Added: 4 years ago
From: goingemoguy
Views: 13,620
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (231)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • never ever thought i say this but

    fuck this let the humans die animals never did nothing to us to deserve this and you do testing on KITTENS to save humans thats animal abuse its not cool just to save humans. about 99% of animals life is endangered but about 20% of humans is endangered because we can take care of our self

  • Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are like us."

    Ask the experimenters why it is morally okay to

    experiment on animals, and the answer is: "Because the animals are not like us."

    Animal experimentation rests

    on a logical contradiction. ~ Professor Charles R. Magel

  • stupid human haters

    i support animals testing to save humans

  • spam alert...

  • @SniperSurkov your an idiot for thinking that...

  • @blondeandhearts without animal testing

    medication wouldnt be here to save you from your disease's

  • @SniperSurkov - There are ways for scientists and medical professionals to create medicine without torturing animals. Medication would still be here.

  • @zZDeMoNiCBoYZz Well said ! :) ,

  • @zZDeMoNiCBoYZz YEa ikr why cant they use prisioner like who murder i mean there gonna send them to a death penalty why not put them for use, and since when are animals like humans ?

  • so basicly if i donate money to help a cure for cancer im basicly giving money to people to abuse an animal? FUCK THAT IM STOPING DONATEING THEY CAN SHOVE THAT MONEY UP THERE ASSES

  • @TheExoticAnimal it's the legal system's fault. When a company develops a drug, they need to make sure the drug is safe. The current way to do so is to first test it on animals, cuz if they do it on human volunteers directly and if things go bad, people always sue. That's the problem. People sue! If people stop suing and accept that there are risks involved in every new drug, then company won't need to test on animals.

  • i wish people would stop i would take my own life just to stop animal cruelty. my own life,

  • shit like this makes me mad as all hell use other humans not the animals

  • shit like this makes me mad as all hell

  • yeah, I can't stand to watch more than a minute of these kind videos. but then again, I don't eat meat or buy any cosmetics tested on animals either.

  • The Nazi's were monsters for testing on other humans, but those who test on animals are deemed as possible saviours.

  • I feel sick

  • i would rather die because of medicine that doesnt work than let millions of animals scream and not be heard. GO PETA

  • It's hard to watch, but by rating this video- it will make it more likely to get viewed by others. I think we need to know the cold, hard truth about vivisection. Please vote that you like this video- if you feel strongly against this practice.

  • I have never considered myself and animal rights activist. But I can not turn my head to this kind of abuse. I have a ruby eyed rabbit that I love very much, I could not fathom drugging him and watching him suffer. I understand that medication needs to be tested, but this is wrong!!! I feel guilty for poking fun at PETA people.

  • if animal testing doesnt work?

    then why are they doing it?

    because it does work

    without animal testing we would still be using witchdoctors

  • @CAS53507 money money money

  • ugh...it's like 731 all over again...

    only instead of humans it's the poor

    animals T_T

  • @noratmedicine It's useless tell them it, it's useless. They don't talk of science, talk only for clichè: meat, food chain, domestic animals, hitler was vegetarian, people for animal's rights are ugly and bad and want vivisection aour babies!!!

    I can't (and don't want too) understand people happy of their stupidity.

  • if yo do not like animal testing, lest test all new drugs on you...

  • The nazis had a reason for experimenting on the jews. According to your logic, no cruelty was involved.

  • @SleepySkeptic Haha.. it's funny you said that.. Because humans are worth more than animals any day. Way more! Are u Indian? Lol.

    We posses a spirit and a soul. Animals only posses a soul. Did u eat your eggs this morning? Well.. if you did.. consider your self part of the abortion of the chicken. Or did you eat chicken last night? Guess what? That chicken was dead. Get real people. You wanna eat chicken.. but don't want the chicken to hurt when u kill it. Seriously. Just don't look at it.

  • @SleepySkeptic Never the less, I'm not up for animal cruelty. But last time I checked, we humans are at the top of the food chain. I mean.. I know about Indians that would die starving cause of no food.. when they have a cow right in front of them, and don't realize that they are so much more worth than the "mom cow" that give em milk. Now don't go beating your dog, or hanging him for experiments. When u look at it, we humans use everything for our own selfish pleasure anyways.

  • @SleepySkeptic Or what makes u think that the cat u have in your house.. or the dog, or fish, or bird, wouldn't rather be in the wild, regardless if they get treated better in your house? The truth is.. that they are there because of your pleasure and not the other way around. The dog didn't come from the store and payed u to be his owner. Neither did the rest of them. But u think u are doing them a favor? Please! We humans are so funny. And selfish. And then we turn around and point fingers.

  • Humans evolved from other animals; our history is not innately superior.

  • That's a good point, if you think about it our practices might be suppressing the evolution of other species. In that case, at what point would we stop torturing them?? When they learn to speak our language and hire a lawyer??

  • For all these animal testing supporters, you have no crucial evidence that animal testing saves lives. In fact, something that may pass animal testing may NOT pass on humans all the time. In addition, once a certain disease is "cured" something else will come along that is even worse.

  • Humans are the most violent evil murderous organisms out there. Animals, as well as humans, die everyday. That cannot be stopped. There are a reason for sicknesses out there, for you cannot live forever. If all these diseases were cured, then we would have an even bigger problem. Over population.

  • The research defense society conducted a poll on animal testing amongst UK doctors and found that 88% support testing medicine on animals before testing it on humans.

  • RDS is a vivisection lobby. Even that Pro-Test eventually admitted this.

  • Who admitted that?

  • 1. Pro-Test (the group name for that vivisection lobby, via site Speaking of Research).

    2. The RDS themselves from what they have said in the past.

  • Ok thanks.

  • Do they really think animal testing has no scientific value and the researchers are doing it 'for the evilz'

  • @FatherTime89,

    It wasn't just "they". People know now vivisection is a scientific fraud.

  • Comment removed

  • bah, we have the technology to make artificial, human organs from a few cells and proteins in the lab. Why not just test on lab-made human organs? Or even humans. There are too many of us anyway :p

  • They need to do things on serial killers, pedophiles, etc. but all the political "do-gooders" go "Oh no you can't, it's unethical and inhumane!" It's not very humane to the animals either, but everybody thinks it's okay because they are not "self aware" or anything. If they are not self aware why then are they used in psychology experiments and that's also like saying it's alright to experiment on an infant or someone with severe mental handicaps.

  • If animal testing is so accurate, than why do we need humans trials?

  • Vivisection should be completely stopped , I agree. To this happen it takes enormous human awareness, unity and the natural healing method like Ayurveda, herbal, yoga should be introduced vigorously.

  • these people need to be shot...how dare they do this to animals i love animals so much that i would do anything for them..yes it is important to help humans but not at the cost of killing any living creature i hope these people rot in hell..bren

  • @foxibren,

    "yes it is important to help humans..." (Sic Sly plug for vivisection there.)

  • cell research is what is curing diseases and making breakthroughs. animal testing to help humans is out dated.

  • If animal testing is oh so acurate, why then are human trials needed?

  • If animal testing was useless why would so many researchers continue pouring money into it?

  • Because they are brainwashed into thinking it is useful.

  • So all those researchers have been brainwashed so thoroughly that they'd ignore data?

  • @FatherTime89,

    And what exactly would that "data" be?

  • The supposed data suggesting animal testing is unscientific.

  • @FatherTime,

    No surprise you avoided the answer. I asked what EXACTLY that data they are ignoring. Not just the suggestion.

  • You don't get it, it's been suggested that data exists to prove animal testing doesn't work. My question is if such data were as vast as claimed why would so many scientists be ignoring it.

    I'm talking about data I doubt exists (the ones that show animal testing is useless for medical testing).

  • 1. Because the ones ignoring it are not scientists, not skilled medical practitioners or doctors that know about things about the human system.

    2. I wanted to know specifics, as in what the data, info, whatever field.

    All animal testing is useless for medical testing.

  • @ShroedingerWatcher "all animal testing is useless for medical testing"...that's the most ridiculous claim i've seen online for a while. from the most basic mechanics of the circulatory system used in the "goat lab" of the military q-course to the knock-out gene models used for establishing the mode of action of genetic disorders (done at NIH and others), animal testing is vitally necessary for learning about our own biology for the purposes of advancing medicine

  • To call it useless is misleading, the point made in the film is that there is no guarantee a product safe for several species of animals, will then be safe for humans. Animal testing takes away the liability from a company while not ensuring safety. Are you currently recieving financial support from an industry that feels they have the right to inflict severe suffering??

  • @SleepySkeptic i work for an industry that provides comfort and relief for millions of people so that they can live more productive, healthy lives. i'm guessing that most people posting negative comments here are kids who don't know what it's like to live in constant pain.

  • Thank you for caring about the pain of your fellow man, and you may never know the pain of animals experimented on. Do you really think we don't know these animals are typically in constant pain?? But you would have us ignore any who can't press charges on you for the tortures. To me you are filth. Could you now admit that profit for your shareholders comes ahead of humanitarian interests?? And is it true you are taxpayer funded?? And does the industry have financial incentive to falsify data??

  • @SleepySkeptic nope, from a purely business perspective, falsifying data is a very quick ticket to lawsuits, government sanctions, and bad publicity. all of these are obviously bad for business. and this doesn't even take into account that most people i work with are driven by the desire to make the world a better place.

  • I'm glad there isn't a financial incentive to suppress medicine so that more testing can be profited from in pursuit of said medicine. And I'm glad the penalty for falsifying data outweighs the profit potential. I'm very reassured now that someone inside the business has told me how benevolent and altruistic they all are. The animals in these undercover torture videos surely had it better than their wild relatives.

  • @FluffyFeralMarmot at expenses of the health and pain of this animals? you honestly think WE deserve to not live in pain but they do? your just too fucked up for words and i feel pity for you, im not a kid and do know whats to live in pain, yet i dont drug myself everytime i feel a sore or everytime my head hurts because i know i owe this "relief" to a poor animal who suffered weeks so i wouldnt have a stupid headache.

    i feel ashamed that i have to share space with ppl like u on earth

  • @faulefische nice trolling :)

  • @faulefische People were curing head aches long before animal testing (Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration, but aspirin comes from willow bark, something that was used as an herbal remedy, rather than discovered at the end of a cattle prod) It was actually tested on humans first.

  • you obviously have no children of your own if you can make that statement. try spending a night in the hospital with your baby and tell me you wouldn't do anything to save him. i love animals but kids come first

  • And most people would probably put their kids ahead of yours, but that doesn't mean they need to steal from your kids.

  • @FluffyFeralMarmot,

    Funny you say that because that is what vivisectors want people to think. And because of that did they put children through such vivisectionist experimental research. All apparently to benefit other children. Which it never did. They ranged from psychological to heart research. Yes, all on children, nobody knew at the time, still don't.

  • @ShroedingerWatcher what are you talking about, who did vivisections on human children?

  • @FluffyFeralMarmot,

    Hold on some examples of them...

  • Between the two World Wars, while Nobel Laureate Pavlov's experiments on animals were eagerly being followed and imitated in labs the world over, a book titled "behaviourism" (Norton, 1925, and The People's Institute Publishing Company, New York, 1930) appeared in the U.S., by a Dr John B Watson, at one time director of the psychological lab of Johns Hopkins University. He described dropping new born children just when they were falling asleep, to test "loss of support"; robbing of toys;...

  • letting them be bullied; placing acid in their mouths; and it states the amazing fact that burning or pricking or cutting produced crying and screaming and an attempt to escape pain by withdrawing the body, etc. etc. etc.

    "We were rather loath at first to conduct experiments in this field," (researcher's words) "but the need to study was so great that we finally decided to build up fears in the infant and then later to study practical methods for removing them. We chose as our first subject...

  • Albert B., an infant weighing 21 pounds at 11 months of age...He had lived his whole life in the hospital. He was a wonderfully 'good baby.' In all the months we worked with him we never saw him cry until our experiments were made!"

  • To make Albert cry, a white rat, which had been his playmate for weeks, was presented to him, and just as he reached for the rat a steel bar was struck with a carpenter's hammer right behind his head. Albert jumped violently, burying his face in the mattress.

    The experiment was repeated until the infant was a nervous wreck: He began to cry as soon as the rat was shown, fell over, raised himself on all fours, and began to crawl away so rapidly that he was caught with difficulty...

  • before he reached the edge of the mattress. Finally the infant was frightened by everything he had played with.

    The experiments came to an end because he was adopted.

    In 1923 a sum of Rockefeller money was granted to experiment on 70 children ranging in age from 3 months to 7 years...

  • American Journal of Pediatrics 1939, Vol. 15, No.4, p485 by the experimenters themselves;

    subjected 42 infants ranging from 11 days to 2 1/2 years of age to repetitious, terrifying experiments of submersion in water. The average number of observations on the same child was more than 10, and went up to 51...

  • When submerged, the movement of the extremities are of the struggling order. The infants clutch at the experimenters hand, try to wipe the water from the face...Often the ingestion of fluid is considerable, and the infant would cough or otherwise show respiratory disturbances when taken out of the water. At no time did any baby show himself capable of raising his head above water for the purpose of breathing....

  • Human Guinea Pigs (Pelican Books, London, 1969, p125: Three doctors of the University of Arkansas Medical Center in Little Rock injected radioactive iodine intravenously in to 46 healthy newborn infants in order to study thyroid function, regardless of the well-known and undoubted risk that this medicament can produce cancer in the thyroid gland; then they calmly reported their exploit in the American Journal of Diseases of Children, (1962, 103, p. 739)...

  • One other one was to do with circumcision on babies which I found on one of those Pub Med sites or similar, I didnt save the link though, but you may find that and other oldies on those sites somewhere if you know how to search them thoroughly enough. There are also adult experiments on humans young and old before and after the world wars. And they put vivisectors claims to shame such as you would rather we experiment on people?

  • There are the books I mention on my profile, there are books online, there are sites out there that are worth a look at. And it all adds up to the fact that vivisection/animal research never benefited anyone.

  • Extraordinary claim, I wonder if you have the extraordinary proof needed to back it up. Animal testing is also done to study psychology, and it's been accredited to human medical and veterinary breakthroughs.

  • Look it up, read about it, look at both sides, study.

    I also included references in those comments.

  • @ShroedingerWatcher You make the claim you back it up

  • i think most researchers would rather not kill animals if they didn't have to. i'd rather poison a few cats and monkeys if it means better medicine for my kids

  • wow your an ass! i would never kill to help people,i would use my brain and make medicine without killing my fellow mammal species.there's other ways then using lower beings to test on,think if some alien came down and decided to test on humans,they would think the same as you,like asses! but im sure they wont be that fucking retarded.

  • how many animals do you think die just to feed you? even if you're a vegetarian, the typical crop requires the death of millions or billions or animals just to reach your table.

  • i don't mind eating meat,im no vegetarian,but im saying if you abuse these poor animals than that's wrong,no one pours acid on the meat you eat,they just get killed.that's way better death then torture.

  • you should check out the mode of action of some of the common pesticides, like Bt or warfarin. dying from constipation or internal hemorrhaging doesn't seem like a pleasant way to go. and yet that's the way *millions* of animals are killed in every field

  • Which is why many people support the organic movement.

  • Have you seen slaughter house videos?!

  • @MithilaNoronha i really dont care... im sorry but im not turning vegetarian cous some animals are getting slaughtered..there death is quick i'd say,but these animals get tested on and they would just want to die...

  • You are sadly misinformed.. Watch 'Earthlings', a 95 minute documentary.. Intelligent, loving animals that are capable of feeling emotion & pain just as we do, are crammed together, agitated & terrified. That's a miserable way to live.. u say u don't care, but I think u do, or u wudn't worry about how quick their death is or if they want to die.. there are more sophisticated means & technology available to us for testing, animal testing is not as reliable as people think either. ..

  • ..so let's be aware, make informed choices, & end the unnecessary suffering of fellow living, sentient beings

  • Not if you buy them from local farmers who grow them on land that has been in their family for generations or perhaps grow them yourself. We need to do away with comercialised "farming" too and go back to our roots where produce was grown by local farmers instead of on some co-op in a terriost country.

  • There are accounts of people who are in the vivecetion feild and have said within a few days of doing it you become desentised to suffering. There's also evidence of researchers abusing the animals and laughing at their fates. The devil is just one man with a plan; but true evil are scientists who test on animals and try to prusade us it's okay.

  • Do you know how many children have died because of medication complications? If animal testing is so presice why do we need human trials?

  • @PinkyPunkyKat animal testing is just the first step...you wouldn't want the first time you see what a drug does to be with a human. without animals we'd probably see a lot more disasters like with what happened with TeGenero.

  • :( :( :( :( :( :(

  • This is horrifying to watch, someone needs to stop this.

  • the less know about this the better.

  • ur excused. and ur and idiot for thinking that animals are treated good in these testing facilities. they arent. never have been. they are absolutely barbaric. and thats not something i believe. thats just life as we know it. ur taking a class huh? um...okay. ur teacher is a vet? um...so. u got eyes and can see but ur ass is still blind.... thanks for supporting this bullshit. ur excused.

  • Do the experiments on the experimenters(after all, they above all people think it needs to be done. They should understand) at least there would be feedback

  • It just shows how long its been going on. What about the more recent video of baby chicks going thogh a grinder just because they are males.

  • the problem starts with animal VS. human rights. rights arent suppose to do battle with eachother.

    rights for all otherwise, death for ALL.

    its everyones choice.

    and right now everyone is divided

    but only cuz they havent thought into it

    enough yet but they will.

    Aliens humans demons animals god DEAD (cept god) unless rights for all.

    cuz incase you didnt notice if gods real

    it is superior to ALL so ALL... lets make the right decision shall we?

  • what the fuck do u need? HD or blue ray or high tech camera film to make it "matter" to u? seriously...ur missing the point.

  • It's a fucking disgrace and should be made a criminal offense under any circumstances.

  • Seriously. It's hard to believe that this is happening. It's such common sense. ;\

  • Real criminals see video > Monsanto Patent for a Pig (Pt.1 of 5)

  • Can the guy who made this video even name the steps of the scientific method?

  • Can you name the steps to getting a drug recalled, dickhead?

  • People are so cruel.

  • I believe that some animal testing is completely inhumane and disgusting but can I ask who else are we going to test new medicines on. Look what happened when we didn't test thalidomide thousands of babies born with limb deformities.

    I'm sorry but its something we have to do but I do agree that some of it should be abolished because it is disgusting.

  • allahoakbar789. Thalidomide was tested on animals extensively prior release. Tests hav been done since withdrawal, UK health authorities like MRC state evidence from animal tests is against thalidomide having genetic effects. Even so, we cannot make unreliable methods reliable by counter examples. Even if there happen to be cases of animal tests not refuted by human application it doesnt make it reliable. We only know b/c we transferred results to ppl. We tested them on ppl. An unavoidable fact

  • Moneim A Fadali knows a bit about surgery or thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. His book Animal Experimentation a harvest of shame, is very passionate as well as factual. He was also known to be a vegan.

    And there are more books worth reading that can be found on Amazon. Shame most folk could not read them way back then when they banned or blocked them especially Slaughter of the Innocent.

    Why did they shun those books? Because they exposed the facts behind vivisection.

  • Great points . Well said .... But i would encourage people to not use Amazon because they sell fur products and other animal products ..just an FYI

  • Amazon sells a few "unpleasantries" I know. But so does any other online retailer. If they have something as hard hitting as proper scientific anti-vivisection literature I'd say its well spent.

    And then of course we could go further offline and talk about how we are all exploiting land taken from others and so on.

    But at the end of the day its what you buy that encourages it so no one is guilty here of buying books I mention here or anywhere else.

  • I have seen the full version of this film, it does not lie. Moneim A Fadali and Pietro Croce certainly didn't lie!

    Read their books, I have them and still reading them right now. Pietro Croce was a vivisector, he found out the flaws of vivisection and so quit and talked and did a book about it as well as updating it called:

    Vivisection or Science testing drugs and safeguarding health, mentioned in this video...

  • I find it really amusing that every pro-animal testing post gets like a -25. I wonder what would happen if all the anti-animal testing people boycotted anything that ever had anything in it that involved animal testing. That just seems like a better idea than getting legislation against it. Companies would be more concerned to adhering to public's desires. I guess that means many of you would never get vaccinated for a lot of diseases. You could always make your own. test it on yourselves.

  • First off alot of these vaccinces cause alot of problems in humans . Autism anyone ?

    Second there are so many other methods of testing that do not require animals

    third . All animal tested products and methods have to be tested on humans anyway in clinical trials to be considered safe . This rule has no exceptions .

    So we waste money and time .

  • Ive never seen anything so biased. This is ridiculous, there are benefits to animal testing but these videos dont show any of them. If all animal testing was 100% unreliable (like this documentary makes it out to be) it wouldnt still be in use. The truth is a lot of the clips of animal cruelty and points made in this documentary are extremes.

  • They're not extremes, they're commonplace. It's still in use because it's profitable and the law allows it. It's profitable because it keeps companies from being liable when their product goes on to harm people. The law allows it because they hold profit to be more important than conscious suffering. This doesn't say it's never been correct, in many ways animals are similar to us, but in many ways they are different, therefore it can never be reliable. Watch the damn documentary.

  • If animal testing was 100% reliable we wouldn't need human trials.

  • I never said it was 100% reliable, i just said that it wasn't 100% unreliable like this 'documentary' makes it out to be.

  • If it were unreliable no one would use it. You think pharmaceuticals wouldn't love to save thousands on the cost of drug development?

  • amen!

  • well... my view on animal cruelty... if a human wants to have something tested that badly... then test on them bloody selves. its not fair to rope innocent animals in because to the barbarians of the human race they have no purpose... THEY FUCKING DO!

    sorry... my rant is over but it just makes me so goddamn mad

    xx

  • i wish i knew were these labs are id go smash those animal testers faces in

  • theres one Oxford

  • This video is extremely informative. It inspired me to do some research into the whole animal testing thing. And sure enough, it's all true. Animals do not make good models for humans. I hope this barbaric practice will soon come to an end.

  • animals make excellent subjects for testing.

    I dont know where you did your research...

  • Well, almost every website about animal testing on the internet says that animals don't make good test subjects and the results are unreliable. And those are not just the AR sites, they're also sites that care about good science and human health. Some ex-vivisectors have even spoken out against the uselessness of animal testing. The only sites that are really in favour of animal testing are the Pro-Test and RDS sites, but they're funded by vivisectors so they have an ulterior motive.

  • Almost every website about animal testing is against animal testing... Most scientific journals will still accredit animal testing as a reliable way of providing evidence that something works. Websites aren't really a good place to look for applications of animal testing and their usefulness. Granted, not all animal testing is useful or good. Animal testing for cosmetics and candy seem like a waste of time for me.

  • Actually, there are some websites which are for animal testing, but they are all either from pharmaceutical companies or organisations funded by the pharmaceutical companies. It's all about profits. Plus there are many scientists who are against animal testing. I looked at the New Scientist website and some very intelligent scientists said that testing on animals is unreliable and horrendously cruel.

  • what a load of rubbish.

    animal research is essential for medical puposes.

    i hope to god this research continues, if only to test shampoo before i try it.

  • Are you braindead??

  • make a service for us and be the first volunteer.

  • ok, ill see what animals i can rustle up.

  • WTF kind of research is electrocuting an animal?? you dont need to hold someone under water to know that if you do they will drown....these are some twisted fuckers pretending to be scientists....

  • i stop watching this too..it makes me sad..:(

  • I stop watching this when the so called doctor said we have gained nothing from animal vivisection.

     Yeah tell that to the metal roads in my back keeping my spine from riping my body in half. Hell...all medical and industry science would come to a complete stop. It dose suck that a lot of the animals that are used where some ones pet at one time.

  • That's like reading two or three pages in a book then stop. If you really care about the issue then I suggest you understand the opposing argument the best you can.

  • Is your only concern for human property, not the individuals being maimed out of human laziness?? You believe animal testing was the only way to come up with the idea that surgery might sometimes be the only way to save lives?? I'm sorry you feel non-human consciousness is property to be used up as deemed fit by the owner. I wonder how long it was, and how much suffering took place, before the doctors had that alibi that let them sell their life-saving treatment to those who could afford it.

  • Well no, you are right that not only animal testing is used to save lives. People have no idea what they have until its gone...some day the medical research that is done will save your life or the life of some one you love. Believe it.

  • some1 said they hated the human race so i told him/her to kill him/herself

    and stop being so hatefull just becuse i have a diffrent opinion

  • such a sad and disgusting practice. This really needs to be stopped now. Anyone who thinks this is for the better cause need to rethink thier morals. Mankind does itself in. No animal testing will cure them.

  • then plz kill urself

  • no ppl just like flock close to eachother, thier is still alot of room left

  • Plenty of room, nowhere near enough resources. It's easy to say we have enough room when you can live your over-consuming life, meanwhile others are starving.

  • what resources?

  • If animal experimentation is just fraud could someone please tell me why anyone would spend £1'000'000's on it. Clearly this is not fake but a genuinly useful thing otherwise market forces would not invest in it.

  • They spend on it because the majority of think it's for their own good, it's their taxes that pay for it. Of course this all requires a prejudiced attitude.. the idea that the human race is infinitely superior to all others, and should be able to murder and torture any other species, so far as it has a 1% possibility of advancing the capitalist agenda and helping to further overpopulate the planet, arrogantly raping resources that our great grandchildren probably needed. I'm done with you.

  • Most animal testing is done by private firms and universities. They know more than you so who are you to say they are wrong. Inneficcient businesses fail.

  • so how are u gona convince sick and dieing ppl and thier familys and friends that we should stop the research that can save thier lifes?

  • If they think that purposely inflicting this life-threatening disease on an animal whose only crime was being born in that body.. in other words, if they are selfish enough to inflict extreme misery on hundreds of thousands of living beings for a *possible* human solution(as well as possible human risks) then I doubt much can be said to change that mentality. At that point, you are dealing with desperate people, morality flies out the window.. which is very sad, especially for the innocents.

  • well morality is an opinion and they think that its not moraly wrong to harm an animal to save a human life

  • Animals are inferior to us, do you really think that any of these animal would have any mercy for us? answer=NO

  • I think certain animals would.. such as cows, pigs, rabbits, and many other peaceful animals we routinely abuse. I doubt snakes or lions would have mercy, but does that give us the right to be just as ruthless?? Apparently so, in your mind.

  • People are not nice, morals are just opinions, there is no good or bad. THese are facts, morals are not.

  • how are we superior to animalls???

  • Some of us have superior logic and responsibility, although most of us just pollute and plunder because it's so easily accessible and they never have to really think about it or be challenged on their position.

  • I'm not arguing that certain regions may be over-populated but the world as a whole is not. Ever seen a map of population density? There's tons of empty space. And I do mean empty space, spots where no human has set foot. Lands that have only been seen from high above through a cartographers eyes.

  • VERGOGNATEVI !!!

    IT IS A SHAME !!!

  • No, it isn't. People occupy less than 10% of the habitable surface of the planet.

  • this is to sad to watch i hate this people need to find better ways to then to use animals and torture them iam sick after watching this to sad sorry i cant rate this

  • im pretty sure evry1 knows they wouldent like it or any1 else but they do it anyway becuse they know it will never come to that so y are u ppl still using the "how u feel if some1 did that to u" argument

  • Probably because it's a common sense argument.. too bad common sense doesn't pursuade the idiotic.