Those animal rights activists can volunteer for the tests in that case. It's a win-win scenario. They can save their precious rabbits and the rest of us can be rid of them and their unrealistic and immature nonsense.
If you want save animals, how about focusing on the endangered species, and not one that wouldn't go extinct even if there was a nuclear war.
Save animals that are important for the eco system, not one that solely exist to be prey for other animals.
Awesome I am going to take some pain killer now that I know helps me but probably was tested on these dumb rodents that are a walking meal in the wild and are eaten by every single predator you can think of.
You dumbasses don't see the big picture. There are very rabbits done in animal tests compared to the millions that die every day in the world from being brutally killed and eaten by predators.
Also, testing can save millions of human AND animal lives. It's for a good cause. It will remain.
You know, the music for the second one really isn't nice. You could've used something more caring, gentle and considerate instead of heavy metal. It's actually disturbing.
The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965
Medical science has advanced tremendously through the use of animal testing. That is a fact everybody but you already knows. I blame the school system. I could understand if you argued that your life was worth no more than a rabbit, but trying to convince me that med reaserch through animal teasting has produced no result is an insult .
testing animals to see what helps humans sounds good. however, cosmetics seem like too vain a cause to put mass population of animals or humans at risk.
An article published in The Lancet in 2004, also shows how retroviral transfer from primates to hunters is still occurring even today. In a sample of 1099 individuals in Cameroon , they discovered ten (1%) were infected with SFV (Simian Foamy Virus), an illness which, like SIV, was previously thought only to infect primates. All these infections were believed to have been acquired through the butchering and consumption of monkey and ape meat
@noratmedicine In February 1999 a group of researchers from the University of Alabama announced that they had found a type of SIVcpz that was almost identical to HIV-1. This particular strain was identified in a frozen sample taken from a captive member of the sub-group of chimpanzees. The researchers (led by Paul Sharp of Nottingham University and Beatrice Hahn of the University of Alabama) made the discovery during the course of a 10-year long study into the origins of the virus.
@o0lBobl0o teh deceptively appealing aspect of animal experiments is that they produce similarities now and then which gives hope re. a cure for a human disease. The fact that this occurred in 1999 and 12 years later AIDS is not cured is a telling aspect of discovery.
Albert Sabin made a superior "live" vaccine by passing the polio virus through animal hosts, including monkeys.
The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965.
It has been estimated that 100,000 Rhesus monkeys were killed in the course of developing the polio vaccines, and 65 doses of vaccine were produced for each monkey
@o0lBobl0o...Though the vaccine could have been produced from human tissue, convention prevailed and manufacturers opted to use monkey tissue instead. Containing the live virus, the animal-based vaccine infected 204 people with polio and resulted in 11 documented deaths. It also resulted in at least one virus (SV4O) jumping the species barrier and infecting humans.
Because of that, the polio vaccine is now grown in human diploid-cell culture rather than animal tissue.
12.Sabin, Albert, MD statement before the subcommittee on Hospitals and Health Care, Committee on Veterans Affairs, House of Representatives, April 26, 1984 serial no. 98-48.
Finally, in 1949, Nobel Prize winner John Enders paved the way for a vaccine by growing the virus in tissue cultures. Science 199, vol. 109: p85-87
In 1941, Dr. Albert Sabin studied human autopsies to finally disprove the nasal theory. He found the virus confined to the gastrointestinal tract, as had been documented nearly 30 years earlier.
Sabin later denounced the monkey model blunder:
"... prevention was long delayed by the erroneous conception of the nature of the human disease based on misleading experimental models of the disease in monkeys."
It was abandoned. Further animal experimentation led to the development of a nasal treatment, which only caused permanent olfactory damage to the children tested. [10-11]
10.Sabin, Albert, in JAMA1965;194(8):872-876.
11.Parish H.J., Victory with Vaccines, E.&.S Livingston, LTD, 1968.
But because monkeys contract polio nasally rather than orally, this "triumph" only postponed the development of an effective vaccine for decades. Incredibly, the scientists working on the vaccine chose to ignore the human digestive data in favour of the monkey data! It is true that a "vaccine" was derived from animal experimentation. But manufactured from monkey tissue, this "cure" resulted in six human deaths and 12 cases of paralysis.[9]9.Develop Biol Standard1980:45:163-173.
When polio first appeared around 1835, it rapidly paralysed and killed its victims. In 1908, a virus was suspected and scientists began working on a vaccine. Note: In developing vaccines, it's crucial to determine how the infection enters the body. Luckily, pathologists discovered the polio virus in human intestines as early as 1912, suggesting entrance through the digestive tract.
Meanwhile, researchers successfully infected monkeys with polio.
@o0lBobl0o So you can see that by leaving out important details a very different (positive) impression can be made re. animal exp. contribution to human med. than was in fact the case. same applies for other claims. As animal exp. have occured in every area of med. these claims can alwatys be made
@noratmedicine Between 1840 and the 1950s, polio was a worldwide epidemic. Since the development of polio vaccines, the incidence of the disease has been greatly reduced. Polio has been wiped out in a number of countries. There have been very few cases of polio in the Western hemisphere since the late 1970s. Children in the United States are now routinely vaccinated against the disease.
So you can see how animal testing has saved millions.
@noratmedicine I see you grasping straws . The fact is that billions have been helped through animal testing. You have been helped through animal testing. If you want to save the rabbits starve yourself to death. Anything less is just you justifying you own evil, by pretending your against it.
@o0lBobl0o By 'grasping straws' do you mean quoting Dr A Sabin speaking to US House of Representatives and quoted in the Journal of the American Medical Association and other referenced evidence?
@noratmedicine We could argue all night, but we both know (1) It doesn't matter how we torture, and kill the little bunnies. The point is that we do. So force fed geese, or chemical injected eggs. It's all the same. We are a horror show for the little bunny rabbits. (2) The only solution is less us. We can end medicine, and farming, and just politely starve to death, or forget about the bunnies.
@o0lBobl0o No, the solution is real science not animal experiments. Specifically it is truth prevailing over profits. You still ahve not shown how humans benefit from aimal experiments. Less toxic and more efficacious medicine woudl result, the real problem is that as drugs cause side effects over 99% of the time removing animal phase would remove the legal device co's rely on to say in court 'we didn't knwo it would kill humans because the animal tests did not show that'
Again, if polio is eliminated it is due to the elimination of diseases causing conditions (hygeine), secondlay the references info i presented shows that as always the use of animals was counterproductive
@noratmedicine "if polio is eliminated it is due to the elimination of diseases causing conditions (hygeine)," The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965.
"In USA today the only cause of polio is the oral polio vaccine routinely administered to infants in society's drive to rid the nation of the disease." Los Angeles Times staff-writer Bill Curry "Polio War Renewed Controversy", Los Angeles Times, July 1 1985 Peter Radetsky, on page 98 of the N.Z. Listener, October 29 1990, in an article titled "The Polio Problem" let slip:
"Every one of the handful of polio cases each year in the United States is caused by the vaccine itself."
In the 1940s, Jonas Salk used Rhesus monkey cross-contamination studies to isolate the three forms of the polio virus that affected hundreds of thousands yearly. Salk's team created a vaccine against the strains of polio in cell cultures of Rhesus monkey kidney cells. The vaccine was made publicly available in 1955, and reduced the incidence of polio 15-fold in the USA over the following five years.
People march around with a wood and paper sign that says save the trees. hahaha. If you want to save a tree quit wiping your butt. You can save several trees all by yourself. If you don't stop wiping your butt you are the cause of the destruction, so you can stay home, and protest yourself.
The people who do this to animals should be lined up and used as test subjects instead. I would recommend it- we'd probably have more of them than we do with animals - enough with "human rights" if anyone had to do this for a living they would no longer BE human.
# "As an ophthalmologist in the New York University I am surprised that the Draize eye irritation test is done at all... I know of no case in which an ophthalmologist found Draize data useful."
(Stephen Kaufman, M.D., New York.)
# "The results of these tests are of no use to physicians."
I think extreme Hypocrisy should be against the law. If you get out of your suv to protest smoking on the beach you should be jailed. If you go to the Dr he should make you kill a kitten before he sees you, so you can't understand what it takes to train the Dr's, and make medicine that your hypocritical will need to get well.
@o0lBobl0o Actually animal experiments are not helping us, just the opposite...The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn’t work in humans. Dr Richard Klausner, Director, National Cancer Institute, LA Times, May 6. 1998
@noratmedicine Do you know where every diabetic on earth would be if not for animal testing. I don't think you realize the plethora of vital medical procedures, medicines, and treatments that owe their existence to animal testing. Cancer is just one of the great number of diseases of people that animal testing cures. chemotherapy, flu, smallpox, cholera, anthrax, plague, and antibiotics. Thank you mister rabbit. Next time you're watching food network think about that.
@o0lBobl0o Re diabetics, they woudl be a lot better off.... Ill start with cancer though...The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn’t work in humans. Dr Richard Klausner, Director, National Cancer Institute, LA Times, May 6.1998
My own medical perspective is that animal cancer research should be regarded as the scientific equivalent of gossip – with about the same chance of turning out to be true, i.e. truly effective in humans. Some gossip turns out to be true, but most of it does not…and gossip can cause great anguish for those affected, in this case millions of desperate cancer patients worldwide. G. Timothy Johnson MD, Boston Globe, May 22.1998
@o0lBobl0o re chemotherapy...The US National Cancer Institute treated mice growing 48 different "human" cancers with a dozen different drugs proven successful in humans, and in 30 of the cases, the drugs were useless in mice. Almost two-thirds of the mouse models were wrong. Animal experimentation is not scientific because it is not predictive.
Handbook of Laboratory Animal Science, Volume II Animal Models Svendensen and Hau (Eds.) CRC Press 1994 p4."
Diabetes/insulin...re abnting and best dog experiments...
"... a wrongly conceived, wrongly conducted, and wrongly interpreted series of experiments."
(Dr F. Roberts, "Insulin", BMJ, 1922.)
"The scientists Banting and Best were incorrectly credited with the discovery of insulin."
(Dr M. Barron, "The Relation of the Islets of Langerhans Diabetes with Special Reference to Cases of Pancreatic Lithiasis", Surgery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 5/11/20.)
"Unfortunately, the condition of a dog with a small but healthy part of his pancreas left is essentially different from that of a person suffering from diabetes... in human diabetes two factors are present:
an essentially progressive lesion absent in experimental animals; and
the detrimental effect of improper diet."
(Hugh MacLean, M.D., D.Sc., Lancet, May 26 1923, page 1043.)
"There is no laboratory method of inducing diabetes... which is exactly comparable to the clinical condition. At best we can get only crude approximations. The dangers of arguing from one species to another, or even from one strain to another of the same species are certainly not to be neglected."
(Dr F.G. Young, Professor of Biochemistry at the University of London, Lancet, December 18 1948, pages 955-956.)
"Dr Banting, Canada's medical hero, who is popularly and erroneously credited with the discovery of insulin by extirpating the pancreases of thousands of dogs, did not cause diabetes, but stress."
(J.A. Pratt, "A Reappraisal of Research Leading to the Discovery of Insulin", Journal of the History of Medicine, Vol. 9, 1954, pages 281-289.)
"The causes of diabetes mellitus remains unknown in both man and animals. In spite of certain species similarities, there are a number of important differences - differences in clinical manifestation, in aetological factors and in the liability to certain long-term complications of the disease."
(Dr Harry Keen, BSc, M.R.C.P., "Spontaneous Diabetes in Man and Animals", Veterinary Record, July 9 1960, page 557.)
"At the CIBA Foundation, London, on 3 July, Prof. Houssay reviewed his group's work on the influence of sex hormones on the incidence and severity of experimental diabetes in the rat: but first warned his audience not to accept the results for other animals or for humans."
@o0lBobl0o "Many points of great interest emerge from their studies. Here is an example of how a technique adapted for a particular study may be usefully turned onto another. Here also is a striking example of species difference in tissue metabolism, and yet another warning against uncritically extending the conclusions of animal experiments to man."
(Leading article on "Insulin and the Heart", British Medical Journal, September 24 1955, page 780.)
re medicine...According to the US FDA 92% of new drugs fail in clinical trials, after they have passed all the safety tests in animals. US FDA (2004) "Innovation or Stagnation, Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to new Medical Products"
smallpox..." In the 21 years ended December 1958, only a little more than one-third of the children born in England and Wales were vaccinated for smallpox, yet only two children aged under five years died of smallpox but of the one-third vaccinated, 91 were killed by vaccination."
(Replies of Minister of Health in Parliament and Ministry of Health Reports.)
In the Philippines between 1918 and 1919, 112,549 cases of smallpox were notified with 60,855 deaths. Vaccination programmes had been introduced in 1905 after which deaths from the disease increased alarmingly. Their records comment that:
@o0lBobl0o "From 1936 to 1962, two-thirds of the children born in England and Wales were unvaccinated: of these, 4, under the age of 5, died of smallpox. Of the vaccinated group, 86, under the age of 5 were killed by the vaccination and many more seriously injured."
@noratmedicine And what are the statistics in say Central America. Smallpox has nearly been wiped out because of the vaccine. Not to mention polio and a million other diseases. So while billions sit at a table to eat a cute little animal there are a few animals who's life will mean so much more in past research, and future treatments that save millions everyday. If you feel that strongly then stop going to the Dr. When you get sick just die, and save an animal.
@o0lBobl0o polio research was delayed by 29 years as monkeys get it via respiratory system and humans via digestive system as quote from sabin indicates. smallpox will be eradicated from third world countries as clean water, food, sewerage and trubbish removal are provided, not by the vaccine. and anyway animals are not needed to create vaccines.
@o0lBobl0o what ahppens when animal ingredients are used in huamn vaccines..."the animal-based vaccine infected 204 people with polio and resulted in 11 documented deaths. It also resulted in at least one virus (SV4O) jumping the species barrier and infecting humans.
Because of that, the polio vaccine is now grown in human diploid-cell culture rather than animal tissue."
@o0lBobl0o despite a 250,000 pound prize offerred by professor vernon coleman and with their reputations on the line vivisectors could not even find 1 person whose life had been saved as a direct result of animal experiments. see vernoncoleman. com/viv115.htm
secondly, as the referenced info shows the use of animals was counterproductive for polio. the devil is in the detail for vivisectors (no doubt youwill ignore that though)
re 'a million other diseases' please tell me any eliminated by animal experiments. Look at the quotes rpovided re. smallpox, they do not indicate that it was eradicated by vaccines, just the opposite
Your comments completely ignore the evidence i have provided which would lead to the opposite conclusion.
"I thought it was just a coincidence until we studied the latest findings about the reactions which can be caused by vaccination. Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation to the explosion of AIDS."
"The degree of AIDS occurrence in Zaire, Zambia, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Rwanda, Burundi, Brazil and Haiti coincides with the degree of smallpox vaccination intensity."
@noratmedicine MONDAY, May 17 2010 (HealthDay News) -- Vaccination with the smallpox vaccine called "vaccinia" may boost a person's ability to resist infection with HIV, new research suggests.
"Dr. Charles Henry Kempe, University of Colorado. After a 20-year study, Dr. Kempe recommends abolishing smallpox vaccination. Since 1948 there have been no deaths from smallpox in the United States. In the same period more than 300 persons have died from smallpox vaccinations, including vaccine-induced encephalitis."
cholera..."The relative failure of conventional vaccine in dealing with the cholera pandemic now sweeping the world has nurtured the idea that the best way to control the disease is by improving water supplies and sanitation. This is how it was eradicated in most developed countries before a vaccine was available.
"It's a well-guarded secret that the vaccination against cholera is ineffective. Rather than waste the effort, a number of doctors will simply stamp your card as having received it."
(Peter Turner, West Africa A Travel Survival Kit (Facts for the Visitor), Lonely Planet Series, PO Box 88, South Yarra, Victoria 3141, Australia.)
antibiotics...all 3 nobel prize winners for penicillin, our most important medicine condemned animal experiments...Flemming himself:
How fortunate we didn’t have these animal tests in the 1940’s, for penicillin would probably never been granted a license, and possibly the whole field of antibiotics might never have been realized. [7]
Mice were used in the initial toxicity tests [by Florey and Chain] because of their small size, but what a lucky chance it was, for in this respect man is like the mouse and not the guinea-pig. If we had used guinea-pigs exclusively we should have said that penicillin was toxic, and we probably should not have proceeded to
try and overcome the difficulties of producing the substance for trial in man.
Nobel Prize winner (penicillin) Sir Ernst Boris Chain, under oath at a hearing investigating the Thalidomide tragedy, said, “No animal experiment with a medicament, even if it is carried out on several animal species including primates under all conceivable conditions, can give any guarantee that the medicament tested in this way will behave in the same way in humans; because in many respects the human is not the same as the animal”.
"After intensive study of the issue, I am convinced that the Draize eye irritancy and the Lethal Dose 50 tests are inaccurate, unreliable, costly and cruel to the animals. The tests deceive the very consumers whom they are supposed to protect, by certifying as SAFE household products and cosmetics that cause two hundred thousand hospital-recorded poisonous exposures annually."
"As a practising physician who is Board certified in internal medicine and oncology, I can find no evidence that the Draize test, L.D. 50 test, or any other tests using animals to support the 'safety' of chemicals and cosmetics have any relevance to the human species. I strongly support legislation that prohibits the use of such animal tests by industry."
British company Pharmagene (now Asterand) uses human tissue exclusively, with the philosophy "a flood of new data on human genetics is making drug research in animals redundant. If you have information on human genes, what's the point in going back to animals?" (35)ref: Coghlan, A. New Scientist, 31st August 1996.
i thought they only tested on mice and rats,, why do they need bunnies,, that is so cruel,, some of them weren't even in cages they got locked up by the neck,,, they could show some respect if they're experimenting on them (which is totally horrible)
Testing on rabbits is good. Rabbits shoot out like 50 babies a year RETARDS. If we didn't hunt, trap, and test on them you'd have to drive over like 20 every time you go to work you guys are just stupid. Oh yeah I just skinned, gutted, and packaged my deer. Nothing can beat good venison. Or maybe tofu can! ILUVTOFU ROLMOA!
if these tests are done to give humans better lives then why not test on "Willing humans" isnt that where it all ends up anyways Animals have no say in the matter Research on whats done to lab animals in the name of science? Rbts with burned band around their abdomns, burning their eyes with chemicals having no purpose in their research.
@blondemax "After intensive study of the issue, I am convinced that the Draize eye irritancy and the Lethal Dose 50 tests are inaccurate, unreliable, costly and cruel to the animals. The tests deceive the very consumers whom they are supposed to protect, by certifying as SAFE household products and cosmetics that cause two hundred thousand hospital-recorded poisonous exposures annually."
@blondemax You said "would you allow your mother to be injected with a substance that had only gone through a "computer simulation"?"As animal 'tests' do not work I would allow valid tests such as Eyetex.# "The results of these tests are of no use to physicians."
(Sandra Davies, M.D., Columbia, Maryland.)
# "The results of these (animal) tests cannot be used to predict toxicity or to guide therapy in human exposure."
(Christopher D. Smith, M.D., Longbeach, California.)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I think the people who disapprove of these tests are the ones that should burn in hell not the scientists some of these people like PETA are just sick
150,000 HUMANS die every day some of these deaths can be prevented from studies like this I think one human life is worth all the rabbits in the world to suffer it's a necessary terrible sacrifice to something grater
@VincentReaper These 'studies' cause most human deaths..."More than 10,000 people are killed every year in the UK by side effects of prescription medicines (32) - now the fourth biggest killer in the western world (33). The US figure is over 100,000 (33)". ref ;Lazarou, J and colleagues. Journal of the American Medical Association (1998) 279: 1200-5.
You have so many fucking problems. You should go burn in hell with all the other heartless assholes who kill hundreds of animals to make your life a few years longer. Fuck. You.
Yeah and if you say someone should go to hell, I think you know something about God and God says we should value human life over animals retard. GO DNR
granted Yes, there are better way to do things now, sometimes you cannot do anything but animal testing. it is a part of science and discovering things... same as plant testing.. they are now finding out plants emit distress signals when harmed by various agents... do you want us to stop hurting the plants to and just die off? I know I am gonna get thumbs down for this but seriously people.... you have to stop and think a bit, not just "feel" for everything.
Just wanted to add a quick comment to this, as i think he's got a point but misses one entirely. The thing is, the body is a very complex thing, and it's nearly impossible to foresee what will happen once you inject fx. a drug. There is alternatives, but none that ensures the same safety as animal testing, and certainly not as cheap. Animal testing can be stopped, but it will be at an increased price of medicine, and it will cost human life - sooner or later.
Who gives a fuck about the bloody rabbits? If testing on cadavers etc was as cheap and easy as you say, then wouldn't all companies do that? Obviously animal testing is better or they wouldn't be doing it.
Ya know, how'd you like it if they put you in a cage and did all that to you? You wouldn't like it one bit. Oh, but these poor innocent rabbits... they love it, it's fun.
They look cute. Until you take one home and it poops on your carpet EVERY 2 MINUTES!!! (Yes it is true, they do that. They also reproduce like crazy. (2 a month =O))
What do you mean? God gave us rabbits to experiment on! That is obvious.blu-blu-blu......
NO WAY!!! I LOVE RABBITS AND THOSE WHO THINK THAT BEING LABRATS IS THEIR DESTINY, THEY SHOULD TEST THE EFFECT OF POISON OR DRUGS ON THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who out there says that animals have rights but takes medication for their health? Even vitamins? These meds have to go through animal testing. So what we do? Stop all medical tests on animals, which, therefore, halts medical progression? Should we not have studied the squid giant axons, which answered the question of action potentials and yielded a wealth of knowledge on neuropathologies? Squid are equivalent to rabbits, probably smarter. Who has a better idea of medical progression?
...Where exactly on this page does it say its okay to test on all other animals... I was having difficulty finding it. Do you know why? OH YEAH BECAUSE THIS IS A PAGE ABOUT BUNNIES!!!! You can look at alot of other ones about other animals but this one happens to be dedicated to bunnies. Im sure the person that created this page and those who visit it dont wish it upon other animals they just are singling out bunnies they get the bulk of cosmetic testing take your head out of your ass for a sec
Is that how you express yourself? Nice happy music for the nice happy rabbits, pathetic boy-band knob-jockeys for the "not so happy" rabbits? How do you know those rabbits are unhappy? Maybe they like pain. I have 2 rabbits and I love them dearly. Does that mean I care about all rabbits? No. Do you care about all humans? Hitler perhaps? Animal testing is merely an amusing vignette in an eternity of suffering. Hypocrites like you make me sick. Go bury your head in the sand.
Okay woah dude back up happy music, boy bands, bunnies, pain, your bunnies, humans, hitler, vignette (any small, pleasing picture or view in a book), suffering,... sand. Is it just me or are you kinda gettin of topic here sweety... Last time i checked this was about cruel testing on bunnies and wtf do you mean by how do we know that they are unhappy... Are you dumb or do you just do multiple stupid things in one day (that fucked up comment you left and saying how do we know they are unhappy)
I'm sorry but there is no other way, despite what groups like PETA tells. The simulations we have are extreamly limited, cadavers are dead and can't be used to model drug effects or interactions. I realize you don't like it but with it out we wouldn't have most of the medical technology we have today.
These are not viable alternatives. The human body is a complex biochemical system with numerous metabolic processes. All of the test you've listed can only be used to test a single stage in the metabolic pathway (if that), and aren't even interconnected.
This is so sad. Today I was at the petshop buying hamsters and there was a rabbit that looked like those white ones, and it reminded me of that. I cried for those rabbits and in happiness that the rabbit I saw was perfect and happy and was in a petshop and probably had a good family by now. -sob-
i love this and i go to caring consumer heaps an heaps coz i cant remember which ones arent and is lol. i do my best to buy non animal products like m and m's and skittles.
alot of people dont care because its not them getting hurt. But animals have feelings too! It made me cry the poor little bunnies dont deserve such cruel treatment!
Continued: Since Noxzema is an acne prevention product it is considered a drug by the FDA and animal testing is required. Same for Head and Shoulders, it is a dandruff prevention product, which is considered a drug as well. Does PG contract out animal testing? If so all it is is outsourcing and does not keep their hands clean. NICE TRY.
Continued: Also, there are recent, well if you consider the 90s recent still, advances in pregnancy tests called enzyme testing that do not use animals in order to make the tests. THERE IS NO REASON TO USE ANIMALS TO MAKE A PREGNANCY TESTS ANYMORE!!!!
What about the testing that PG did on rats back in the 90s to show that Crest was better than Enamelon in France at a conference where the rats were killed?
the only contact PG has had with rabbit, testing was the removal of an(one) ovary, rabbit,(the rabbit lived)This was for the manufacture of pregnancy testing kits. whoever does the testing you show doesn't belong to PG. testing of that sort has always! be banned at PG, from the top. to the bottom, the bad part is every one knows this. the test you claim are done by PG are done by other companies. (PG uses cell reaction technology, not overt testing on humans or animals).
scary video, l thought alot of this had stopped. l'm sure l checked out proctor and gamble once before and they actually produce alot of the bunny food, cat litter and so on. not sure if thats still the case though
it would surprise you what all thats put in our food, notice cancer is becoming more common ? I can imagine an animal was used to test them.
I did a search on animal testing + I was disgusted. Did you know that Beagles are 1st choice for animal (dog) testing ? Basset hounds too, but so are animals in your local SPCA's. Its sickening. Adopting a surrendered/abused/rejected animal from there only to cause it useless, extreme painful test s on it. Hows that for the ultimate end ?
you are right !! If not Oprah, why not Dr Phil ? Animal abuse is an unacceptable behavior of some people. And it should be more out in the open !!! I think Oprah has a show suggestion email doesn't she ? maybe some of the other celebs do too. Or do a search on celebs who are against animal abuse. Try PETA they usually mention the celebs. Awesome vid !!!
awesome message !!! I totally share the same feelings with animal testing. Funny thing, I have seen most of these rabbit testing pics on net. Its disgusting. Have you ever checked on what they do to the old greyhound racing dogs ?
your right but we have to accept there are insenstive jerks in this world... who thinks animals are "its" and dont have names and arent worth it but eventually itll stop
we need to stop those bitches... sorry i dont usally curse but i like animals alot as soon as i saw this i wanted to get all 6 of my rabbits and watch over them
hi...one more thing i did is email oprah today, and beg her producers to spread the word to the world..and i emailed her your video...let's wait and see if she'll do anything!!
this is why i have joined peta, and any other non-cruel animal group there is...and am becoming a vegetarian, too..thanks for the list of compannies that don't test on animals..what if humans were tested for animal products?!!!
Those animal rights activists can volunteer for the tests in that case. It's a win-win scenario. They can save their precious rabbits and the rest of us can be rid of them and their unrealistic and immature nonsense.
If you want save animals, how about focusing on the endangered species, and not one that wouldn't go extinct even if there was a nuclear war.
Save animals that are important for the eco system, not one that solely exist to be prey for other animals.
McLarenMercedes 1 month ago
Awesome I am going to take some pain killer now that I know helps me but probably was tested on these dumb rodents that are a walking meal in the wild and are eaten by every single predator you can think of.
You dumbasses don't see the big picture. There are very rabbits done in animal tests compared to the millions that die every day in the world from being brutally killed and eaten by predators.
Also, testing can save millions of human AND animal lives. It's for a good cause. It will remain.
WASPTexas 1 month ago
You know, the music for the second one really isn't nice. You could've used something more caring, gentle and considerate instead of heavy metal. It's actually disturbing.
MrsCrazyForSmarties 3 months ago
اي لايك ذيس فيديو
DHOM44 10 months ago
will you volunteer?
kuwaizair 11 months ago
The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965
Medical science has advanced tremendously through the use of animal testing. That is a fact everybody but you already knows. I blame the school system. I could understand if you argued that your life was worth no more than a rabbit, but trying to convince me that med reaserch through animal teasting has produced no result is an insult .
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
testing animals to see what helps humans sounds good. however, cosmetics seem like too vain a cause to put mass population of animals or humans at risk.
DiggityDoglikeDogg 1 year ago
An article published in The Lancet in 2004, also shows how retroviral transfer from primates to hunters is still occurring even today. In a sample of 1099 individuals in Cameroon , they discovered ten (1%) were infected with SFV (Simian Foamy Virus), an illness which, like SIV, was previously thought only to infect primates. All these infections were believed to have been acquired through the butchering and consumption of monkey and ape meat
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o This may be so but it is of little value to haumsn. 30 years of priamte research still hasn't produced a single monkey model of aids
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine In February 1999 a group of researchers from the University of Alabama announced that they had found a type of SIVcpz that was almost identical to HIV-1. This particular strain was identified in a frozen sample taken from a captive member of the sub-group of chimpanzees. The researchers (led by Paul Sharp of Nottingham University and Beatrice Hahn of the University of Alabama) made the discovery during the course of a 10-year long study into the origins of the virus.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o teh deceptively appealing aspect of animal experiments is that they produce similarities now and then which gives hope re. a cure for a human disease. The fact that this occurred in 1999 and 12 years later AIDS is not cured is a telling aspect of discovery.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Albert Sabin made a superior "live" vaccine by passing the polio virus through animal hosts, including monkeys.
The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965.
It has been estimated that 100,000 Rhesus monkeys were killed in the course of developing the polio vaccines, and 65 doses of vaccine were produced for each monkey
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o...Though the vaccine could have been produced from human tissue, convention prevailed and manufacturers opted to use monkey tissue instead. Containing the live virus, the animal-based vaccine infected 204 people with polio and resulted in 11 documented deaths. It also resulted in at least one virus (SV4O) jumping the species barrier and infecting humans.
Because of that, the polio vaccine is now grown in human diploid-cell culture rather than animal tissue.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o
12.Sabin, Albert, MD statement before the subcommittee on Hospitals and Health Care, Committee on Veterans Affairs, House of Representatives, April 26, 1984 serial no. 98-48.
Finally, in 1949, Nobel Prize winner John Enders paved the way for a vaccine by growing the virus in tissue cultures. Science 199, vol. 109: p85-87
noratmedicine 1 year ago
In 1941, Dr. Albert Sabin studied human autopsies to finally disprove the nasal theory. He found the virus confined to the gastrointestinal tract, as had been documented nearly 30 years earlier.
Sabin later denounced the monkey model blunder:
"... prevention was long delayed by the erroneous conception of the nature of the human disease based on misleading experimental models of the disease in monkeys."
noratmedicine 1 year ago
It was abandoned. Further animal experimentation led to the development of a nasal treatment, which only caused permanent olfactory damage to the children tested. [10-11]
10.Sabin, Albert, in JAMA1965;194(8):872-876.
11.Parish H.J., Victory with Vaccines, E.&.S Livingston, LTD, 1968.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
But because monkeys contract polio nasally rather than orally, this "triumph" only postponed the development of an effective vaccine for decades. Incredibly, the scientists working on the vaccine chose to ignore the human digestive data in favour of the monkey data! It is true that a "vaccine" was derived from animal experimentation. But manufactured from monkey tissue, this "cure" resulted in six human deaths and 12 cases of paralysis.[9]9.Develop Biol Standard1980:45:163-173.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
When polio first appeared around 1835, it rapidly paralysed and killed its victims. In 1908, a virus was suspected and scientists began working on a vaccine. Note: In developing vaccines, it's crucial to determine how the infection enters the body. Luckily, pathologists discovered the polio virus in human intestines as early as 1912, suggesting entrance through the digestive tract.
Meanwhile, researchers successfully infected monkeys with polio.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o So you can see that by leaving out important details a very different (positive) impression can be made re. animal exp. contribution to human med. than was in fact the case. same applies for other claims. As animal exp. have occured in every area of med. these claims can alwatys be made
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine Between 1840 and the 1950s, polio was a worldwide epidemic. Since the development of polio vaccines, the incidence of the disease has been greatly reduced. Polio has been wiped out in a number of countries. There have been very few cases of polio in the Western hemisphere since the late 1970s. Children in the United States are now routinely vaccinated against the disease.
So you can see how animal testing has saved millions.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o look at tyhe references info i just provided. as you can see use of animals was counterproductive for the polio vax even if it did work
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine I see you grasping straws . The fact is that billions have been helped through animal testing. You have been helped through animal testing. If you want to save the rabbits starve yourself to death. Anything less is just you justifying you own evil, by pretending your against it.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o By 'grasping straws' do you mean quoting Dr A Sabin speaking to US House of Representatives and quoted in the Journal of the American Medical Association and other referenced evidence?
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine We could argue all night, but we both know (1) It doesn't matter how we torture, and kill the little bunnies. The point is that we do. So force fed geese, or chemical injected eggs. It's all the same. We are a horror show for the little bunny rabbits. (2) The only solution is less us. We can end medicine, and farming, and just politely starve to death, or forget about the bunnies.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o No, the solution is real science not animal experiments. Specifically it is truth prevailing over profits. You still ahve not shown how humans benefit from aimal experiments. Less toxic and more efficacious medicine woudl result, the real problem is that as drugs cause side effects over 99% of the time removing animal phase would remove the legal device co's rely on to say in court 'we didn't knwo it would kill humans because the animal tests did not show that'
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Again, if polio is eliminated it is due to the elimination of diseases causing conditions (hygeine), secondlay the references info i presented shows that as always the use of animals was counterproductive
noratmedicine 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@noratmedicine "if polio is eliminated it is due to the elimination of diseases causing conditions (hygeine)," The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the USA by 1965.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o
"In USA today the only cause of polio is the oral polio vaccine routinely administered to infants in society's drive to rid the nation of the disease." Los Angeles Times staff-writer Bill Curry "Polio War Renewed Controversy", Los Angeles Times, July 1 1985 Peter Radetsky, on page 98 of the N.Z. Listener, October 29 1990, in an article titled "The Polio Problem" let slip:
"Every one of the handful of polio cases each year in the United States is caused by the vaccine itself."
noratmedicine 1 year ago
In the 1940s, Jonas Salk used Rhesus monkey cross-contamination studies to isolate the three forms of the polio virus that affected hundreds of thousands yearly. Salk's team created a vaccine against the strains of polio in cell cultures of Rhesus monkey kidney cells. The vaccine was made publicly available in 1955, and reduced the incidence of polio 15-fold in the USA over the following five years.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
People march around with a wood and paper sign that says save the trees. hahaha. If you want to save a tree quit wiping your butt. You can save several trees all by yourself. If you don't stop wiping your butt you are the cause of the destruction, so you can stay home, and protest yourself.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
please see choose cruelty free and humane seal to avoid animal tested products and research. harmful to animals and us
noratmedicine 1 year ago
The people who do this to animals should be lined up and used as test subjects instead. I would recommend it- we'd probably have more of them than we do with animals - enough with "human rights" if anyone had to do this for a living they would no longer BE human.
fivefordying2 1 year ago
# "As an ophthalmologist in the New York University I am surprised that the Draize eye irritation test is done at all... I know of no case in which an ophthalmologist found Draize data useful."
(Stephen Kaufman, M.D., New York.)
# "The results of these tests are of no use to physicians."
(Sandra Davies, M.D., Columbia, Maryland.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
I think extreme Hypocrisy should be against the law. If you get out of your suv to protest smoking on the beach you should be jailed. If you go to the Dr he should make you kill a kitten before he sees you, so you can't understand what it takes to train the Dr's, and make medicine that your hypocritical will need to get well.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o Actually animal experiments are not helping us, just the opposite...The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn’t work in humans. Dr Richard Klausner, Director, National Cancer Institute, LA Times, May 6. 1998
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine Do you know where every diabetic on earth would be if not for animal testing. I don't think you realize the plethora of vital medical procedures, medicines, and treatments that owe their existence to animal testing. Cancer is just one of the great number of diseases of people that animal testing cures. chemotherapy, flu, smallpox, cholera, anthrax, plague, and antibiotics. Thank you mister rabbit. Next time you're watching food network think about that.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@o0lBobl0o Re diabetics, they woudl be a lot better off.... Ill start with cancer though...The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn’t work in humans. Dr Richard Klausner, Director, National Cancer Institute, LA Times, May 6.1998
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o 1998
My own medical perspective is that animal cancer research should be regarded as the scientific equivalent of gossip – with about the same chance of turning out to be true, i.e. truly effective in humans. Some gossip turns out to be true, but most of it does not…and gossip can cause great anguish for those affected, in this case millions of desperate cancer patients worldwide. G. Timothy Johnson MD, Boston Globe, May 22.1998
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o re chemotherapy...The US National Cancer Institute treated mice growing 48 different "human" cancers with a dozen different drugs proven successful in humans, and in 30 of the cases, the drugs were useless in mice. Almost two-thirds of the mouse models were wrong. Animal experimentation is not scientific because it is not predictive.
Handbook of Laboratory Animal Science, Volume II Animal Models Svendensen and Hau (Eds.) CRC Press 1994 p4."
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Diabetes/insulin...re abnting and best dog experiments...
"... a wrongly conceived, wrongly conducted, and wrongly interpreted series of experiments."
(Dr F. Roberts, "Insulin", BMJ, 1922.)
"The scientists Banting and Best were incorrectly credited with the discovery of insulin."
(Dr M. Barron, "The Relation of the Islets of Langerhans Diabetes with Special Reference to Cases of Pancreatic Lithiasis", Surgery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 5/11/20.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"Unfortunately, the condition of a dog with a small but healthy part of his pancreas left is essentially different from that of a person suffering from diabetes... in human diabetes two factors are present:
an essentially progressive lesion absent in experimental animals; and
the detrimental effect of improper diet."
(Hugh MacLean, M.D., D.Sc., Lancet, May 26 1923, page 1043.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"There is no laboratory method of inducing diabetes... which is exactly comparable to the clinical condition. At best we can get only crude approximations. The dangers of arguing from one species to another, or even from one strain to another of the same species are certainly not to be neglected."
(Dr F.G. Young, Professor of Biochemistry at the University of London, Lancet, December 18 1948, pages 955-956.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"Dr Banting, Canada's medical hero, who is popularly and erroneously credited with the discovery of insulin by extirpating the pancreases of thousands of dogs, did not cause diabetes, but stress."
(J.A. Pratt, "A Reappraisal of Research Leading to the Discovery of Insulin", Journal of the History of Medicine, Vol. 9, 1954, pages 281-289.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"Arguments based on the insulin requirements of the depancreatised dog and cat applied to human diabetes are quantitatively dangerous."
(Dr F. G. Young, D.Sc., PhD., F.R.S., British Medical Journal, November 17 1951, pages 1167-1168.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"The causes of diabetes mellitus remains unknown in both man and animals. In spite of certain species similarities, there are a number of important differences - differences in clinical manifestation, in aetological factors and in the liability to certain long-term complications of the disease."
(Dr Harry Keen, BSc, M.R.C.P., "Spontaneous Diabetes in Man and Animals", Veterinary Record, July 9 1960, page 557.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"At the CIBA Foundation, London, on 3 July, Prof. Houssay reviewed his group's work on the influence of sex hormones on the incidence and severity of experimental diabetes in the rat: but first warned his audience not to accept the results for other animals or for humans."
(Lancet, July 14 1951, page 70.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o "Many points of great interest emerge from their studies. Here is an example of how a technique adapted for a particular study may be usefully turned onto another. Here also is a striking example of species difference in tissue metabolism, and yet another warning against uncritically extending the conclusions of animal experiments to man."
(Leading article on "Insulin and the Heart", British Medical Journal, September 24 1955, page 780.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
re medicine...According to the US FDA 92% of new drugs fail in clinical trials, after they have passed all the safety tests in animals. US FDA (2004) "Innovation or Stagnation, Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to new Medical Products"
noratmedicine 1 year ago
flu..."The risk of suffering serious complications from the 'flu vaccines is far greater than the 'flu."
(Dr William Frosehauer, Scripps Howard News Service, November 5 1986.
The vaccine often gives people the flu and there is no evidence that it prevents it.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
smallpox..." In the 21 years ended December 1958, only a little more than one-third of the children born in England and Wales were vaccinated for smallpox, yet only two children aged under five years died of smallpox but of the one-third vaccinated, 91 were killed by vaccination."
(Replies of Minister of Health in Parliament and Ministry of Health Reports.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
In the Philippines between 1918 and 1919, 112,549 cases of smallpox were notified with 60,855 deaths. Vaccination programmes had been introduced in 1905 after which deaths from the disease increased alarmingly. Their records comment that:
"The mortality is hardly explainable."
(Hume, 1963.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o "From 1936 to 1962, two-thirds of the children born in England and Wales were unvaccinated: of these, 4, under the age of 5, died of smallpox. Of the vaccinated group, 86, under the age of 5 were killed by the vaccination and many more seriously injured."
(Hansard, February 1 1964.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine And what are the statistics in say Central America. Smallpox has nearly been wiped out because of the vaccine. Not to mention polio and a million other diseases. So while billions sit at a table to eat a cute little animal there are a few animals who's life will mean so much more in past research, and future treatments that save millions everyday. If you feel that strongly then stop going to the Dr. When you get sick just die, and save an animal.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o polio research was delayed by 29 years as monkeys get it via respiratory system and humans via digestive system as quote from sabin indicates. smallpox will be eradicated from third world countries as clean water, food, sewerage and trubbish removal are provided, not by the vaccine. and anyway animals are not needed to create vaccines.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine Not a single dose of vaccine has ever been made that does not have a direct relationship to an animal.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o what ahppens when animal ingredients are used in huamn vaccines..."the animal-based vaccine infected 204 people with polio and resulted in 11 documented deaths. It also resulted in at least one virus (SV4O) jumping the species barrier and infecting humans.
Because of that, the polio vaccine is now grown in human diploid-cell culture rather than animal tissue."
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine 204 people doesn't even knock a dent in the billions who benefit from animal testing.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
@o0lBobl0o despite a 250,000 pound prize offerred by professor vernon coleman and with their reputations on the line vivisectors could not even find 1 person whose life had been saved as a direct result of animal experiments. see vernoncoleman. com/viv115.htm
secondly, as the referenced info shows the use of animals was counterproductive for polio. the devil is in the detail for vivisectors (no doubt youwill ignore that though)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
re 'a million other diseases' please tell me any eliminated by animal experiments. Look at the quotes rpovided re. smallpox, they do not indicate that it was eradicated by vaccines, just the opposite
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Your comments completely ignore the evidence i have provided which would lead to the opposite conclusion.
"I thought it was just a coincidence until we studied the latest findings about the reactions which can be caused by vaccination. Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation to the explosion of AIDS."
(W.H.O. Advisor, The Times, May 2 1978.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"The degree of AIDS occurrence in Zaire, Zambia, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Rwanda, Burundi, Brazil and Haiti coincides with the degree of smallpox vaccination intensity."
(The Times, May 2 1987.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
@noratmedicine MONDAY, May 17 2010 (HealthDay News) -- Vaccination with the smallpox vaccine called "vaccinia" may boost a person's ability to resist infection with HIV, new research suggests.
o0lBobl0o 1 year ago
"Dr. Charles Henry Kempe, University of Colorado. After a 20-year study, Dr. Kempe recommends abolishing smallpox vaccination. Since 1948 there have been no deaths from smallpox in the United States. In the same period more than 300 persons have died from smallpox vaccinations, including vaccine-induced encephalitis."
(The Evening Bulletin, Philadelphia, May 7 1965.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
cholera..."The relative failure of conventional vaccine in dealing with the cholera pandemic now sweeping the world has nurtured the idea that the best way to control the disease is by improving water supplies and sanitation. This is how it was eradicated in most developed countries before a vaccine was available.
(New Scientist, May 20 1982.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's a well-guarded secret that the vaccination against cholera is ineffective. Rather than waste the effort, a number of doctors will simply stamp your card as having received it."
(Peter Turner, West Africa A Travel Survival Kit (Facts for the Visitor), Lonely Planet Series, PO Box 88, South Yarra, Victoria 3141, Australia.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
The
recent anthrax attacks in the US mail were initially not taken seriously enough because experiments on
monkeys showed the bacterium not to be fatal until 8-10,000 spores are inhaled. When people died from
much smaller doses it became apparent that this does not apply to humans.
curedisease. net/news/primate_inquiry_submission. pdf (remove spaces adn add w's)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
antibiotics...all 3 nobel prize winners for penicillin, our most important medicine condemned animal experiments...Flemming himself:
How fortunate we didn’t have these animal tests in the 1940’s, for penicillin would probably never been granted a license, and possibly the whole field of antibiotics might never have been realized. [7]
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Florey:
Mice were used in the initial toxicity tests [by Florey and Chain] because of their small size, but what a lucky chance it was, for in this respect man is like the mouse and not the guinea-pig. If we had used guinea-pigs exclusively we should have said that penicillin was toxic, and we probably should not have proceeded to
try and overcome the difficulties of producing the substance for trial in man.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Nobel Prize winner (penicillin) Sir Ernst Boris Chain, under oath at a hearing investigating the Thalidomide tragedy, said, “No animal experiment with a medicament, even if it is carried out on several animal species including primates under all conceivable conditions, can give any guarantee that the medicament tested in this way will behave in the same way in humans; because in many respects the human is not the same as the animal”.
noratmedicine 1 year ago
re plague, not sure what your claim is but it, like most infectious disease, is eliminated through hygeine
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Also, vaccines are safer if made without animals anyway
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"After intensive study of the issue, I am convinced that the Draize eye irritancy and the Lethal Dose 50 tests are inaccurate, unreliable, costly and cruel to the animals. The tests deceive the very consumers whom they are supposed to protect, by certifying as SAFE household products and cosmetics that cause two hundred thousand hospital-recorded poisonous exposures annually."
(Paula Kislak, D.V.M., Sherman Oaks, California.)
curedisease. net
noratmedicine 1 year ago
"As a practising physician who is Board certified in internal medicine and oncology, I can find no evidence that the Draize test, L.D. 50 test, or any other tests using animals to support the 'safety' of chemicals and cosmetics have any relevance to the human species. I strongly support legislation that prohibits the use of such animal tests by industry."
(Donald C. Doll, M.D., Columbia, Missouri, 1988.)
curedisease. net
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Fuck these companies and the people that are so greedy, they would do this to these poor creatures just for an extra dime.
ValkyereHowie 1 year ago
My friend Paula ( a chemist) left P&G in Mason ,Ohio because she could'nt stand
putting lipstick in the eyes of bunnies !
pemgolf 1 year ago
we must boycott those companies that test on animals. it shouldnt be that hard people
fobmastafob 1 year ago
British company Pharmagene (now Asterand) uses human tissue exclusively, with the philosophy "a flood of new data on human genetics is making drug research in animals redundant. If you have information on human genes, what's the point in going back to animals?" (35)ref: Coghlan, A. New Scientist, 31st August 1996.
curedisease. net
nomonkeymedforhumans 1 year ago
i thought they only tested on mice and rats,, why do they need bunnies,, that is so cruel,, some of them weren't even in cages they got locked up by the neck,,, they could show some respect if they're experimenting on them (which is totally horrible)
ItsAntoniettaDarling 2 years ago
They should test on suisidal people.
Nesysli 2 years ago
Testing on rabbits is good. Rabbits shoot out like 50 babies a year RETARDS. If we didn't hunt, trap, and test on them you'd have to drive over like 20 every time you go to work you guys are just stupid. Oh yeah I just skinned, gutted, and packaged my deer. Nothing can beat good venison. Or maybe tofu can! ILUVTOFU ROLMOA!
etpete1 2 years ago
what a waste of good meat those bastards
megadethownage 2 years ago
what a waste of human life
rebelwithoutastraw 2 years ago
if these tests are done to give humans better lives then why not test on "Willing humans" isnt that where it all ends up anyways Animals have no say in the matter Research on whats done to lab animals in the name of science? Rbts with burned band around their abdomns, burning their eyes with chemicals having no purpose in their research.
PypersMoM 2 years ago 5
But tell me- would you allow your mother to be injected with a substance that had only gone through a "computer simulation"?
should would undoubtably do this to help you if you had an awful disease; but how awful would it make you feel if it went wrong.
a lot of what is in the box in the top right there is false; but i relise its very emotive.
it is unfortunatly very misleading and i hope you can one day see a more balanced view point :-)
blondemax 2 years ago
@blondemax "After intensive study of the issue, I am convinced that the Draize eye irritancy and the Lethal Dose 50 tests are inaccurate, unreliable, costly and cruel to the animals. The tests deceive the very consumers whom they are supposed to protect, by certifying as SAFE household products and cosmetics that cause two hundred thousand hospital-recorded poisonous exposures annually."
(Paula Kislak, D.V.M., Sherman Oaks, California.)
noratmedicine 1 year ago
Don't judge me- I come from the civilaisation of Europe where cosmetic testing on animals is illegal....
blondemax 1 year ago
@blondemax You said "would you allow your mother to be injected with a substance that had only gone through a "computer simulation"?"As animal 'tests' do not work I would allow valid tests such as Eyetex.# "The results of these tests are of no use to physicians."
(Sandra Davies, M.D., Columbia, Maryland.)
# "The results of these (animal) tests cannot be used to predict toxicity or to guide therapy in human exposure."
(Christopher D. Smith, M.D., Longbeach, California.)
curedisease. net
nomonkeymedforhumans 1 year ago
@nomonkeymedforhumans
rubbish!
FDA VS Christopher looney smith
blondemax 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think the people who disapprove of these tests are the ones that should burn in hell not the scientists some of these people like PETA are just sick
VincentReaper 2 years ago
i bet you have lack of moral values.
mhiettube 2 years ago 2
150,000 HUMANS die every day some of these deaths can be prevented from studies like this I think one human life is worth all the rabbits in the world to suffer it's a necessary terrible sacrifice to something grater
VincentReaper 2 years ago
Yeah, the human life might add couple of extra years then they die anyway. All this 'saving lives' and then we die anyway.
Animals have NO say so - humans do what they feel like..... some of us feel like this is WRONG!
So, live your life, take the modern medicine and die any way.
TerrahDawn 2 years ago
@VincentReaper These 'studies' cause most human deaths..."More than 10,000 people are killed every year in the UK by side effects of prescription medicines (32) - now the fourth biggest killer in the western world (33). The US figure is over 100,000 (33)". ref ;Lazarou, J and colleagues. Journal of the American Medical Association (1998) 279: 1200-5.
and they all pass animal 'tests'
curedisease. net
nomonkeymedforhumans 1 year ago
omg that is terrible to test products on animals
meganloves2shop 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
seriously who cares, just worry about your own life not a fucking rabit..
ninja6kid 3 years ago
You have so many fucking problems. You should go burn in hell with all the other heartless assholes who kill hundreds of animals to make your life a few years longer. Fuck. You.
Gianni98761 2 years ago 2
Yeah and if you say someone should go to hell, I think you know something about God and God says we should value human life over animals retard. GO DNR
etpete1 2 years ago
it makes me want to cry the things people do to animals. it is just cruel. there has to be other ways please. i am crying right now
lalaroxalot 3 years ago
granted Yes, there are better way to do things now, sometimes you cannot do anything but animal testing. it is a part of science and discovering things... same as plant testing.. they are now finding out plants emit distress signals when harmed by various agents... do you want us to stop hurting the plants to and just die off? I know I am gonna get thumbs down for this but seriously people.... you have to stop and think a bit, not just "feel" for everything.
fiernocht 3 years ago
Just wanted to add a quick comment to this, as i think he's got a point but misses one entirely. The thing is, the body is a very complex thing, and it's nearly impossible to foresee what will happen once you inject fx. a drug. There is alternatives, but none that ensures the same safety as animal testing, and certainly not as cheap. Animal testing can be stopped, but it will be at an increased price of medicine, and it will cost human life - sooner or later.
Flak117 3 years ago
Who gives a fuck about the bloody rabbits? If testing on cadavers etc was as cheap and easy as you say, then wouldn't all companies do that? Obviously animal testing is better or they wouldn't be doing it.
pqwilrj 3 years ago
Ya know, how'd you like it if they put you in a cage and did all that to you? You wouldn't like it one bit. Oh, but these poor innocent rabbits... they love it, it's fun.
Have some respect, you bastard.
FROZYO 3 years ago
Good thing I'm not a rabbit, eh. lol. Anyways, those rabbits are sacrificing their live so that men may live. I salute you, noble rabbits!
pqwilrj 3 years ago
I CARE
CptJazz 3 years ago 5
those scientists are SICK FUCKS WHICH WILL GO TO HELL AND BURN FOREVER!!!
runescapek0ed 3 years ago
those sciencetist bastards will die and burn in hell for doing such in-human stuff!
deathknight110 3 years ago
well of course they don't look happy, have you ever seen a rabbit smile and laugh?
contraryjerrystudios 3 years ago 4
besides happy bunny :P
disney1nickjluvr45 3 years ago
They look cute. Until you take one home and it poops on your carpet EVERY 2 MINUTES!!! (Yes it is true, they do that. They also reproduce like crazy. (2 a month =O))
Jedicommando 3 years ago
What do you mean? God gave us rabbits to experiment on! That is obvious.blu-blu-blu......
NO WAY!!! I LOVE RABBITS AND THOSE WHO THINK THAT BEING LABRATS IS THEIR DESTINY, THEY SHOULD TEST THE EFFECT OF POISON OR DRUGS ON THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
whoa that was a mouth-full!
gckbowers411 3 years ago
Who out there says that animals have rights but takes medication for their health? Even vitamins? These meds have to go through animal testing. So what we do? Stop all medical tests on animals, which, therefore, halts medical progression? Should we not have studied the squid giant axons, which answered the question of action potentials and yielded a wealth of knowledge on neuropathologies? Squid are equivalent to rabbits, probably smarter. Who has a better idea of medical progression?
Ceg47241 3 years ago
they get hurt so bad
link1597 3 years ago
im sorry for cursing but i really want to stop this i even cryed please stop it PLEASE
kimiko141 3 years ago
fuck every one that does that nice bunny who every does that to bunnys should just drop died and go to hell painfull -leslie s.
kimiko141 3 years ago
YES! BECAUSE IS ON OTHER ANIMALS IS ALL OK!
AND NOTHING SAYS IT BETTER IS THAN LINKIN IS PARK!
Pft.
Zeanu 3 years ago
...Where exactly on this page does it say its okay to test on all other animals... I was having difficulty finding it. Do you know why? OH YEAH BECAUSE THIS IS A PAGE ABOUT BUNNIES!!!! You can look at alot of other ones about other animals but this one happens to be dedicated to bunnies. Im sure the person that created this page and those who visit it dont wish it upon other animals they just are singling out bunnies they get the bulk of cosmetic testing take your head out of your ass for a sec
XxXMarissa806XxX 3 years ago
...
CRAAAWLING IIIN MY SKIIIN! *holds a dead bunny*
Zeanu 3 years ago
... im speechlesss... i wish we all could help, but i don't think it ever will!
DaisyGraceA 3 years ago
its horrible the way they test on rabbits
cuteyprincez11 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is that how you express yourself? Nice happy music for the nice happy rabbits, pathetic boy-band knob-jockeys for the "not so happy" rabbits? How do you know those rabbits are unhappy? Maybe they like pain. I have 2 rabbits and I love them dearly. Does that mean I care about all rabbits? No. Do you care about all humans? Hitler perhaps? Animal testing is merely an amusing vignette in an eternity of suffering. Hypocrites like you make me sick. Go bury your head in the sand.
sakkozz 3 years ago
Okay woah dude back up happy music, boy bands, bunnies, pain, your bunnies, humans, hitler, vignette (any small, pleasing picture or view in a book), suffering,... sand. Is it just me or are you kinda gettin of topic here sweety... Last time i checked this was about cruel testing on bunnies and wtf do you mean by how do we know that they are unhappy... Are you dumb or do you just do multiple stupid things in one day (that fucked up comment you left and saying how do we know they are unhappy)
XxXMarissa806XxX 3 years ago
some people eat rabbits too
orguad 3 years ago
..poor rabbits..stupid humans...
happystar24 3 years ago 2
I'm sorry but there is no other way, despite what groups like PETA tells. The simulations we have are extreamly limited, cadavers are dead and can't be used to model drug effects or interactions. I realize you don't like it but with it out we wouldn't have most of the medical technology we have today.
EndGameOmega 3 years ago
Actually there are lots of alternitives:
• An embryonic stem cell test, using mouse-derived cells to assess potential toxicity to developing embryos
• The 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake Phototoxicity Test
• Human skin model tests such as the validated EpiDerm™ test
• The use of human skin leftover from surgical procedures
• The use of a clinical patch test
Educate yourself before believing everything your read and or hear. :)
JesterDev 3 years ago
These are not viable alternatives. The human body is a complex biochemical system with numerous metabolic processes. All of the test you've listed can only be used to test a single stage in the metabolic pathway (if that), and aren't even interconnected.
EndGameOmega 3 years ago
Rabbits - so nice animals, and this peoples - the big motherfuckers
mecidlo 3 years ago 3
This is so sad. Today I was at the petshop buying hamsters and there was a rabbit that looked like those white ones, and it reminded me of that. I cried for those rabbits and in happiness that the rabbit I saw was perfect and happy and was in a petshop and probably had a good family by now. -sob-
aki7the7worried 4 years ago 2
STOP TESTING
kubjje 4 years ago 6
Holy Shit..
That's horrible. ='[
xhukashix 4 years ago 3
damn dont stupid ppl have fealings no more i cried i REALLY REALLY REALLY want to stop this
sweetiepie331 4 years ago 2
i love this and i go to caring consumer heaps an heaps coz i cant remember which ones arent and is lol. i do my best to buy non animal products like m and m's and skittles.
newzealandgal42 4 years ago
alot of people dont care because its not them getting hurt. But animals have feelings too! It made me cry the poor little bunnies dont deserve such cruel treatment!
NetherlandBunny 4 years ago
SAVE ANIMALS!!!!!!!!!!!!! :'( IT MADE ME CRY!
this people HAVE NO LIFE!
for god sakes!
we people must help them somehow.
I don't know how,
BUT WE SHOULD SUE THIS PEOPLE!
RABBITS ARE HUMAN BEINGS TOO!!!!!!!! :'( its so fucking sad they do this ! =/ poor wabbits ='/
FlexDuckie 4 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Rabbits are human beings too"?! Are you kidding?
SomeShows 4 years ago
@FlexDuckie I'm with you
Katja455 1 year ago
oohh my I couldnt watch after the bad started. I had no idea they used bunnies. Darn if humans arent cruel..
bunnies rule!
luvdabun 4 years ago 2
00:25 = Cry
lovelaceLMAO 4 years ago 3
wow i love bunnies
BunnyHelper713 4 years ago 3
Continued: Since Noxzema is an acne prevention product it is considered a drug by the FDA and animal testing is required. Same for Head and Shoulders, it is a dandruff prevention product, which is considered a drug as well. Does PG contract out animal testing? If so all it is is outsourcing and does not keep their hands clean. NICE TRY.
07BSPtC 4 years ago
Continued: Also, there are recent, well if you consider the 90s recent still, advances in pregnancy tests called enzyme testing that do not use animals in order to make the tests. THERE IS NO REASON TO USE ANIMALS TO MAKE A PREGNANCY TESTS ANYMORE!!!!
07BSPtC 4 years ago
What about the testing that PG did on rats back in the 90s to show that Crest was better than Enamelon in France at a conference where the rats were killed?
07BSPtC 4 years ago
the only contact PG has had with rabbit, testing was the removal of an(one) ovary, rabbit,(the rabbit lived)This was for the manufacture of pregnancy testing kits. whoever does the testing you show doesn't belong to PG. testing of that sort has always! be banned at PG, from the top. to the bottom, the bad part is every one knows this. the test you claim are done by PG are done by other companies. (PG uses cell reaction technology, not overt testing on humans or animals).
galaxyrainguy 4 years ago
my mom sell Avon
sqiggythebrat 4 years ago
scary video, l thought alot of this had stopped. l'm sure l checked out proctor and gamble once before and they actually produce alot of the bunny food, cat litter and so on. not sure if thats still the case though
MillieCanillie 4 years ago
it would surprise you what all thats put in our food, notice cancer is becoming more common ? I can imagine an animal was used to test them.
I did a search on animal testing + I was disgusted. Did you know that Beagles are 1st choice for animal (dog) testing ? Basset hounds too, but so are animals in your local SPCA's. Its sickening. Adopting a surrendered/abused/rejected animal from there only to cause it useless, extreme painful test s on it. Hows that for the ultimate end ?
PypersMoM 4 years ago 4
I'll have to look that site up. : ) ty
Colleen
mom to 8 +
hates with extreme feelings animal abuse !!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
PypersMoM 4 years ago
you are right !! If not Oprah, why not Dr Phil ? Animal abuse is an unacceptable behavior of some people. And it should be more out in the open !!! I think Oprah has a show suggestion email doesn't she ? maybe some of the other celebs do too. Or do a search on celebs who are against animal abuse. Try PETA they usually mention the celebs. Awesome vid !!!
PypersMoM 4 years ago
awesome message !!! I totally share the same feelings with animal testing. Funny thing, I have seen most of these rabbit testing pics on net. Its disgusting. Have you ever checked on what they do to the old greyhound racing dogs ?
sad to + not for queasy stomach
PypersMoM 4 years ago
your right but we have to accept there are insenstive jerks in this world... who thinks animals are "its" and dont have names and arent worth it but eventually itll stop
legend101zelda 4 years ago
we need to stop those bitches... sorry i dont usally curse but i like animals alot as soon as i saw this i wanted to get all 6 of my rabbits and watch over them
legend101zelda 4 years ago 2
hi...one more thing i did is email oprah today, and beg her producers to spread the word to the world..and i emailed her your video...let's wait and see if she'll do anything!!
60bunnies 4 years ago 3
i've printed companies of of caring consumers for home products and cosmetics...Hard Candy is a cosmetic co that has stopped testing on animals, too
60bunnies 4 years ago
this is why i have joined peta, and any other non-cruel animal group there is...and am becoming a vegetarian, too..thanks for the list of compannies that don't test on animals..what if humans were tested for animal products?!!!
60bunnies 4 years ago
this a great and powerfull video, thanks for sharing this.. 5 stars..
kedi003 4 years ago
thanks for posting this up...I think everyone should be aware of this...thank you!
misty260 4 years ago
that is just horrible!! some humans r so cruel +heartless. they should test it on themselves instead!!
Lexaaa21 4 years ago
Sorry. I couldn't watch. I had a feeling you were going to show those photos. Do you have a list of companies to avoid?
biblegirl7 4 years ago
OMG!! Poor bunnys...
markopolo1993 4 years ago 4