Chill out about Animal Experimentation

[jkbell2088]

We need more animal research not less. People who want to save animals are clueless.

[drpiddleton]

... if you run away from the facts because the truth is likely to upset you than your opinion carries no weight as it is purely informed by emotion and not logic and evidence. Fortunately the general public is reasonable and while they might not like animal testing they accept that human beings have more value than other species but I feel so frustrated those ignorant fanatics that take their protests a step to far.

[drpiddleton]

...not as cost effective. Bullshit. The first heart transplant would have been in impossible were it not for animal testing, along with countless of other medical breakthroughs. You cannot turn your back on history and pretend that it doesn't exist; animal testing works!! We have hundreds of years of evidence.

[drpiddleton]

Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men comes to mind here. Some people just cannot handle the truth - we need to have a government regulated form of animal experimentation!! You people demand the latest pharmaceutical drugs or life saving surgical procedures but criticise the methodology used to make these discoveries You can't have it both ways. And don't read some bias report written by a non scientist which says that the alternatives to animal testing is more effective but not as c

[oliviamariesiragusa]

Though I disagree with animal testing regardless of your argument, I do feel you're valid coming from a medical standpoint, but what is your argument about the emotional treatment of animals in testing facilities? If you have to do the tests then do them, but if the animal screams out in pain, why do you need to beat the shit out of it, shake it in the air, hold it by the hind legs, etc. I don't agree with animal testing. But what about how it desensitizes the researchers themselves?

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa Maybe one day when technology gets better we won't need the use for animal experiments. That day isn't today, so lets be a little patient.

[oliviamariesiragusa]

@hubbabubbarubbalubba lol okay, ill stand by while they all suffer now because HOPEFULLY there MIGHT be a technological solution later. And MAYBE when people are finished trying to make luxurious technology smaller and smaller, a.k.a. iPods, computers, etc., (which IS rly important), they'll make time to save innocent lives...b/c medicinal technological advancements aren't really as important as life constantly being made unnecessarily easier by allowing us to fit our whole lives in 1 device.

[oliviamariesiragusa]

Respond to this video... so seriously? don't tell me to be "patient". I'm not so lazy that I'd just stand by while shit like this happens. The problem will probably never be solved, but I'll at least do my part... which is more than I'm assuming I can say for you.

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa So what are you doing exactly? Watching videos and feeling sorry for the animals? What you're doing is amazing. lol

[oliviamariesiragusa]

@hubbabubbarubbalubba You're an asshole. You don't know me or anything about me. I happen to have taken part in a lot toward the cause that's made me proud and concrete in my beliefs. I don't pull these beliefs out of my ass. I've seen and experienced this sorry excuse for humanity first-hand so you're half-wit really doesn't impress anyone. Don't bother responding; I can guarantee I won't be reading it.

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa Go ahead and be proud of your fake achievements. Even if you did any of the things you said, what difference have you made? None. lol So what are you so proud about, doing nothing but crying and complaining? What you don't seem to understand is the medical achievements you see today that have been tested on animals, crude or not, had saved millions if not billions of human lives. I will agree that the methods are kind of disgusting, but all we can do is wait. So chill out.

[oliviamariesiragusa]

@hubbabubbarubbalubba I'm seriously not going to dignify your personal assumptions towards me with an explanation. That's a waste of time. You telling me to be patient is like saying the Jews should have been patient when they were being tested on because they were thought to be a lesser species. New strains of AIDS have been created through animal testing for christ sake! Because that's definitely what this world needs, MORE disease. Why are you even talking to me?

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa U know what the Jews did? They waited out the war, dumbass. And in the end of all ur shit talking, u cant even explain what you ever did to make a single fucking difference. I don't care about what u witnessed or what u feel toward the situation, u did absolutely jack. Not a single thing u claim to have done, did and would never possibly ever do anything to stop the tests without better alternatives for it. U ask why I'm even talking to u? R you that scared? Ur so pathetic.

[oliviamariesiragusa]

@hubbabubbarubbalubba Ur a fucking pig. I'll repeat this in case you didn't get it before. I don't need to explain my personal experiences to you. Just because I don't need your approval does not invalidate things I've done in my life. This is so stupid now and we're getting nowhere. I know there are people like you out there and you shouldn't be so surprised that there are people like me so leave it at that.

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa You testify that you're making the smart argument and I'm making the uneducated one. Ur a joke. I'm speaking in real terms. There's nothing anyone can do about it. If you really feel the need to do something, instead of sulking about it and blaming medical history, start actually doing something about it. You're making an ironic statement because it's not protesting that'll change their mind, it's a different method of testing itself that'll change it, you stupid idiot.

[hubbabubbarubbalubba]

@oliviamariesiragusa I never asked for your personal experiences, that shit is useless. What I meant, if you were too stupid to know, was that whatever ur doing is useless. I already know this without you explaining anything either, coz an ordinary person like u won't do anything productive enough to change shit. I take back saying "I don't care..." and I'll put in "It doesn't matter what you witnessed or feel...". You don't need my approval, wtf? lol Ur dumb. Ur deviating from the point, pussy.

[oliviamariesiragusa]

@hubbabubbarubbalubba lol. I never said the whole problem would be solved either. All I'm saying is that anything I've done, whether you think it's a big deal or not, is useful if it helps even one animal. With the problems in our world and global population growing faster than a problem's potential to be solved, a little good is better than hopelessness. I'm not a politician and frankly I know I'd suck at it but I do know I've helped animals, whether it was a lot or a little...

[oliviamariesiragusa]

Respond to this video... You clearly don't have an educated argument, just grandiose statements you've heard from other, equally as uneducated, places.

[TheSightlessBird]

I mean this is fascinating and a very interesting perspective and all. But......did your mother ever hug you?

[TeaInTralfamadore]

this dude looks like he's about to rape someone

[rettsmedisiner]

Who says that humans have higher moral value than animals?? Your priest? This is religious crap. How is meat justifiable forr survival?? We are herbivores you moron!!!! Animal testing is the opposite of science. It's only done for legal reasons to protect big companies and by people who want their names published on fancy magazines.

[iamjordandavoll]

@rettsmedisiner first of all humans are dominant on earth. we run it, and yeh we have higher moral value. do you want to look a little kid in the eye and tell him that animal rights are more important than the kids rights, so he doesnt get medication? second, we are omnivores, not herbivores you dumb shit. we eat meat AND plants. and plz explain how animal testing protects big companies??

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll Their rights are EQUAL. I asked you, since when and why are human rights more important than animal rights? To that you have no answer. WE ARE HERBIVORES YOU MORON! Have you ever studied physiology? Please do before you make a fool of yourself here in public. Animal testing is not reliable and IT DOESN'T WORK.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll Animal testing is only done to cover pharmaceutical companies. If something bad happens they can always claim that they did their best and tested it on 3 different spieces "hey how was I supposed to know?". See the thalidomide trial and the thalidomide case.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll (1) Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals.

(2) According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree only '5%-25% of the time'.3) 95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.

(4) At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in laboratory animals. They are allowed because it is admitted the animal tests are not relevant.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll (6) When asked if they agreed that animal experiments can be misleading 'because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans', 88% of doctors agreed.(7) Rats are only 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll (8) Rodents are the animals almost always used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (e.g lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: the two cannot be compared.(9) Up to 90% of animal test results are discarded as they are inapplicable to man.13) An estimated 83% of substances are metabolised by rats in a different way to humans.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll 25) The lifesaving operation for ectopic pregnancies was delayed 40 years due to vivisection.(27) Aspirin fails animal tests, as does digitalis (a heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would have been banned if vivisection were heeded.(29) Blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies, corneal transplants were delayed 90 years

[iamjordandavoll]

@rettsmedisiner whats all the numbers? did u copy and paste? how can i even know that's reliable. and i didnt say animal experimentation is a perfect science. its far from it. animals do suffer at times, but it is still the best thing we have right now, so why complain about it? leprosy, measles, mumps, all that would still exist, why? for the cost of some fucking animals? does that sound okay to you?

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll Yeah I copied it because 1) you couldn't post the site here and 2) you only care to prove yourself right and not get your facts straight so you would never read it yourself. As you didn't even read what I copied. Those are from the mouth of vivisectors in press conferences!! DOn't even dare to call this science. It's not. We owe nothing to animal testing and as I said there are more reliable and cheaper methods. Why don't you search for yourself??

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedisiner There's also much more info revealed by animal testing in the shape of bio-safety. People against animal experimentation always claim that nothing works on animals and humans the same way. Wrong... Anthrax, nerve gas, and a host of chemical and biological agents affect many animals in a similar fashion as humans. Also most animal research doesn't stem from an outward physiological point of view. Its typically on a microscopic lv dealing with antibodies and other immune responses.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama You are so wrong about this. Physiology is of great importance. And when you're using the wrong models you are going to have the wrong results. This is why scientists have cured cancer in mice for decades. BUT NOT IN HUMANS!

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll For the record, your views are entirely fascist!

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedisiner By the way I did one my thesis papers working at a BSL3 lab which used animals in experimentations. I've seen the practices and from my personal experience the techs and researchers are trying to be as humane as possible. Its a big deal when you're in a college lab, because any slip up will cause you to lose funding and become blacklisted. Which means years of college and a number of degrees down the drain. Many people won't risk their lives to be intentionally cruel to animals.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama What exactly do you call humane? Treating a sentient being as a slave? Confined until they go crazy. Hooking them up on drugs? Butchering them alive? Is your exeperience (which I highly doubt as significant since you said you saw some practices) more important than the thousand undercover videos available? It's obvious that you don't know anything about vivisection. You don't know the facts and you don't know what's going on in these labs.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmed 1st consider the age of these undercover vids. What the propaganda artists don't reveal is the era in which these vids were used. The undercover vids I've come across look to be pre Animal protection act era. Which would be from 2002 up until now. It doesn't pay to treat animals badly. The APHIS is filled with animal hugging administrators and they approve the review boards, the experimentation and the researchers. They also threaten suit or pull have funding pulled upon violation.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama Don't be so naive. Every once in a while something new comes to light. And please look at HLS experiments before you make a statement like that. But let's assume for a while that they sing lullabies to animals (which is of course moronic but anyway). Does this make the act ethical? Was the willowbrook experiment ethical? (AND for the record, the willowbrook exp was scientificaly PERFECT!!! unlike an.test. which is unrealiable and misleading and has hindered progress).

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedisiner The ethical nature of experimentation isn't to eradicate any and all animal discomfort. If you read the latest animal protection and ethical treatment act it never states that the animal won't be harmed. It states to minimize that harm as much as you can. It would be foolish to have an animal in dire condition because it would hinder the experimental results. The animals should be as close to their starting point as possible throughout MOST scientific testing.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama The ethical nature of slavery of african americans wasn't about welfare. It was about the abolition of exploitation. I don't know what organization you have in mind but the real animal organizations talk about RIGHTS not wellfare. We don't fight for comfortable cages, we fight for empty cages. AND ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION IS UNSCIENTIFIC, UNRELIABLE, MISLEADING, CRUEL AND UNETHICAL. It's only done because it offers legal protection. Get your facts straight.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedisiner APHIS is the organization I'm talking about and they're part of the USDA. They don't fight against animal experimentation they fight for productive, necessary experimentation. This is a government watch-dog group with inspectors and the whole 9. Their job is to find humane violations based upon the animal protection act. They don't work for the interest of animal rights organizations.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama MM isn't cured because we don't possess the defense mechanisms that mice do. Are you even listening to yourself? WE ARE USING THE WRONG MODELS. How much simpler do you want me to make it for you? Animal exp has STOPED progress and there are a lot of facts about that. In that case, you are not talking about an animal rights group, so your comment is irrelevant, just like your knowledge on this topic.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmed You don't cure cancer by using susceptible organisms. What can I extract from a human that could possibly cure MM? In Ebola there were some people with a natural immunity and blood transfusions from these people were given to susceptible people and those susceptible people either didn't get ebola or were cured of it. That's the same with any organism. Some dogs were found to have natural rabies antibodies. The use of these rabies antibodies were used to pass on immunity to humans. cont

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama AAAAAAH. I am done dealing with ignorants. You don't even understand the stuff that YOU are writing. You are irrational, and you are ignorant, and you are cruel and you are a racist.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmed I'm ignorant and you can't even tell the difference between race and species? If I hold a supremest view towards another species that doesn't mean I'm racist. It doesn't even follow any standard definition for racism. Race in intra-species meaning we have to be of the same species. Plus I don't believe race even exist at as a genetic construct. Its obviously a social construct. But anyways, you simply can't defend your claims. Its okay to disagree with this practice without substance.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmed Now if we can pass on rabies immunity from dogs to humans why can't we pass on the anti-monoclonal mechanisms in mice? MM isn't cured because we're just not there yet. Before smallpox was cured it WASN'T cured. There's obviously a time in which certain diseases aren't curable, and research is needed to reach the point in time in which diseases are curable. MM is tricky and advances have been made due to this research. So its not counter productive. How could it be?

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll Btw, have you ever heard of the willowbrook and tuskegee experiments? The willowbrook experiments help to discover hepatitis vaccine. And it was PERFECT. Scientic, properly controlled and carried out. From a scientific point of view it was PERFECT (unlike animal testing). But still, was it ethical? Are you fond of practises like that?

[iamjordandavoll]

@rettsmedisiner Hey, if they could consistantly do this, i have no problem. ppl think that since im for animal testing, i want them to be in labs and suffer and have to be subject to freak experiments. thats not the case. i want it to continue because without it we dont have other reliable, consistant ways to find medical cures. if they could do what you said above more often, then id say fuck animal testing.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll But you don't understand! It's a whole business behind it. Eventually they will stop but now it brings them money and cover! How can a pharmaceutical company ask for more?! And if you're for animal testing, you are for suffering. Your views are spieciesist, as were the views of american researches conucting the tuskegee experiment. You say animals don't deserve concideration, they said the same for black people. You are all racists in the end.

[iamjordandavoll]

@rettsmedisiner that's a rather outlandish statement, considering i AM black. its totally different. we are all humans. and i dont think animals should suffer. of course it happens to some extent, but there is no part of human or animal life that comes without suffering to some extent at one point or another. i do think their feelings should REALLy be considered, but not to the point where it greatly gets in the way. there r good and bad researchers. the ones who abuse should go to hell

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll Why? Black people can't be racists? Please, no more silly comments! There are no good vivisectors. Please understand that.

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedis Animal experimentation is necessary. Yes it is a big business and with all big businesses there's short cuts and bullshit. However, advances in multiple myeloma stemmed from animal research using lab mice. Mice create differentiating antibodies similar to humans. However mice don't suffer from monoclonal antibody production, which leads to multiple myeloma. So humans attempted to induce monoclonal production in mice. Years later there's a number of drugs used to suppress the cancer.

[rettsmedisiner]

@raventakayama "However mice don't suffer from monoclonal antibody production, which leads to multiple myeloma. So humans attempted to induce monoclonal production in mice. Years later there's a number of drugs used to suppress the cancer. "

This is why it's not SCIENCE. THIS IS WHY MM IS NOT CURED!!

[raventakayama]

@rettsmedi MM isn't cured because we don't possess the defense mechanisms that mice do. However, we've learned from our experiences with biotechnology that you can transfer immunity from one species to another. GM corn uses the defense mechanism of a bacterium against corn eating insects. The notion is that humans can use the mouse's immunity against MM or monoclonal antibodies. We've done this before with rabies. Some animals are naturally immune to rabies and we've passed this on to ourselves.

[rettsmedisiner]

@iamjordandavoll (31) At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.26) According to the Royal Commission into vivisection (1912), 'The discovery of anaesthetics owes nothing to experiments on animals'. The great Dr Hadwen noted that 'had animal experiments been relied upon...humanity would have been robbed of this great blessing of anaesthesia'.

[888gogreen]

cantinued from comment below: Hearing an animal or even a person scream in pain and horror should not be able to be justified by the greedy efforts of people who themselves are too scared to put their lives in the position that they put others. Stop Animal Testing!

[888gogreen]

ancient philosopher Protagorous once said "man is the measure of all things", i think this video reaafirms this. If this guy is serious then we are all screwed, he speaks like an intelligent man but alas he does not sound like one. To believe that animals have less worth than humans is disgusting they may not be able to comprehend quantum physics but they are more than sufficiently equiped to comprehend pain and suffering.

[sabakunoamanda]

I agree we need animal testing for important things like cancer and such. But you people obviously don't have pets. Have you ever seen an abused dog? He is fucked up and scared of everything. They have dreams and hopes and feelings. They should just be more gentle with animals and considerate. Just because you are using them for science does not mean they should be left in filth with no food or water and without human or animal contact.

[drbeladaz]

Yes, lets stop with testing and leave the medicine progress where it is. Let people die of cancer and number of other illness we couldn't see trough deeper if it weren't for testing.

[ayaangellove]

For everyone who thinks that animals have dreams, imagination and emotions,,i would like to clear it up for you....animal brains are not developped has our human brain..the part of our brain called frontal lobe is missing in animals brains..scientists studied animals brains and ended up with noticing that they can not have emotions or thoughts,,not even dreams..because they dont have the frontal lobe..if you dont beleive me check it out!! If you study biologie you should know that!

[Bonersoup183]

@ayaangellove All of what you just said is useless because they still experience pain.

[ayaangellove]

@Bonersoup183 They don't experience pain like human do! Thats where the difference is! I don't say they don't feel pain i just say it's not in the same way and with the same intensity that we human feel it! They don't remember the pain emotionaly or psychologically its only physical for the animals! That doesn't make it better but thats how it is!!

[Bonersoup183]

@ayaangellove "Thats how it is!!" You have no heart.

[ayaangellove]

@Bonersoup183 If that makes you fell better !!! Then fine i have no heart. But everyone has their own opinion and perspective on everything in life.

[rettsmedisiner]

@ayaangellove This is bullshit. Do you know that first hand?? Animals experience emotional pain (look at dogs and how their psychology is affected by people who mistreat them). Animals SUFFER and suffering is not only about pain. Even if it was just physical, your point is still lame.

[pads41]

@ayaangellove Many in the scientific community are brainwashed to believe this.

[omnibus3010]

If you think animals don't feel like we do you have to be the biggest, heartless most stupid animal on the planet....As far a psychological pain goes....Let's see you volunteer your worthless ass for experiments & then say that.....Seriously...You can numb the pain with you mind if it hurts.......LMAO

[MusaAsif]

this guy seriously needs to speak up and speak more clearly

[loyalsubscriber67]

this video is ridiculous.

[ZennLa13]

FUCK OFF. How can you presume that animals do not have rich imaginations, hopes and dreams? Animal rights try to minimize animal suffering... i think they understand that animals imevitably die as a result of our existence. Of course growing crops and even walking on the ground displaces and kills insects, etc. But any unneccesay killing of animals needs to be stopped. This guy is extremel insensitive.

[suroj]

If animal testing is outlawed, poor students will be targeted. Also poor people who are desperate for cash

[Chikaze01]

Shut up! animals feel as much as we do. They are alive as much as we are. Try and find some other way of testing these things. Animals belong in either a loving home or the wild, not a place where they are tortured every waking moment of their life. I wanna see those of you who think harming innocent animals is okay, go into a lab and see what is going on. If you have a heart you will know this is all wrong.

[watchensee]

How do you know that other creatures don't have dreams & hopes? Why don't you chill out by going into a laboratory, and help give science the answers by being a human model for research? And then see how easy it is to be a lab pet DUMMY!

[eazyrider17]

A rat or a human child? Seems like a very easy decision to me.

[banana7570]

Your assumptions about how an animal "psychologically" deals with having their spines broken or infected with painful terminal diseases seem convenient for someone who is not a direct participant in the experiment. To be fair, I know that you feel you are acting in the best interest of humans based on a moral perogative...but your assumptions are not different from those we placed on african americans or women less than 100 years ago.

[banana7570]

Surely as a "scientist", you must concede that no one has any idea of the hopes and dreams of another living thing...except that living thing. Morals are clearly relative, - it would seem to me that a scientifically prudent possibility would be to use the vegetative and imprisoned for experiments relative to humans-since clearly I could not imagine that they have any "hopes or dreams" worth saving (good thing I am not in charge, eh?)