Politically Incorrect, Drug Addicts/ Animal Testing- Part 2

[zwergie4444]

I'm going to shop at the body shop a lot more from now on!!!

[Hulkamania4eva]

Losing weight is simple, watch what you eat, how much you eat at each sitting, what time you eat and get off of your fat ass!

[tdevry]

All animal testing is totally wrong and has never cured any bloody thing.There is still no cure for cancer even after 40 years of torturing animals to death.There are some pretty good websites online, go look at them before deciding that people are so superior and animal testing is necessary. Animal testing is not reliable either. Stop smoking, overeating, do some exercise and you be a lot healthier. Read the packaging on your medicine next time and see the side affects testing did not avoid

[TairyGreen89]

Go to 9:45 the doctor puts the British bitch in her place. What "alternatives" are these fucktards even talking about? Human testing? That's the only other option for MEDICAL research. These idiots are against research on animals for medical purposes too. They don't realize that there is a good chance they would be dead without the vaccines that were developed aided by animal testing.

[LondonIrishRover]

No one was arguing against animal testing on cosmetics,, I agree, thats wrong. Animal testing for medicine saves lives everyday all over the world. If you care about the welfare of animals more than you do about the welfare of humans then you're fucked up. Also, I bet the day you get any illness which depends on animal tested treatments to cure, you'll change you're tune very quickly. And notice how they talked about 'alternatives' but didn't actually say any.

[Prka01]

It's amazing, five skinny bastards talking about someone "cheating" to loose weight. I have almost 150 kg and I'm planning to undergo the same procedure. Those skinny pricks should shut the hell up. If you don't live it, don't judge it.

[sessrojak]

jane adams should just listen to anita roddick, she knows her shit because she started body shop goddamnit

[superman11978]

It takes a noble mind to extend the laws of morality to include animals. Most humans are incapable of this line of thought. You cannot blame them, because they themselves are just privileged animals who, like any animal, are in it for themselves and their families. Those with empathy towards all creatures have transcended their animal natures and have become, dare I say, "human", rather than homo sapiens.

[DroppinKnowledge69]

dr drew would shit on dr phil or any other famous doctor

[grands1am]

@DroppinKnowledge69

Hahahahah.... I like to do a Dr. Phil impression when I'm sitting around my house

[burningknuckle26]

US govt tests on their ppl all the time. CIA testing LSD on unaware ppl, giving crack and syphilis to blacks etc etc

[mamboch80]

they test it on animals because they dont want to get killed self. how simple is that

[thepurpleclown]

People Eating Tasty Animals.

Animals are tasty, people. eat them, nourish your bodies. Vegitarians and vegans, get fucking real.

Human bodies aren't perfect, they're affected by many types of diseases. Until there are better forms of testing, we need animal testing.

[mrgimp420]

These shampoo test animals have it good. No job, no responsibilities. They get fed, housed, and even bathed. Every now and again, it burns their eyes, or gives them a rash for a day or two. Then they get an extra banana. I understand that the majority of animals suffer through their lives....but so do the majority of humans. How come animal activists have the same passion to stop the genocide of palestinians, or the aids plague of africa?

[grayziehobbes]

@mrgimp420 You are a retard cunt!

[mrgimp420]

@grayziehobbes and youre just some driveby internet gangster who wouldnt dare talk like that to anyones face.

[acphenom]

Why don't we just test stuff on convicted violent criminals? IMO, when you violate someone else's liberty you surrender your own.

[OneVoiceMore]

@acphenom Because we're not FULLY Nazis yet?

Just a thought.

[dagame81790]

Shit, maybe people shouldn't have pets either. If you think about it it's just a form of animal slavery, claiming a living organism with an individual conscious as your physical property. Every notice how PETA supporters tend to ride horses and own lots of dogs and cats? Why not let them run free? Oh, that's right, because they are hypocrites.

[Sueds90]

Why do people compare to humans to animals? and why do they have such great affection toward them? They eat, sleep, and shit. they don't care about you. The only reason why they come back to you is because YOU feed them, and YOU give them attention. you are THEIR bitch. Why do so many people say "no testing on animals" while they stuff their face filled with fried chicken? Humans are better than animals. Why do you want to bring them to the same level as us, when they have done nothing?

[mypowerlevelover9000]

@Sueds90 your not even better than the animals shit let alone the animal answer your question?

[operaghostandkitty]

@Sueds90 You obviously have never had a pet before.

[Sueds90]

@operaghostandkitty I've had 2 dogs, 3 cats, fish, and a lizard....you're right...i've never had any at all...

[rrpauldoran]

This animal shit is bullshit. Animals aren't humans.

People are WAYYYYYYYYYYY to "praise the animals" now-a-days, its fucking SICKENING.

[hardcorezombi]

@rrpauldoran God, I know. I mean, let's just continue to torture animals to test shampoo.....Get a grip, bud.

[rrpauldoran]

@hardcorezombi Okay maybe I should have been more descriptive in my comment.

As far as testing animals for hygienic purposes, I could really care less, but I don't see a need to test them on animals, because if they really have to test a simple product for our hygiene on an animal, then that just worries me about what they're putting into our shampoo and crap.

BUT, for testing for finding cures to diseases and illnesses, YES. We shouldn't but our own species in harms way for those things.

[mypowerlevelover9000]

@rrpauldoran yeah we should just kill everything we see to help ourselves so we can live longer and kill more things including each other awesome plan bro

[rrpauldoran]

@mypowerlevelover9000

Way to take what I said out of context.

Species survive by taking out other animals.

Humans are no different.

I would rather sacrifice animals to gain better medicines to help our own, than test on..humans. It's just the logical and sane thing to do.

Sorry you disagree.

[mypowerlevelover9000]

@rrpauldoran if you want to keep things in context then you should realise that most testing done on animals is not going to benefit you in anyway its simply to benefit corporations and companies so they can sell you knew crappy products that do the same thing as the old ones that you didnt need in the first place they dont care about your welfare they are not trying to help you

[moreoreos123]

@mypowerlevelover9000 It's true that many times animal testing is done for things that we don't need, but it is also sometimes done for things that we DO need. Many medicines have been tested on animals, and that has saved a lot of peoples lives. I'd rather see medicines tested on rats than humans, sorry if i care less about a rats life than a humans. However, animal testing should only be used when it absolutely HAS to be. I think it is overused.

[RailwayFalcon]

@moreoreos123 The problem is animals are very different to humans, even other mammals, and what cures one may kill the other. If we'd tested asprin on rats it would never have been allowed, because it's toxic to them. Now imagine what would happen if it was the other way round, and because something toxic to humans was safe for rats it was sold without human testing.

We can test human tissue cultures now. Surely that's better than testing on animals?

[rrpauldoran]

Okay at 2:20, blond bitch got stupid.

Women always say "diets dont work" blah blah blah. YES THEY DO. And more than that, if they arent working, DO SOME FUCKING EXERCISE. It is foolproof. You can't "not lose weight". That's BULLSHIT.

[kingpimpbob]

The blonde's argument makes me sick, I'm not like all the other people who can differentiate human from animal because although humans cannot understand anything other than a human being in pain and being tortured, that tested creature is going to know and feel everything happening to them, humans feel the need for dominance over animals but I don't understand why but that has to be because I see things in a different light then others. We are well beyond finished with animal testing now.

[Maverick6429]

Great show. 

[autumndominiqe]

The British woman with the glasses kinda looks like Tina Fey.

[ThePhantomviper]

if i have to slaughter 250 billion cats 2 save 1 human child i'd do it, without hesitation. If these eco wackos become sick i doubt they'd refuse any medicine or treatment that was produced through animal science. This is why human life carries so little value to people anymore. I don't know any parent willing to look their child in the face and say i'm sorry hon but your life is no more significant than lab rats. so you'll just have to die.

[IamAsi94]

@ThePhantomviper thats millions of football stadiums that are full of dead cats-just to save some kid?-thats not fair

[ThePhantomviper]

@ThePhantomviper its not about fairness its about human life is more precious than animal life on any level sorry if you don't agree. If you want to look your kid in the eye and say "hey sorry but a cat, rat, horse whatever is more important that you go ahead.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper And then I would have to murder you. Cats are my own children.

"Here is an anecdote from the writer Patricia Highsmith: "Not so long ago I said to a friend of mine: 'if I saw a kitten and a little human baby sitting on the curb starving I would feed the kitten first if nobody was looking.' My friend said: 'I would feed the kitten first if somebody was looking.'" So would I. Humans ARE animals. Never forget that.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty yeah well next miss highsmith need surgery or medicine or food she can visit her local giraffe. And she willl die!!!! Animals are animals and not capable of human compassion.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper You obviously do not know animals very well.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty to the contrary I own several cats and dogs. I used to breed animals dogs so I have quite a bit of experience. So as I said next time you're writhing on the floor and need emergency help..well lets so most of us normal people will dial 9/11. You can sit back and let your cat do it. Good luck with that one. Oh and by the way when you're cat gets sick, good luck getting all of those "other" cats to administer it medication. I think its fair to say you don understand animals.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper How does that even remotely relate to understanding animals? You're the one claiming they're incapable of compassion, which is bullshit, sorry to say. I work with cats day in and day out at an animal shelter. I have a number of them at home. When I am sick, they curl up with me in bed. When I am sad, they purr to me. When I don't make it to work or don't wake up when I usually do, I will find them sitting outside my door, waiting for me. And you claim they can't feel?

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty See hear ya go changing the point. You HAVE to be a Democrat. You're putting words in my mouth. 1st of all I never said anything you claim. I said your cat won't be doing your operation. Just cuz something is capable of cuddling doesn't make it compassionate. My cats sleep in bed with me too. Doesn't mean they're going to be there to save my life like a human. Being able to "feel" doesn't define compassion. Hitler could feel. Your cats wud sell ya out for a can of Tuna.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper Actually I'm a Libertarian. And some of my cats don't even LIKE tuna. There was a cat adopted out from our shelter named Autumn whose owner is severely diabetic. Sometimes he will start slipping into a diabetic coma during the night. Somehow, we don't know how, but Autumn can sense this and never fails to wake him up. If she didn't do this, her owner would have died in his sleep a long time ago. By the way, my cats Tobias and Babe both choose sitting with me over some chicken.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty That may be the case It doesn't mean the cat did it out of "concern" Unless now you're claiming to understand what a cat is thinking. In which case we''ll never agree. I understand that animals have certain instincts. Where I live there is a dog whom is famous for pulling people out of the river. That doesn't mean anything to my point. I understand the value of animals in our society. My point was simply that I will never put their lives above human life.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper Then we never will agree or respect each other, it seems.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty Well I don't disrespect you or anything I mean this is a blog. I give you the same as any Human. But theres no way I'd feed a cat and watch a baby go without. You're taking humanity from humans and giving it to animals. Dont get me wrong I love my cats and my dogs but theres no way id save them before my own kids.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper My cats -are- my children. I put animal life above human life because I have little respect for humans in general. To quote Carlin, one of the great masters of comedy and a man wise beyond his time: "Humans knowingly and willingly participate in their own destruction. Other animals do not do that." Please refrain from giving me any examples, the key words there are KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY. Seeing the savagery humans are capable of...-shrugs- I'll take my cats over that any day.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty well then you're nuts and beyond therapy. Since humans make you so sick, please commit suicide and be consistent. Since you are human it'll be one less problem in the world....right?

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper I thought you said you didn't disrespect me. I'd rather be crazy than be a jerk, which is what you come across to me as. If I killed myself, who would take care of my cats, and what would my parents do? I'm their only child. What would my friends think? I may be human but I don't have to be part of the problem. I thought we were actually reaching an 'agree-to-disagree' stance here and respecting the fact that people have different values and beliefs...guess I was wrong.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty Im just using your words verbatim. If you kill your parents your parents will die from neglect. Who knows mb ur cats will care for them. I mean as you said humans are a big problem so i say we start with you. Just dip some celery in can of arsenic and be consistent because you are human and are participating in your own destruction as you put it. Kill youself and you'll truly be makin a difference.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty Im just using your words verbatim. If you kill yourself your parents will die from neglect. thats 3 eveil humans gone Who knows mb ur cats will care for them. I mean as you said humans are a big problem so i say we start with you. Just dip some celery in can of arsenic and be consistent because you are human and are participating in your own destruction as you put it. Kill youself and you'll truly be makin a difference.

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper I don't like celery. My parents aren't evil humans at all. My dad especially loves animals very much. My cats are loving, yes, but they need us. They can't care for themselves - they're house cats, not wild cats. Humans participating in their own destruction refers to wars and murder and the like; things you don't find in animals. Not all humans are evil but enough are...it's sad. And again, I have friends who would be sad if I died. It'd be a selfish thing to do.

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty Yes and many times humans have no choice to go to war. Because of others. Oh so you and your family are part of the "worthy" humans but everybody else should die? right? real easy to sit back and claim others are not as worthy of life as oneself. Since you don't like celery may i suggest fundip. You do find murder in animals many dogs and cate kill just to kill my cat kills mice all the time but doesnt eat them. Killing is part of wildlife as much as in war to protect freedom

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper I don't like that either. I'm really particular. Cats kill mice because they're hunters. They may not eat them for one or more reasons, but that instinct is hard-wired into their DNA...I thought you said you understood animals? In regards to war, it's sometimes but very rarely the only option. I'd rather not get into that though. Also I don't claim to be a saint...I'm not a good person but I'm better than most people. But your last statement makes no sense. (...Can we stop now?)

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty sure ill be nice and stop only because I believe ur heart is in the right place but just misguided. best of luck

[operaghostandkitty]

@ThePhantomviper I thank you. The same to you. I cannot fault those who value their children - certainly that is something one must do. The reason I reacted so strongly to your comment is because I have no children of my own and have thereby adopted cats as my children instead. I understand you were merely making a point and I shouldn't have let my emotions get the better of me. I apologize. Do take care, alright?

[ThePhantomviper]

@operaghostandkitty yes and you as well. Kitty kudos, I have 4 and they are part of what keeps me high spirited many times . They bring me alot of joy. :)

[KorlicTheGreat]

on the animal testing debate. Jame Adams is the only person who has any idea of whats going on. Too bad all of these people are retards on the subject anyways.

[sgsfdgfsdfsdfsddf]

do the know what a heart transplant is? or what medicine is? yah try to study it on a computer program

fuck out this is like Intelligent design

Alternatives? bullshit and they are based on animal testing and used when they can. so full of shit

[bumpnuglies]

Nothing like listening to two women complain about animal testing, who themselves have leather shoes and tons of makeup on. If you dont like it stop buying it period.

[torstn]

that pinsky guy seems so unlikable too - whereever i see him i think he just seems so phony and very opportunistic

[torstn]

doesn't the blonde witch drives you insannnnne!!!!!!!

what a gross person

[melissagalianos]

Another point: that pro-animal torture blonde girl pulled out every cheesy line that pro animal-torturers use. She tried to manipulate emotion using the whole "your child or a monkey" analogy which is bogus propaganda at best. She also said the whole "Im alive today for no other reason than animal torture" sob story. Yeah well some people are alive today because of serial rapists. It doesn't make it right and the point is  THERE ARE MORE RELIABLE ALTERNATIVES!!!!!

[TairyGreen89]

@melissagalianos Most vaccines were developed by testing them on animals. That's the only reliable way other than testing on people. Millions of people would be dead from diseases that are virtually gone because of vaccines that wouldn't exist without animal testing. Also doctors get their training that way, didn't you listen? Should we let virgin doctors go in and start operating on people? You fucking idiot. There is a good chance you would be dead without MEDICAL animal testing.

[melissagalianos]

what part of "WE HAVE SAFER, MORE RELIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO OUTDATED, FRAUDULENT ANIMAL TESTING" does the dye job girl not understand? Shelley Long's analogy about how we have horses and now we have cars was a great way to make ignorant people get the fucking point. I love Bill Maher for his compassionate heart too. You can see he is really upset by the idea of hurting the defenseless.

[EzraTerminal]

Cars use cow poltry, so why arent they against cars?

[jankflip]

vegans are cool and everything BUT the ones that are pricks outshine the ones that are cool

[Paniro123]

Why dont we just let the animals vote on it? Oh right they cant.

[yeXshallbeasgods]

vegan is great for health reason, environmental reasons, and doesnt support inhuman torture to animals, now how the fuck is that stupid?

[EnviroArtiste86]

dude, u don't read much do u?

[consciencematter]

I'm not a vegan, but that's just fucking stupid.

[EnviroArtiste86]

i wanna punch jane, what a bitch. VEGANS RULE btw!

[56789fghjk]

The idiot with diabetes is a fucking sick individual

[GaeasBlessing]

What is up with this idiot comparing diabetes drug testing (on animals which have diabetes themselves, mind you) to testing draino on cats and dogs because mothers "need to know" that it is bad for their kids? I love morons like this. She makes her own position look infinitely worse than any animal rights activist ever could.

[astroman2006]

Medicine is only a cure for an illness that probably didn't have to exist. Nobody seems to want to prevent bad health, but everyone wants highly advanced medicine and free health care. And we reward them... Veganism ftw.

[GaeasBlessing]

VEGAN POWER BROTHER!

[Ironzealot7531]

Veganism FTL

would you really see terminally ill people die because you can't bare the thought of itty witty fwuffy bunnies all hurty

[astroman2006]

Neither. Why not prevent terminal illness through good health? Oh that's right, because most people now have the will power of a 6 year old and eat candy all day. Should I be sympathetic for someone with a poor diet who ends up sick? Should another being pay for their carelessness? Should we make the effort to advance medicine to cure sicknesses that shouldn't exist? Veganism is a simple dietary choice based on individual responsibility, not just animal sympathy.

[66kompis]

"walk like your butt is chewing gum"...lol...!!

[NativeMoon]

The only panelist with any credibility is Dr. Drew. The others might as well not even be there - these women are absolutely embarassing.

[Alfrunk]

Oh yeah - "Dr Drew" - the pop-culture answer to medicine and 2 minute "drive by" solutions to complex problems. You don't get out much, do you?

[philvanyam]

The comment was "any credibility". Not "a ton of credibility". In this group he IS the only one with any credibility. I mean, he is a celeb TV doctor, but at least he's a doctor.

[rrpauldoran]

@NativeMoon Hell yes.

[diaryofascholar]

@NativeMoon Beside Shelley Long, who is mostly useless, I don't think you even know who the other women are. Dame Antia Roddick is a brilliant businesswoman and philanthropist, If she was quiet, it was because her introduction by Maher sucked.

[mkarmam]

where is the rest of this?

[drlee2]

Shelley, why don't YOU tell us the alternatives, since you know so f*ckin much!

The 'young' blonde lady is actually right. She's just having a hard time making her point b/c of the 'old' blonde lady Shelley and the other old lady w/ the glasses thinking they know every f*cking thing. Of course, Dr. Drew is the only real expert on this panel.

[goingemoguy]

Embryonic Stem cell research, computer simulations, clinical trials, donated organs and bodies, cell cultured tests, ect. How many people died from vioxx?

[conwict7]

Jesus Christ, the "Founder of the Body Shop" and Shelley Long are fugging stupid.

Body Shop constantly refutes Dr. Drew's points and the (sane) blonde's comments with "But in reality..."

And Shelley Long says "NO, really, I know so much more than you...I'm an actreess! I'm popular." More or less.

[Drhousemd51]

That Shelley Long girl is a retard...your an actress..dr. drew is a doctor... you worked as a waitress and went to auditions your whole life...dr drew went to medical and studied science his whole life...but yea your right...

[Drhousemd51]

medical school that is...

[michaelpyro]

Dr. Drew rocks, but the chick next to him blows ass.

[zukobro51]

I love how Dr. Drew was the only one on there who had any factual backup. The lobbyist wasn't too annoying, but that blonde bitch just wouldn't shut up. She doesn't know more about addiction than Drew, she needs to go play in traffic.

[thiopheneme]

There is no adequate alternatives to some animal testing. 1000s of animals are used for minuscule breakthroughs in science, but they are necessary. True, we aren't remotely close to mice, rats, dogs, monkeys, but the small connection we do have with each animal, collectively, is still the best route in the early stages for testing drugs for severe conditions. Animal testing for cosmetic conditions, or conditions that are merely discomforts (ie. viagra) is absurd.

[wittyvegan]

The only "prove" I heard so far that there is no alternative is that every major medical breakthrough within the last years was also tested on animals. But because everything is tested on animals you don't have any data to compare.

The animal experiments themselves should be tested in a double blind study and I can guarantee you that the outcome won't be better than any other placebo.

[nicogum]

The body shop claims there is no animal testing with there products. What they fail to mention is the fact they use ingredients that were long ago tested on animals. I'll bet the anti-testing people are not reliant on any prescription medication, all of which are tested on animals. The only alternative to animal testing and experimentation is to use people as guinea pigs.

[wittyvegan]

You don't have to replace something that didn't work in the first place.

[areyouamormon]

The only good panelist is Dr. Drew. All 3 women on this episode happen to be awful. Shelly Long is just a dimbulb. The British one is an uber blowhard and Jane Adams is a cunty right-wing corporate hack.

You'd think I was a woman hater or something but this is just one instance where there are 3 bad women and one good guy. Bill wasn't very good this episode himself.

[Crosno]

Why didn't they listen to the doctor? When they said, "can't they switch research to alternatives?" he said "No way" but still they argue like they are the experts...

[wittyvegan]

Before the war in iraq the "experts" said that there where WMDs in iraq, that we will be greeted as liberators and there won't be a civil war. At that point critics where dismissed as uninformed and/or ignorant. So much for the experts.

[danmoore5000]

Lol. Are you kidding me!? Because someone fucked up on foreign policy, experts in completely different fields now carry less weight with you?

Hey, didn't a bridge fall down a while ago. So much for engineers. I guess my computer isn't as g

[wittyvegan]

You just made my point. There is no overall expert on life sciences/biology. This guys may be experts on animal experiments. But so far I haven't seen any hint that they are also experts on alternative methods. And because they are no experts in this area their opinion is not better than mine or yours.

[danmoore5000]

Ok, if you figure they've got different areas of expertise within the field, that may be valid.

[wittyvegan]

I had quite a few discussions with animal experimentors by now. And in most cases it turned that I knew more about alternatives than they did.

[Crosno]

I seriously don't think that SCIENTISTS kills animals for fun. I seriously believe they have to do that to progress in the biomedical field, where did the cure from Chicken pox, Polio, Flu, diabetes come from? Using animal testing... And that's just from the top of my head.

[wittyvegan]

Testing on animals ist like burning witches. Everytime it fails it is a single case which doesn't allow any generalization against the overall method. Everytime it works it is a general prove that it works.

If every drug is tested on animals also all useful drugs are. But you can't say what would have happened if you would have used alternatives. Perhaps we would have a cure for HIV by now?

[lafids]

Alternatives? This is crazy talk. There are no alternatives for testing on whole animals or animal organs. These are not the only way of testing drugs, but there are no substitutes for these kinds of tests, unless you want to build living organisms, or donate yourself to science...and save the animals.

[wittyvegan]

It's quite simple: A scientific method should deliver predictions that can be checked. In physics a theory is overthrown if it will make false predictions. Because biology is a "little" more complex you have to work with models that make predictions with the best successrate. But even in this case models with a successrate below 50 percent should be overthrown because you will get random results.

And as far as I know animal experiments are way below 50 percent.

[wittyvegan]

A combination of in-vitro-tests (with human tissue) and computer models creates better results than "simulating" the human body within a stressed mouse.

[lafids]

Pharmacologists do use computer modeling, in vitro tests, as well as whole animal systems, and a whole buch of other experiments too. One is not a substitute for another, they all must be done to ensure the drug does what it's intended to do, and to figure out side effects.

[wittyvegan]

Personaly I don't like the phrase 'alternatives' because it implies that animal experiments have any scientific value.

[lafids]

wittyvegan, you have got to be kidding. Animal experiments dont have any scientific value? So would you test a drug that has only been tested on isolated tissue in vitro, and never on a whole animal system? Drugs have different effects on different tissues, and there is no way to predict all the side-effects. The safest way for humans to test these drugs is to have them tested on animals first.

[wittyvegan]

No. I am not kidding. You can take a look at the studies and you will see, that the success-rate of animal experiments is not higher than throwing a coin. You simply could leave them out and there wouldn't be any change in safety.

Do I think this rate of security is acceptable? Absolutely no! But we first have to admit, that we waste billions of dollars/euro on a method which simply doesn't work and then search for methods which do.

[JCool621]

OK wittyvegan, a pharmaceutical company is a business in it to make profit. When they are developing a drug to bring it to market they aren't looking to throw money down the drain. So if they could "leave out animal testing and there would be no change in safety" don't you think they'd do that???

[wittyvegan]

If it only would cost money they would. But to them it's the perfect insurance policy: If something happens it is simply a "sad but unpreventable accident". Better spend a few million on animal experiments than a few billion on lawsuits.

And of course some of the company "scientists"/managers actually believe that is valuable science because they never questioned this dogma: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

[JCool621]

The only way that animal testing prevents lawsuits is by making the drugs safer in the first place. If a drug kills someone and they get sued, "we tested it on animals" is not going to be valid excuse like you say it will. You have a very biased view going into the topic so you only believe the slanted studies written by people who think like you instead of the actual experts. Also these researchers would always have a job with or without animal testing so dont act like their job depends on it.

[wittyvegan]

Who are the experts you are talking about? The people who never did "alternative" testing in their whole live? Please tell me name an unbiased study and we will talk about it.

[JCool621]

The "experts" that im talking about are the researchers who went to school for at least 6 years to learn all about drugs and the processes by which they are made. They are mostly all smart people who would question a method that sounded useless if it really was, but its not. They are robots like you make them out to be and they aren't minimum wage joe shmoes like you make them out to be either.

[wittyvegan]

They are taught that animal experiments are a valid method and it is not obvious that they are not. There is no discussion that some animal experiments deliver valid results and some don't. But to be a helpful scientific tool the transmissibility has to be clearly above 50 percent. The only studies I know which actually tested this say that the rate is below 50 percent.

You said that this studies are biased but can't deliver one that had a different result.

[wittyvegan]

Do you really think the court checks if this specific animal experiment was a valid source of information? Ususally they call an "expert" (aka. another guy who does animal testing). And non of them actually questions the very basic dogma of animal testing.

[JCool621]

Courts don't call in animal testing experts so you need to drop that argument. If your drug kills someone and the death couldn't have been predicted via the information in the packet insert you are screwed. What do you think they call in a reasearcher and he says it worked on a mouse? Of course not. Even if they do thats not gonna save them if the package insert is wrong. Animal testing is a part of making that package insert as accurate as possible before anything happens.

[wittyvegan]

The career of this researchers is built on animal testing. Of course they will lose their job if the company would switch to alternative methods because they don't know anything about it.

[JCool621]

WRONG! Like I said these aren't 6 dollar an hour guys off the streets these are highly trained drug experts that went to school for at least 6 years studying drugs. They have a job no matter what because if a company were to switch to an alternative method, they would be the ones conducting that alternative method. If the military builds a new plane do their old pilots not get to fly it? Of course they do the just train the old "expert" pilots on how to fly the new plane.

[wittyvegan]

The airforce wouldn't use marines that never sit on the pilotseat. And neither would the drug companies use "experts" on animal testing that never did alternative methods. The technics are quite different.

[JCool621]

You ruined my analogy my point wasn't about marines that don't fly, it was about pilots who are already experts at flying.

[wittyvegan]

The difference between animal experiments and in vitro is way to big. My analogy might have been a little overboard. But yours is as far from the truth. We are not talking about a newer technic, we are talking about a completely different method.

[JCool621]

My point is if they use an alternative that the Pharm.D. guys don't know, they will just train those guys on the new method and they will keep their jobs. By the way, how bout naming some of the "alternatives" that the drug companies don't already do? You won't be able to come up with one because they pour hundreds of millions of dollars just to bring a single drug to the market. They test every possible thing they can test.

[wittyvegan]

For example: There are at least 4 alternatives to the Draize-test. But still the companies use it although it delivers worse results and is more expensive. My source? I attended the congress "5th World Congress on Alternatives & Animal Use in the Life Sciences" where they said exactly this. ("It still is the golden standard.")

[JCool621]

First off, thats an eye test primarily used for cosmetics, and I'm not talking about cosmetics, I'm talking about drugs. What about genetic testing like gene silencing? That is a technology that has the potential to cure AIDS and cancer but you can't test it on in vitro tissue or a human subject, you need animal testing for that.

[wittyvegan]

You wanted an example. I gave you one. And the Draize-test is not limited to cosmetics.

Gene silencing is one of the most bullshit ideas I have ever heard. Multiple genes are interacting in producing enzymes. If you switch one on or off it results in thousands of changes. (And that on an animal that already differs in about 5 percent.)

[wittyvegan]

They have tried to cure HIV on monkeys for more than twenty years. They weren't even able to reproduce full-blown AIDS.

And they promise a cure to cancer for more than a hundred years now. Of course thanks to animal testing.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

[JCool621]

Here's the problem with activist groups. They all start with a good cause and then they go overboard and people then think they are crazy. I can agree with your point when talking about spraying shampoo in a rabbits eye. But when you and your group want to protest animal testing in cancer studies then me and everyone else just think your crazy. You guys would get a lot more done if you focused your attention on issues that didn't make you appear insane.

[wittyvegan]

"We have cured mice of cancer for decades,

and it simply didn't work in humans."

Dr. Richard Klausner

National Cancer Institute

Animal experiments are killing humans by the millions because they take away resources from research that would actually help people. If I have to appear crazy at first to make it clear that the very basic idea of animal experimentation is wrong then be it.

[JCool621]

I told you to name me an alternative and you gave me an eye test mostly used in cosmetics. Then I gave you a new field of research that requires animal testing and you said it's bullshit. If gene silencing is such bullshit why is it such a growing field of research. You should get on the phone and call these scientists and tell them a 25 year old chick from Germany says they are wasting their time researching gene silencing. BTW your from Germany do you like Rammstein? That band is awesome.

[wittyvegan]

Gene silencing is a perfect example for the causality approach common in the medicine field. They try to reduce an extrem complex system to a simple on/off-switch either completly ignoring or trying to standardize psychosomatic reactions. This is not limited to science. If you want to know why you are sick in the first place usually you have to go to a doctor who also does alternative medicine. Like I said before: It is a dogma.

(By the way: I am a guy.)

[JCool621]

It cracks me up how you think you know more about all these research methods more than the actual guys that do them. They are all science black belts and you're wearing a yellow belt telling them their methods are bullshit,and gene silencing doesn't have anything to do with psychosomatic reactions it's all chemical reactions in the cells so I don't get that point. My bad on the girl remark but you can understand why I thought you were a chick from the vegan lifestyle and video of the chinchillas

[wittyvegan]

There is a german phrase for it: "betriebsblind". It means that somebody works so long on a specific problem that he/she is not able to see the obvious. In that case an outsider has to question it. And that's not just an opinion. It is based on scientific studies and common sense and I am still waiting for the "unbiased" counter-study you told me about.

[wolfgarnaud]

well it is stupid... and compare an animal to a person is even more. whats next try to comunicate with animals and tell them no to eat and kill each other.

what is with humans that we try to controle everything.

ohh and also before critizasing something in the medical field... try to come up with an alternative. and a good one.

[wittyvegan]

Ok. If I want to say that a system is broken I have to know how to repair it?

And you are right: It is stupid to compare a human to a (non-human) animal. But that's exactly what these so called scientists do.

[wittyvegan]

I'm still searching for a study which did research on the success rate of animal testing and got a pro-animal testing result. I haven't found one yet and neither have the "researchers" that told me they would send me one.

[wittyvegan]

Animal testing have nothing to do with safety. According to the study 'Animal Carcinogenicity Studies' 58.1% of ALL animal carcinogenicity data of the EPA is dead wrong. I have a few other study which also show that animal testing have nothing to do with real science. Throwing a coin has better results.

[wittyvegan]

Adams and Pinsky assume that there is no alternative to animal testing. My question to them: How do you know? Animal rights activists (like myself) are blamed for being partisan. But the people who made a living of killing animals and have no idea of in-vitro testing are the experts on this topic? That's like letting Bush decide if his decision (on any topic) was right or not.

[Crosno]

Because he is a doctor? Because he has studied and practiced medicine on animals to be able to save human lives? Because he has experience in the medical field and know how the process works

?

[wittyvegan]

He has no experience in alternative methods. He only has experience in his specific field. He talked about teaching medical students. There is massive literature about alternatives in science AND in teaching students. In the UK it is not even allowed to teach surgeons on animals because they know the differences are to big.