecosystem of the planet which is a far far worse crime than being a threat to humanity. Putting humans first a really quick way to destroy the planet and the other creates we share with it. This kind of mentality of 'humans first' is self defeating anyway, if we fuck up the ecosystem beyond repair then we're fucking ourselves in the long run too.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What the fuck do those organizations do that's so wonderfully protective of the planet? ...besides protest things ....which accomplishes very damned little as far as I've ever seen or heard. Please ....tell me what they've accomplished in their struggles to protect the ecology?

And please, please, be specific ....just touting their propaganda bullshit isn't an explanation!

Baron Max

 

They have brought love and peace la la lal fucking la.

 

Is this "love and peace" something that they've kept hidden from the rest of us for some reason? ...LOL!

Baron Max

 

Animal testing does not show long term effects of drugs, by that I mean even just a few year's. Pharma companies get sued for this often.

 

What, you're too lazy to look this up for yourself? The very fact that we are talking about these organisatiosn shows that they have had an effect on politics, social science, environmental awareness, etc. Here in the UK the WWF and Greenpeace regulary meet with politicians to help shape policy that will protect the planet for future generations. I'm not sure what you mean by bullshit propaganda, since these organisations are not self serving, they aren't out to make as much money as possible and fuck anyone that gets in their way. BTW, protesting can achieve a great deal, but like anyhting else it fails as often as it succeeds.

 

Oh, really? I find it hard to believe that ANY human organization is NOT self-serving. And just you saying so doesn't make it true.

Baron Max

 

Just saying so doesn't make it true.

 

Thank you, Spurious, you're soooooo correct. It's also something that we should all keep firmly in mind around here.

Baron Max

 

Just saying so doesn't make it true.

 

unless the subject is "how awesome the devil inside is".

 

Obviously.

 

I recently read something that fits into this thread (About the largest pain-inducing test on animals, by far, in the world. It is a taste test.)

Brazil leads world in production of beef (by tons produced) but the grass feed, disease resistant, line (Zebu, developed from a strand common in India) does not taste as good as the partially grain feed Angus strand, which is common in Australia, so they lead world in value of beef sold.

Any beef eaters protesting animal tests that save human lives should stop participating in this continuing beef taste test.

 

Re-read the post fucktard. I wasn't expressing "humans first" I was pushing AGAINST "Animals first". You can have both good enviornment and human progress... if you don't think so, cry all you want. All the ideas behind overpopulation, limited resources, ect. are centuries old. It all reminds me of Y2K. "Oh, at this time, if we don't do this, this, and this... horrible things will happen!" The deadline passes. Nothing happens. So the deadline gets pushed further and further into the future. "By the mid 1990's the world will be destroyed by GLobal Warming!" Didn't happen. "By the year 2000..." nothing happens. "OK, by 2030!" That's it... we'll just make the deadlines longer so we don't look like idiots.

 

I would love to see the scientific publication that published the world would be destroyed by 1990, 2000, or 2030.

 

I heard from sources in the know that Europe is heading towards a shortage in transgenic mouse facilties within the next decade.

For those who think that animal usage is declining I have bad news. It has been steadily increasing.

The introduction of the transgenic model just increased this trend. Instead of a few mouslines now hundreds of new mouse lines need to be kept all over the world.

 

Not sure what you are refering to. Please clarify. Is it the number of facilities or a shortage of mice? Also clarify what is a transgenic mouse. I know about mice with some genes "knocked out" so they are prone to various diseases, especially cancers and thus very useful for testing effectiveness of durgs against those diseases. I also know that often mice get human tissue transplants, for example some tumor or cancer cells to see even better how the drug works on human tissue, but not clear what your "transgenic mouse" is.

 

What's a transgenic mouse:
http://www.dbc.uci.edu/~tjf/tmf_tgms.html

There will be a shortage in facilities, not in mice. In fact the number of mouse lines is constantly growing. In out group we already have about 15 mouse lines, not counting crosses between different mouse lines.

Every mouse line needs to have a certain amount of breeders if you want to actively study them. If you study them a lot you need to expand the colony. If you don't need them anymore you can freeze the line, but only one of our lines is frozen at the moment.

It's a tool that is used more and more.