and personally, i think this is disgusting. that poor animal is running around in that tiny run for ages whilst scientists treat it like shit and probably just kill it after, when it could be free with a family doing what it is supposed to. not like it gets payed in any way... And to be honest, it doesn't to me look like they are doing this test for a crucial piece of scientific evidence. You're just ignorant. What are you like, 5? Having fun going against people who care? big and clever you...
For ages? 10 mins. No, scientists do not 'treat it like shit', unless you believe all animals have rights, then yes, we are holding the rats in captivity, just like what happens with pet rats. I'm assuming you're vegan?
That is correct, rats don't know they will be out in 10 minutes. It is not a 'weird run', it is the elevated plus maze (EPM). It's one behavioural test for anxiety. Rats feel safe in enclosed spaces and are scared of open spaces naturally because they are prey animals. The more anxious, the more time it spends in the inclosed arms. We can use this test to objectivly measure anxiety behaviour in rats and mice. Feel free to google it for more info. [cont]
[cont 2]This particular experiment looked at how administering the hormone oxytocin in different ways can reduce anxiety behaviour. This was done a while ago as oxytocin nasal sprays in humans are being studied at the moment. After, the rats were put back into their homecages. But often, they are killed (anesthesia overdose) so their brains are examined.
Now I'm not sure if you really care about rats or just want to pick a fight on youtube because you don't seem to get rats [con]
[cont 3] Rats prefer dark over light so 'no natural light' is not really a problem. They are actually scared of bright light naturally. Rats are social animals so they MUST be kept with other rats. Actually, it is cruel to keep them alone (unless there is a good reason) but still, many pet owners do it. I do agree that the cages are crap. We've put rats in big open enclosures, but they just stick to the corner and hiding spots as they don't like open spaces. [cont]
[cont 4]What would be better is a burrow type environment as that's how rats naturally live. Problem with that is animal techs need to look after hundreds of rats in an animal housing facility and they must check the health several times per week. If they're all in burrows, it's hard. And we use animals because we can control their breeding and environment so there is less variation between them. So all the environments need to be the same. [cont]
[cont 5] Still, a lot of this is also money saving for the government, and that means the tax payer which is not really bad, it's about priority Rats and mice are not even considered ANIMALS in the US for animal welfare protection. All these experiments we do show they are as intelligent as dogs and importantly, can suffer like cats or dogs. They just don't live for very long in comparison. While people are busting dogs out of labs, people are laying down mice traps and rat poison
Well it depends on what the test is, and what it's for. Yes some like this one are mild, but there are ones that are very brutel, and painful! In all the progress we make. Let us never forget all the lives we brake, and take. By the way I was not disapointed, very happy the rat didn't get hurt! :)
If you are talking about things such as in vitro, computer modeling, brain scans, etc those to compliment the animal research rather then replace it. Like animal studies, those all have their limitations. For example, you can't test the effect of a drug on behaviour by looking at a bunch of cells in vitro.
Sometimes, an animal experiment can be done a different way without using animals. If that's the case, by law, then animals cannot be used.
The nervous systems of animals are not equal to that of humans, so the results of neuroscientific animal research are questionable. The local university of my hometown is conducting experiments on the open brains of apes, inserting probes without anesthetics, forcing them in clamps for hours, bombarding them with epilepsy-inducing flashes and sounds. The reason for all that is, they "might" use the results to understand alzheimer's better. It's not even clear if the results are applicable.
That's why it all depends on what you are studying. And actually, one human's nervous system is different to another humans, which is why you get such variation in response to drugs. Researchers must take this into account when designing the experiment.
As for results not being clear... this is because it is research! If we knew the answer, it wouldn't be called research.
Just because you're depicted a mild psych experiment, doesn't mean that horrible invasive practices like vivisection aren't totally common and done in the name of crap like artificial sweeteners, make-up, and window cleaners. You obviously are pushing an agenda.
Yes, I'm pushing an agenda. And that agenda is that animal experimentation is not all the violence and crap that groups like PETA and ALF make it out to be. And there are different kinds of experiments. Some are cruel and not very helpful, such as the LD50 and those need to be campaigned against, but that doesn't mean every single study is like that.
When people yell out "Stop animal testing!" we obviously aren't yelling at things like this. So, eventhough what you're saying is true, it doesn't mean it really changed anything. The point is to stop torturing of animals but since a scientist can easily say "It is absolutely necessary for the experiements" means that animal testing needs to be stopped or LARGELY regulated
I am concerned about the extremists who yell out "Stop animal testing!" as they are against them all. I agree with those who are concerned about animal welfare and wanting to stop animal cruelty.
It is largely regulated by animal ethics committees. And when people like animal liberation front yell out "Stop animal testing!" they mean all experiments because they violate animal rights.
When animal welfare supporters say it, they usually refer to safety testing and cosmetic testing or anything involving pain. Experiments need to be regulated on a case by case basis not an out right blanket ban on them all.
yeah ofc, they dont choose the "boring" stuff cuz its nothing to be that worried about... so we shall leave vivisection be cuz it involves "the mild" stuff as well? who knows what they did to the rat later that day?
By your logic, we should bad medicine because medicine can kill people, so lets leave medicine be cuz it involves 'healing people' as well? Or how about having children. Many parents abuse their children, so lets ban having children, or should we leave it because there are 'good parents' as well? Oh cars! How can we have cars on the road, they cause crashes!
No. How about we follow the strict laws that ensure animal welfare priority and punish those who break them.
first, i dont think "logic", thats for the pope... second, vivisection is done intentionally, its not something that "might happen", so by my "logic", we should cut vivisection, we have enough washing stuff, and medicine and we should go with traditional medicine, or alternative testing... plus most "medicines" are just chemical lobotomy... its mind poisoning drugs...
Yes, it depends if you have morals or don't have any..... the fact is ANIMALS ARE BEING TORTURED .... and you, unlike others, don't hide in the shadows but actually DEFEND IT... as you sow that shall you also reap...
but this experiment is very different to others, the monkeys of Silver Spring was very painfull for those monkeys, i know that i can respect but please dont make fun of animal testing, just watch earthlings it is a documentary, i am not attacking you but please watch earthlings there are 5 parts, animal testing, food, fur,circus etc.. just watch the part of animal testing and tell me, can you test on an animal like that???
Dude. There are different ways of animal testing. There is examination of the animals behaviour, to study the animals because people care about them. There is useless torturing of animals by people who don't care about animals. This is an example is what I call good animal testing. It doesn't always go like this. You have a limited view my friend.
This video is in response to videos made by animal rights activists. They say that we should not do any medical animal experimentation what so ever, which is different from animal welfare activists, who just want to stop cruel experiments. If you want to talk about limited views, talk to PETA, ALF etc.
they dont use one rat only for one experiment, like this, who knows what they would do to the rat later, he is healthy and "usable" so ofc they will use him later, so why should alf differ animals, they just take as many possible... a dog may be in a mild experiment, later theyll cut him open alive...
to whoever gave me a thumbs-down...you're pretty stupid. tell me who you are and i will support the claim of your being a dumbass with a great argument...
7. Google or Yahoo "Hans Ruesch Centre" and when on his site look for the videos section and watch "Bad Medicine" and "Mice to Men". The others are just as informative and have nothing to do with the likes of PETA or other names, in fact they used only parts of some of these videos.
They focus on the scientific fraud of vivisection.
6. There are many past and present experiments you have not a clue about, some you may though. Ah Wikipedia, the misleading site of misinformation. Why put so much faith in a site that is based on public opinion alone? Some of that site may be honest on word definitions but not everything. As for laws dont get me started on them, they are an absolute joke. Vivisectors decide at the end of the day what the animals endure with or without anesthesia...
5. Why are you repeating past experiments? They have been done before and tell us nothing about humans. One only can compare similarities. You will find it in rats, humans, monkeys, cats, and pretty much any animal for that matter (minus fish for obvious reasons) although I guess they reversed it with them...
experiment and they found the monkey would rather starve than get his snack).
4. Of course you will not let the rats drown because you are doing those experiments, not them who did them years ago. Not all vivisectors or vivisectionists are in the same state of mind. But all think animal experiments provide some sort of benefits. They dont.
is torture and is very unpleasant for them. Lets say I was forced to hold onto a rope which was tied to someone hanging off a cliff, if I fell asleep the person falls to their death. I would hold on for as long as I could even though it would be very unpleasant for me. Or how about a monkey who is given a switch to press, if he presses it he gets a snack but the switch activates an electric current which shocks another monkey in an a joining compartment. (That actually happened in an...
3. As Ive said there were many experiments and yes some of them involved the rats drowning. They wont tell you this themselves because it gives vivisectors a bad light and shows their true colours. I think cats were also used with such water based experiments.
What is torture? When something becomes so unpleasant one wants to escape it but cannot because they are stuck to endure it for any given period of time in whatever given way. So if a rat is forced to go without sleep or drown that...
what past vivisectors have done and said themselves.
2. On the actual experiments, no I am not misinformed about the level of shocks given. They did raise the electric current with many experiments and not just with rats, they have used, monkeys, cats, dogs and probably others too. There is nothing to be learned about humans from these experiments. You only find out how the rats will react in them...
I did consider the video shown here to be yours as with the other one I also commented on. But one cannot be sure if it was yours or by someone else, the only hint of it not being by actual vivisectors is the look of it. If you have seen other videos of actual past experiments you will see they exactly as I have described them, or better.
Your description of this experiment sounds very little different to what I have said. In fact you are repeating...
ShroedingerWatcher, first of all, I appreciate that you took the time to write a nice, decent intelligent response, which shows youve thought about it well.
Of course I believe you are misinformed, especially with your description of experiments ;) The one in this video is one of mine, called the elevated plus maze, is a paradigm often used by neuroscientists to measure anxiety behaviour. Rats are naturally scared of open spaces but they also like to explore.
If a rat is anxious, they will spend more time in the enclosed arms of this maze, like this rat did.
You describe other common experiments, but in a misinformed way. The first one, I think you are talking about fear conditioning? A tone is sounded, and then the rat is given a small millisecond shock from the floor, which startles the rat, without hurting it. After a few shocks like this, the rat will startle to the tone alone, without the shock. A similar thing is also done with humans.
I would indeed be lying to say that it isnt stressful for a rat. It is. But it isnt torture, thats for sure.
Then there is the Morris water maze. This is a simple memory task, rats can swim fine. The one about seeing how long the rat gives up, I think you are referring to the forced swim test, which is meant to screen for depressive behaviours. Giving up DOES NOT mean drowning. The rat does not like being in that water, so it will look for a way out.
If the rat is showing depressive behaviour, it will stop trying to get out. It will NOT drown!! They are left for ten minutes.
The one about deprived of sleep placed on rotating discs... I used this just last year, and again, its NOT about drowning. Its called the flowerpot technique The ethics committee would not allow it through if the rats had any chance of drowning, even on accident. This experiment is used to selectively deprive REM sleep from a rat.
The rats cages are now lined with water, about 4cm high. The rat can comfortably walk around in it. In this cage, there are some platforms which are big enough to stand and sit on, but too small to lie on. A rat can sleep sitting, but only non REM sleep. When they get to the REM stage, they lose muscle tone (as is normal, same with humans)and fall over and lie down. Only they fall in the water, which wakes them up. Thats the purpose of it.
Not to see how long they can stay awake because their lives depended on it. That really does sound shocking and I really do hope nothing like that is done anywhere. I only really know the law in Victoria, Australia, I have a copy of the Act, but not other countries. Feel free to search for the name of these experiments on Wikipedia and google for a more in depth explanation, no room here for it :P
Also, yes, animals are often dissected to look at the effects on the brain, and other organs. They are killed first, or put under deep anaesthesia from which they will never recover (think of taking a pet to the vet to be put to sleep) and shouldnt be cut up without it! Thats just disgusting, and Ive heard of it being done before the 50s, but I dont know how true it is, or if they were just urban legends or being trying to shock me.
A newbie would probably agree vivisection cant be abolished on the medical grounds and even take the likes of Pro-Test seriously when they claim there has been some benefit from animal research.
But then you have the thinkers, the ones not afraid to ask question even if they themselves are not scientists. And then you have actual vivisectors who realized one day what they were doing was a major mistake because they could see why it was a mistake....
Then of course should folks forget them we only have to wait for vivisectors to give us more examples.
However, there is favoured journalism when it comes to so-called animal welfare organizations or those claiming to be against vivisection. They show the graphic content, they show some examples of animal abuse, but they never point out the scientific facts and that is because it is very damaging to their business. They focus on morals while ignoring the medical facts and science...
results. I can easily give you the opposite results of animal experimentation.
No surgery, nothing, not a single thing has been of benefit because of vivisection. In fact there are enough examples to put it to absolute shame although some dont like having those examples pointed out so its all discreetly forgotten.
But not all of us forget them, and not all of us are silly enough to take the words of vivisectionists because they are all misinformed, uneducated on the basis of science...
abdomen and yes the rat had no anesthetic as you could easily notice the rats feet twitching vigorously when he cut the rat open, not before.
The claims in this YouTube video are of favoured journalism, it is one of the many misleading tricks vivisectors fool newbies into thinking things are not that bad. And as far as vivisection goes, no it has never benefited anyone and never will.
I have been given so-called examples from those that believe in it, all they have shown me is favoured...
long it took for the rat to give up and drown in the water. Another water based experiment was of rats deprived of sleep placed on rotating discs just above water, if the rat fell asleep they would drown or would try to stay awake for as long as possible. At the end of all experiments all animals are dissected and particular parts of them studied. In particular I remember very old footage of a rat strapped down on a table on his/her back, the laymen was recorded as he cut open the rats...
mentioned. Others involved the rats placed in deep water filled containers with a maze, the same thing is being researched, the rat has to swim around the maze to find their way out. In some of those electro shock experiments some rats manage to climb onto the food racks or anything to hang onto...the researchers removed them so the rats could not escape. Of one water experiment in particular a rat was placed in a glass container roughly the same size as the rat, the laymen wanted to see how...
press the button every time the rat walks over the grid. Notes are taken over observation. Then there are other experiments using electro shock techniques. You notice the rat in the video is completely unharmed, that is not the case later on regarding the experiments later used, they operate on the rat attaching this long wire which if I remember right is rigged to a machine or computer to record the animal's brain or thought processes while used in the experiments including the one I...
Poor attempt to lie about animal experiments. That footage is old but looks similar to what past researchers did to rats, apparently they used them to study the psychological aspects, they would begin with something similar to the video above but it does not end there. They also conduct other tests, a rat is placed in a container large enough to run around in but the flooring is partly rigged to an electric current that is operated by a switch. The "researchers" (laymen or vivisectors) would...
I used to work in a pharmacology lab as a technician in my gap year. We'd "stun" the animals (rats) by cracking them off the desk or guillotining them. We'd pop the guinea pigs' necks so it's not all rainbows and sunshine, though it depends on the field. Didn't do much for the hangover on a morning! But necessary...
wow, this video popped up when i searched for an example of 'elevated plus maze' and it looks like i've stumbled on a hardcore debate. props to nervousneuron for showing the other side of animal testing. though for sure some animal tests are cruel and unnecessary, a vast many more are as humane as possible and contribute invaluable data to bettering lives around the world. wanting to abolish animal testing because some people abuse it is a narrow and misinformed argument.
Listen, i agree that not all experiments are horrible but it is still unfair And still there are animals out there that are being treated unfairlly and horribly as if they are just a wasted life. sorry biut i dont like this message. If you want experiments on animals to stop (which it should) then you should try to get people to realize what is happening.
but i have taken many classes throughout my college education that have covered how they test animals to determine how their brain works and most of them arnt like yours. they use electroshock many of the times but. your right it is not as bad because the mice are not as understanding as monkeys. and thats where my problem comes in when we use animals and blaintantly mistreat them and torture them for the benefit of the sick minded people that work their.
companies still mistreat animals whether we like it or not. under cover video footage shows us. and to monkeys! who are as almost as understanding as us. Like i said watch some video footage and put yourself in the monkeys position and then you tell me whether its humane or not. But we use all these great fancy drugs that make it okay right? according to your laws of nature. this is fine.
its sad how your regard these actions as "humane"? what does that mean?. To be completely honest you and most of us are ignorant citizens who only know what people tell us. u think it might b this way but your wrong. Tests like this benefit our economy and businesses. They do happen whether law say not 2 or not.
It is not humane at all. Imagine if your life was pissed away, for someone to remove part of your brain. Think before you speak. Its irrelevant when you have video footage from recent
irrelevant! Some studies might not harm animals. But 90% of them probablly do. Because we regard them as nothing, because they cant voice their opinions in a way we understand. And because they benefit corporate america. Testing on animals for new drugs, chemicals/pesticides, brain exp. etc. helps corporation and industriy remain competitive with new products. No1 funds for a lab to test which way a rat runs down a 4 way bridge. It is a problem, people are changing it and have been. You can sit.
'90% of them probablly do.' Guess what, 74% of stats are made up. 98% are made up when not cited.
'No1 funds for a lab to test which way a rat runs down a 4 way bridge.'
Yeah, that's true if we are talking about COSMETIC TESTING, which we are not. That is banned in many countries. As for pure research, like this video, how you think I got funding for this one? From the money tree? 4 way bridge.. lol, learn some about behaviour testing, psychology and neuroscience.
I know some pain can't be prevented but isn't every little and big meaningless and unneccessary pain just too many ? but good point with that video, I don't believe that every testing is cruel, but some of them are cruel enough to say that this is really the point were you wish those testings never happened
nervousneuron you've got a point.there are more harmless testings on animals than harmful ones but take just the word brain research. I know there are some harmless tests too but aren't most ones quite awful? brain research contains monitoring of brain activities,cutting out parts of brains,replacing parts of brains,stimulate brain areas and so on and all those tests contains a big machine with you skull (mostly forehead) staying open until they die shortly after the test.
And it's fair enough to be concerned about that kind of brain research. I was before I knew anything about it.
Those experiments are done anesthetized. Most of the time, the animal is humanely killed before waking up. Animals can be awake for it with appropriate anesthetic, the brain has no pain receptors. Which is why we can operate on humans in the same way. As for cutting out parts (lesion studies) animals are not aware of what happened, and is given post surgery analgesia.
Animals also should not die as a result of the experiment (there is toxicity testing, I don't support that). Most of the time, animals are humanely killed (for example, anesthetic overdose, ie. 'put to sleep') at some point after the experiment, depending on what the experiment was.
Im from argentina, so scuse my english or what ever.
You´re stupid mother fucker you know? why dont you see the others experiments with animals?
To much people make suffer to the animals just for a stupid study or i dont know, but that mouse walking there is not an excuse for the animal experimentation, mother fucker!
It doesn't matter if some of the testing is boring & not gory...The fact is that alot of animals do suffer immense pain and torture & are forced to live in tiny cages only to go completely insane from isolation and sheer boredom..Alot of "the worst of the worst" that peta shows is actually far from the "worst of the worst" try and find some of chinas animal torture testing & tell me that animal testing is still ok.
they leave out the boring stuff cause they no that won't make people think. that wasn't testing for medicine that is just testing to see how it thinks. Animal testing has ups and downs, not all of it is bad but most is.
This is not what draize and LD 50% testing looks like, hun. The animal testing you show is not even common. This is not cosmetic testing, this is not medical research. How often do you think the psychology of rats is tested?
Wow... the elevated plus maze is a widely used paradigm used to assess anxiolytic effects of drugs among other things. So I believe you are mistaken...
what kind of drugs are you on? it`s great that they`re all not horid , but what about the ones when animals suffer horribly.& who the hell give anyonethe right to take any life AT ALL or USE IT for their own purposes? what gives anyone the right to play GOD!!!
these animals are electricuted put through depravation & a ton of shit more. why don`t YOU check out some facts before saying something so rediculous...THEN GET BACK TO US!!
The TRUTH is that animals and people are different, and not exact in an bodily function. Imagine this, if you will... Beagles and small monkeys force to smoke and wear back packs with nicotine for the good of human kind. Now that's real productive, right? We already know what cigarette smoke causes in humans, there is no need to continue testing these on animals. Also, feeding beagles high fat high cholesterol diets to see the effects of harding of the arteries-IN A CARNIVORE??
No, we are very similar, biochemically. Animal testing is legitimate because we are so similar. We do react to certain things differently, but humans do not make good research subjects for ethical and practical reasons.
are you kidding me?you must be a medical/science student, who is blinded by the books they want you to read. Ever read the book that has Splenda in it, where the animals died from eating Splenda, and yet it still made the market for human consumption? Now are we the same?I never heard of any human dying from Splenda. Please don't refer me to senseless vids. anyone can make those kinds of videos. Educate yourself, watch videos on Covance and what they do to animals and continue to get away with.
lol! Oh noes, the education is making us stupid! Blinded by knowledge.
A simple wikipedia search explains why Splenda is still marketed
"Results from over 100 animal and clinical studies in the FDA approval process unanimously indicated a lack of risk associated with sucralose intake.[8] However, some adverse effects were seen at doses that significantly exceeded the estimated daily intake (EDI), which is 1.1 mg/kg/day. [cont]
When the EDI is compared to the intake at which adverse effects are seen, known as the highest no adverse effects limit (HNEL), at 1500 mg/kg/day, there is a large margin of safety.
THERE YOU GO! I knew you were some kiknd of medical/science student. BTW, THE DEFINITION OF WIKIPEDIA- a dictionary for dumb people by dumb people. Anyone can add information to a subject there. I recently went back for my Masters' degree and NONE of my professors would let me use Wikipedia for any of my research papers. It is the most unreliable source out there. And Splenda did kill EVERY animal they gave it too. Kinda like smoking,we know it kills humans and animals don't smoke,by U make 'em.
its good for small checks friend obviously not for any rigorous academic exercise or publication. A majority of articles are accurate enough for a layman understanding
@ sealgryhnd Okay MA or MSc big difference especially when discussing research. If you're talking about fidelity of results then I'll pose a very specific example. How are we to intimately explore the structure-function relationships of the brain without invasive techniques. Tissue culture (plated neurons) and other non-animal methods will prove to be inadequate in determining BEHAVIORAL responses from treatments, interventions or drugs
They very well may be inadequate, but thus far, so have the tests that have been executed on helpless animals. There have been very few successful tests on the brain. We have the technology to do the proper tests, but somehow, people don't use it. Furthermore, BEHAVIORAL responses to treatment are lacking, because each person is made up differently (animals, also),there are never any finite answers to these questions with a blanket statement about a certain treatment.You have to agree with that.
Sealgryhnd, THERE YOU GO! making assumptions without evidence to back it up.
Firstly, I'm a research assistant, not a student. I obviously was a student once, and I hope you were too. Occupation has no bearing on the argument
Now wikipedia. The reason it is unreliable is because it can be edited any time so it cannot be accurately referenced. You don't even know who the author is! Like a textbook, it's a secondary source, not the original paper. This isn't an academic journal publication{cont}
this is an informal discussion/debate on the Internetz. Wikipedia is easy to look up for everyone, and everyone has access. Not everyone had access to papers of original research. Wikipedia also does cite its sources (if the article is good lol) so you can go to the splenda page and have a look for yourself. OF course animals will die if you give something way way over the average human consumption. It can be splenda, it can be caffeine or even water!
All articles are not cited properly on Wikipedia, therefore it is not at all reliable. It is the gossip column of the Internet. Furthermore, I don't make assuptions when debating. And you are right occupation has no bearing on the argument, because I am definitely more informed than most lab assistants, lab researchers, and without question most students in the Science field. Wanna hear the best part... I am a Computer Forensics Investigator, not a scientist. It isn't even my specialty! WOW,HUH?
In addition, Splenda, like all of the ARTIFICIAL SWEETNERS, is not good for you and they killed numerous animals to figure that out! That's genius!! I suppose you agree that they should continue to test tobacco on monkeys and dogs too,eh? I do see that you don't agree with animal cruelty, and for that I applaud you, however; what do you consider animal cruelty? Please don't be blinded by the senseless tests performed daily to rationalize animal testing.
...so.......not all animal testing is bad?..... i'm confused, are you saying that groups like 'PETA' dramatise situations to make people want to help?... because, i just saw a documentary in which showed a fox being skinned alive, i don't think the investigators could add any more stress to the animal. please elaborate. or humor me, tell me it's all CGI :/ ?
uhm yes, people show the worst, because this sort of animal testing isn't hurting the animal and putting it in great pain. there is no killing involved in this kind. its the bad,painfull,hurting that we need to stop! not them running around...retard
Maybe you should do a little research on the issue before making such comments and calling names.
There is killing involved in almost every research project. These rats I used were eventually put down. This video is about animal rights videos (ban animal exploitation, whether pain is involved or not) NOT animal welfare. They make the situation look worse than it is. For example, 'undercover agents' stress the animals out just for the camera.
What a smart ass constructing this video. This video demonstrates a rat in a a mechanical arm maze for testing of spatial memory, it is not an example of VIVISECTION which literally means 'live cutting', which is a deprivation of animal rights that many people are against. Not simple psychological testing where the animal is not harmed. Perhaps next time you would like to show a cat restrained in stereotaxic equipment with electrodes in its brain?
This video is actually of an elevated plus maze for testing of anxiety related behaviour. Now as to vivisection, while what you say is true to the dictionary meaning, this is how ALF define it: "Vivisection is defined as the act or practice of performing experiments on living animals."
This is still a deprivation of animal rights, and I do not waste my time trying to convince animal rights activists this is not the case. What my POV is it is not a deprivation of animal welfare, which is what most people are concerned with.
Stereotaxic devices are there to assist with brain surgery, including with humans. It may look nasty, but it's there to keep the head still and to provide co-ordinates. All done under anesthesia of course.
Sweetheart, difference is, people volunteer for brain surgery that might help them, lab animals are forced into brain lesions which might destroy them. That, is the ethical difference. That is why the stereotaxic device in the later instance is used to restrain an animal which is NOT sedated, seeing as brain surgery is not done under general anaesthetic. And here, 'restrain' is the right use of the word.
Sweetheart, we wouldn't be able to develop the methods (or even obtain basic information about how the brain works, to start with) without working with animals first. I like how you conveniently overlook this fact.
Also, I've done some neurophysiology experiments during my studies (now I work with cell cultures and slices, mostly) and sedatives were always used. Same goes for every other experiment I can think of. Commonly used s.d.'s is not even *built* for restraining a non-sedated animal.
There is no excuse for restraining something against it's will to inflict a life of degradation and pain on it. If science has shown us anything, it is that all beings, in being alive, are the same.
If research is for the sole benefit of human kind, then why the competition for sucess & recognition? Why don't pharmaceutical companies sell affordable HIV/AIDS treatments to countries most highly afflicted with HIV/AIDS? Profit. The whole function of this institute is completely transparent.
In reply to your first comment, kudos for being both.
Furthermore, this is hardly pioneering research, is it? It's just a slightly adapted versions of a million similar experiments, if that. How original. I'm glad your ethics committee approved this, it certainly justifies that the benefit to man-kind clearly outweighs animal suffering (i.e. intense boredom on both parts).
Seriously though, joking aside, you don't really believe in vivisection, do you?
fuck you dumb ass you are doing the same thing. selective journalism... you are only showing the mild stuff. anyway it doesnt matter its still animal testing and its still fucked up
I've work with mices. And I've made about 50+ Gb of Morris water maze video. Of course - no any blood, pain and so on. Typical neuroscience (memory and cognition) experiment - is experiment with mazes.
Okay you have also used selective journalism...you could have done that in your bedroom
I realise that not all labs are cruel, and more alternatives have arived without animal tested products, but the issue still remains, there are unecessary tests on live subjects that go towards nothing but pain and agony, so maybe your half right then
There are those who abuse and those who can change in any industry, sadly i havent seen any real major breakthroughs, so your video is just as misleading
I'd also say that in certain cases, it's preferable to hurt an animal than a human in the clinical tests, for reasons that have only to do with ethics, and not with scientific things.
As far as medical questions, certain animal tests can be reliable. Certain ones cannot. It's all shades of grey. I can't just take a side for or against "animal testing," as it's such a subjective term that it means almost nothing.
Well, to be fair, I'd say that this video perhaps deals in the same black and white that PETA does: It's either all horrifying, or it's all perfectly fine.
Not all animal testing involves pain. There's also the difference between testing animal psychology, which is painless, and using animals to test the dangers of something, in place of humans.
I'm not going to assert an ethical position, because someone will attack it either way, and I'll make nothing but enemies by saying it on YouTube.
Have you thought over my suggestion to turn your career to REAL research instead of chopping up defenslesss animals and other experiments like this which are ALL a waste of time and money? You pointed out that drugs go through clinical trials which most people realize. The problem is trials on humans are not done long enough or on enough people and that is why the unknowing public are test subjects. Animal tests only provide misleading results.
What about injecting cancer cells on animals?? And forcing monkeys to smoke? We know that this happened. Industry it's really cruel, yes. You can't denay. Maybe ones are less worse than others, but most are very cruel with animals.
You make a good point, the test where a rabbit is blinded with clorox is prominant rarely seen is the test where the rabbit infact doesnt not want to play monopoly. good vid,I'm against animals being harmed this rat looks like he was bored more than anything.
Ofcoarse you will never admit you are torturing animals. You are inflicting pain on a defenseless animal, that's torture.
I am well aware about the different ways animals are tortured in experiments. It's what I think ahout all the time because I was injured at a demonstration at UCLA asking why they refuse to debate what they claim is helping human beings with our tax money.I would ask you to debate a MD but you are no one special.But maybe you are, who do you work for?
I am no one special, just a mere post grad student from Australia.
I have heard so many anti-viv sites say "no vivisector will debate us!!', and I wonder why. Even if they lose the debate, it doesn't change whether animal experiments are wrong or right, just how good the debaters were in convincing the audience. I do think it would be a good idea for more debates on the issue so both sides can understand the other side a little better.
You seem to think vivisection debates are for proving whether vivisection is right or wrong ethically. A scientific debate has NOTHING to do with ethics, its' about proving that it's not safe for humans to use a different species as a model for the human being. Vivivisectors won't debate because they are incompetant and hide what they do to animals from the nieve public. I seriously suggest that you change your career plans and conduct REAL research, meaning don't use animals. The ALF is alive.
Scientific Fraud. Vivisectors are the most evil people living on this planet because not only do you inflict torture and murder on defenseless animals, you cause sufferng in humans with your drug recalls do to the fact that animals react differently thatn humans. It's a fact. Vivisection will be abolished one way or another.
Torture and murder.... perhaps you should look up those words in the dictionary. Yes, there is killing, but no murder! Also, any drugs released are based on human trials. I agree, it would be stupid to release drugs tested *only* on animals. Animals are not only used for drug testing, but for theory testing too, from which our knowledge of the world is based upon.
I offered to drop a lawsuit against UCLA if they would just debate and pay my medical bill. They injured me at a demonstration. UCLA has not debated in 20 years! Chancellor Block likes to experiment on mice. Regardless of the "amount" of suffering in this video, a mouse is not a minature man. Animals are different species that react differently to drugs and that is why vivisectors run when you beg them to debate what they claim is helping human beings. Tax dollars down the drain.
Sure, they may be using the worst of the worst, but that just means that it HAPPENS. It's not like it's rare. Many animals are being mistreated in animal testing. For example, where is this rat going to go when this mild test is complete? Probably back to a too-small cage. And is he ever going to be set free? No. He'll never know what it's like to be loved and cared for as a pet because of testing.
cant stand this. all these ppl that abuse and test on animals are making this world a horrible place for these innocent animals.
retards who kill animals for fun,anger, entertainment,testing or any other reason. they're god's creatures! they're creatures who don't murder, steal, or make war. if you kill or hurt an innocent animal, you might as well go kill your neighbor while you're at it. STOP ANIMAL TESTING AND ABUSE NOW.
Sure, many animal experiments are perfectly benign. So what? People who care about animals object to experiments that cause animal suffering. I don't see what's wrong with that position.
Errr...I wouldn't go pointing out that the AR/anti-viv movement uses emotive propaganda, to cause individuals guilt, sadness and anger.
This is exactly what pro-vivers do! choose between a rat or your child, no scientific debate...isn't that emotive??
Furthermore, on the topic of selective journalism, isn't it ironic that M,R&M features just one study. Selective? Isn't it also strange that they left out any "bad" bits as well!! And they claim its the truth...ironic, isn't it?
to the maker of this. yea ok go ahead and tell your self that animal testing is ok. it doesnt matter how many hours go by without the bad shit. the bad shit still DOES happen and it is not ok. animals have hearts and feelings, and it is not ok to ever be cruel to them, not even to test stuff out that would help humans. so keep lying to yourself to make it feel better.
There is no connection between a Heart and Feelings im afraid. The Heart is the thing that makes the blood squirt all over the place when you cut somethings head off :)
Yeah and we need animal experimentation! stupid experiments on animals should be stopped like when they put screws in their head.. However, we do need some experementing. Like that is how we found khemo to treat cancer. And the khemo helped the animals too, it treated their cancer as well. So yeah, when it is unnessicary, it should be banned but if it is for a good cause I am all for it. I care about people more than animals by a long shot.
How can u say u r NOT using the technique called selective journalism ?????????
How can u assume this one real video clip present the whole story of so many different types of animal tests ???????????
If there were no cruel things going on, how would the people against animal testing be able to use the technique called selective journalism ??????????
Resources are limited to obtain footage of animal experimentation, vivisection, and other animal cruelties. They're prized and exploited do to difficulty in obtainment. Sure, it is noted not all experiments entertain blood, and gore, yet, PUT YOURSELF IN THAT ANIMAL'S POSITION. The video you portrayed as boredom, is it not truly boring to the subject? Sad, and alone, and in captivity. Even this, as dismissive as it may seem to you, would not be, if you endured this experimentation, ignorant ass.
Resources are limited to obtain footage of animal experimentation, vivisection, and other animal cruelties. They're prized and exploited do to difficulty in obtainment. Sure, it is noted not all experiments entertain blood, and gore, yet, PUT YOURSELF IN THAT ANIMAL'S POSITION. The video you portrayed as boredom, is it not truly boring to the subject? Sad, and alone, and in captivity. Even this, as dismissive as it may seem to you, would not be, if you endured this experimentation, ignorant ass.
All in all, we have to remember that we're not subjecting animals to cruelty for our morbid pleasure. Instead, we are providing valuable information for the development of bioscience and humanity. Selective journalism or not, one cannot deny the pragmatic goals of animal experimentation.
I do tests like this called the elevated plus maze. This video is correct in saying not all testing is cruel. As a vegetarian and animal lover who is getting and education in physiology I was hesitant to even know... All my mice do is eat high fat diet, get weighed every two weeks, and do mazes like this. They live a long happy life. I did watch a beagle video and it breaks my heart. Researchers can make a choice to be more humane and not cause pain or suffering. We do it all the time.
Thanks for this reply :) I'm doing physiology now, using a radial arm maze. I remember my first year of undergrad, reading my first paper on research which used animals. I was so shocked to read the rats were 'sacrificed' (I still remember the wording) so they could use the muscle tissue. I thought they picked rats up off the street!
Now things are much different that I understand the process.
And your method was also to leave out the terrible stuff also still known as selective journalism.
How about showing the corporate agenda with rows of dogs and rabbits with eyes full of bleach and acids along with other harmful commercial substances.
Those are the test we're making the real noise about.
It's satire (or parody, what ever, not sure if I used the right word), as the point is you can't show a few experiments (most of which look worse than they are, others are breaking the law) to represent them all.
By selective journalism, I mean either staging a photo (like PETA's raids on primate labs where they put the monkeys in restaints themselves and took pics) or leaving out vital information (eg. letting us know the animal is unconscious during that surgery).
As for rows of dogs and rabbits - that sounds like the draze test, which is illegal in many countries/, and it should be! Inflicting suffering like that on conscious animals for cosmetic testing. For that there are alternatives, as I haven't died from any of my 'not tested on animals' products.
And that has little to do with academic medical experimentation.
Technically, those against animal experimentation are telling the truth. Animal experimentation is wrong, but without it a lot of our population would be dead. It is how you look at it, and I am compeletly AGAINST ANIMAL EXPERIMENTAION.
and personally, i think this is disgusting. that poor animal is running around in that tiny run for ages whilst scientists treat it like shit and probably just kill it after, when it could be free with a family doing what it is supposed to. not like it gets payed in any way... And to be honest, it doesn't to me look like they are doing this test for a crucial piece of scientific evidence. You're just ignorant. What are you like, 5? Having fun going against people who care? big and clever you...
SuperfluousRaversX 1 week ago
@SuperfluousRaversX
For ages? 10 mins. No, scientists do not 'treat it like shit', unless you believe all animals have rights, then yes, we are holding the rats in captivity, just like what happens with pet rats. I'm assuming you're vegan?
nervousneuron 1 week ago
@nervousneuron
10 minutes. They're no good at rationally thinking. 10 minutes struggling in a weird run is not nice, at all. and then what happens to it?
How do they not treat it like shit? is it kept in a little cage with lots of other rats and no natural light? probably...
What is the test proving anyway out of interest?
SuperfluousRaversX 1 week ago
@SuperfluousRaversX
That is correct, rats don't know they will be out in 10 minutes. It is not a 'weird run', it is the elevated plus maze (EPM). It's one behavioural test for anxiety. Rats feel safe in enclosed spaces and are scared of open spaces naturally because they are prey animals. The more anxious, the more time it spends in the inclosed arms. We can use this test to objectivly measure anxiety behaviour in rats and mice. Feel free to google it for more info. [cont]
nervousneuron 1 week ago
[cont 2]This particular experiment looked at how administering the hormone oxytocin in different ways can reduce anxiety behaviour. This was done a while ago as oxytocin nasal sprays in humans are being studied at the moment. After, the rats were put back into their homecages. But often, they are killed (anesthesia overdose) so their brains are examined.
Now I'm not sure if you really care about rats or just want to pick a fight on youtube because you don't seem to get rats [con]
nervousneuron 1 week ago
[cont 3] Rats prefer dark over light so 'no natural light' is not really a problem. They are actually scared of bright light naturally. Rats are social animals so they MUST be kept with other rats. Actually, it is cruel to keep them alone (unless there is a good reason) but still, many pet owners do it. I do agree that the cages are crap. We've put rats in big open enclosures, but they just stick to the corner and hiding spots as they don't like open spaces. [cont]
nervousneuron 1 week ago
[cont 4]What would be better is a burrow type environment as that's how rats naturally live. Problem with that is animal techs need to look after hundreds of rats in an animal housing facility and they must check the health several times per week. If they're all in burrows, it's hard. And we use animals because we can control their breeding and environment so there is less variation between them. So all the environments need to be the same. [cont]
nervousneuron 1 week ago
[cont 5] Still, a lot of this is also money saving for the government, and that means the tax payer which is not really bad, it's about priority Rats and mice are not even considered ANIMALS in the US for animal welfare protection. All these experiments we do show they are as intelligent as dogs and importantly, can suffer like cats or dogs. They just don't live for very long in comparison. While people are busting dogs out of labs, people are laying down mice traps and rat poison
nervousneuron 1 week ago
this video is pathetic
SuperfluousRaversX 1 week ago
Your video is popular on Maldives
jesusfields35 2 weeks ago
Your video went viral on Cairo
irvingadkins616 3 weeks ago
this is true
anni97rocks 1 month ago
PETA are fucking gay you rock for uploading this video
it rely puts up a midle finger to peta
paddytheduck 2 years ago 4
Well it depends on what the test is, and what it's for. Yes some like this one are mild, but there are ones that are very brutel, and painful! In all the progress we make. Let us never forget all the lives we brake, and take. By the way I was not disapointed, very happy the rat didn't get hurt! :)
watchensee 2 years ago
no reason for animal testing when there are alternatives, which is the case.
FightForTheInnocent 2 years ago
What alternatives? For neuroscience?
If you are talking about things such as in vitro, computer modeling, brain scans, etc those to compliment the animal research rather then replace it. Like animal studies, those all have their limitations. For example, you can't test the effect of a drug on behaviour by looking at a bunch of cells in vitro.
Sometimes, an animal experiment can be done a different way without using animals. If that's the case, by law, then animals cannot be used.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
The nervous systems of animals are not equal to that of humans, so the results of neuroscientific animal research are questionable. The local university of my hometown is conducting experiments on the open brains of apes, inserting probes without anesthetics, forcing them in clamps for hours, bombarding them with epilepsy-inducing flashes and sounds. The reason for all that is, they "might" use the results to understand alzheimer's better. It's not even clear if the results are applicable.
boodleboy 2 years ago
@boodleboy
That's why it all depends on what you are studying. And actually, one human's nervous system is different to another humans, which is why you get such variation in response to drugs. Researchers must take this into account when designing the experiment.
As for results not being clear... this is because it is research! If we knew the answer, it wouldn't be called research.
nervousneuron 3 months ago
Great!
gargatua 2 years ago
Just because you're depicted a mild psych experiment, doesn't mean that horrible invasive practices like vivisection aren't totally common and done in the name of crap like artificial sweeteners, make-up, and window cleaners. You obviously are pushing an agenda.
L3m0nTr33s99 2 years ago
Yes, I'm pushing an agenda. And that agenda is that animal experimentation is not all the violence and crap that groups like PETA and ALF make it out to be. And there are different kinds of experiments. Some are cruel and not very helpful, such as the LD50 and those need to be campaigned against, but that doesn't mean every single study is like that.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
When people yell out "Stop animal testing!" we obviously aren't yelling at things like this. So, eventhough what you're saying is true, it doesn't mean it really changed anything. The point is to stop torturing of animals but since a scientist can easily say "It is absolutely necessary for the experiements" means that animal testing needs to be stopped or LARGELY regulated
Deadeye990 2 years ago
I totally agree with you.
msdork101 2 years ago
I am concerned about the extremists who yell out "Stop animal testing!" as they are against them all. I agree with those who are concerned about animal welfare and wanting to stop animal cruelty.
Animal research is already largely regulated.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
@Deadeye990
It is largely regulated by animal ethics committees. And when people like animal liberation front yell out "Stop animal testing!" they mean all experiments because they violate animal rights.
When animal welfare supporters say it, they usually refer to safety testing and cosmetic testing or anything involving pain. Experiments need to be regulated on a case by case basis not an out right blanket ban on them all.
nervousneuron 3 months ago
FYI this song is Clubbed To Death by Rob Dougan
NietzschePan 2 years ago
youre damn right!!! iam for the animal testing!!
Generalhammerlatte 2 years ago
yeah ofc, they dont choose the "boring" stuff cuz its nothing to be that worried about... so we shall leave vivisection be cuz it involves "the mild" stuff as well? who knows what they did to the rat later that day?
FNO108 2 years ago
By your logic, we should bad medicine because medicine can kill people, so lets leave medicine be cuz it involves 'healing people' as well? Or how about having children. Many parents abuse their children, so lets ban having children, or should we leave it because there are 'good parents' as well? Oh cars! How can we have cars on the road, they cause crashes!
No. How about we follow the strict laws that ensure animal welfare priority and punish those who break them.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
first, i dont think "logic", thats for the pope... second, vivisection is done intentionally, its not something that "might happen", so by my "logic", we should cut vivisection, we have enough washing stuff, and medicine and we should go with traditional medicine, or alternative testing... plus most "medicines" are just chemical lobotomy... its mind poisoning drugs...
FNO108 2 years ago
Yes, it depends if you have morals or don't have any..... the fact is ANIMALS ARE BEING TORTURED .... and you, unlike others, don't hide in the shadows but actually DEFEND IT... as you sow that shall you also reap...
rixflix1122 2 years ago
I do not defend animals being tortured. I defend animal experimentation.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
oh yeah, like, vivisection with doesnt exist?! bollocks
FNO108 2 years ago
but this experiment is very different to others, the monkeys of Silver Spring was very painfull for those monkeys, i know that i can respect but please dont make fun of animal testing, just watch earthlings it is a documentary, i am not attacking you but please watch earthlings there are 5 parts, animal testing, food, fur,circus etc.. just watch the part of animal testing and tell me, can you test on an animal like that???
nic19913 2 years ago
Dude. There are different ways of animal testing. There is examination of the animals behaviour, to study the animals because people care about them. There is useless torturing of animals by people who don't care about animals. This is an example is what I call good animal testing. It doesn't always go like this. You have a limited view my friend.
SemperLupePR 2 years ago
This video is in response to videos made by animal rights activists. They say that we should not do any medical animal experimentation what so ever, which is different from animal welfare activists, who just want to stop cruel experiments. If you want to talk about limited views, talk to PETA, ALF etc.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
they dont use one rat only for one experiment, like this, who knows what they would do to the rat later, he is healthy and "usable" so ofc they will use him later, so why should alf differ animals, they just take as many possible... a dog may be in a mild experiment, later theyll cut him open alive...
FNO108 2 years ago
because if you only show the boring stuff nobody would care
operationSMD 2 years ago
Congrats, you have answered the rhetorical question well :)
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Oh! thanks! lol
SupHobagg 2 years ago
This video shows a experiment on a rat, do you know what kind of experiment it is?
Dont you understund that its different experiments depending on WHAT they are testing?
What they are trying to find out?
What they are trying to find a cure too?
If you dont know more then what you show in this video, then its your problem.
I ASSUME this experiment is to see the behavior of the rat in a way they want to find out.. Im right aint I?
This is not about taking of half of their had and replace it.
2rs2pure 2 years ago
lol wot?
'I ASSUME this experiment is to see the behavior of the rat'... as is every other BEHAVIOURAL neuroscience experiment.
I know exactly what experiment this is because it's mine.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
HIJO DE LA GRAN PUTA
Angeldeleon7 2 years ago
Thank you for uploading this
SupHobagg 2 years ago 5
to whoever gave me a thumbs-down...you're pretty stupid. tell me who you are and i will support the claim of your being a dumbass with a great argument...
SupHobagg 2 years ago 2
Thumbs up :)
nervousneuron 2 years ago
7. Google or Yahoo "Hans Ruesch Centre" and when on his site look for the videos section and watch "Bad Medicine" and "Mice to Men". The others are just as informative and have nothing to do with the likes of PETA or other names, in fact they used only parts of some of these videos.
They focus on the scientific fraud of vivisection.
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
The more involved you are with vivisection, the less compassion you will show towards life, or non human life for that matter.
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
6. There are many past and present experiments you have not a clue about, some you may though. Ah Wikipedia, the misleading site of misinformation. Why put so much faith in a site that is based on public opinion alone? Some of that site may be honest on word definitions but not everything. As for laws dont get me started on them, they are an absolute joke. Vivisectors decide at the end of the day what the animals endure with or without anesthesia...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
5. Why are you repeating past experiments? They have been done before and tell us nothing about humans. One only can compare similarities. You will find it in rats, humans, monkeys, cats, and pretty much any animal for that matter (minus fish for obvious reasons) although I guess they reversed it with them...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
experiment and they found the monkey would rather starve than get his snack).
4. Of course you will not let the rats drown because you are doing those experiments, not them who did them years ago. Not all vivisectors or vivisectionists are in the same state of mind. But all think animal experiments provide some sort of benefits. They dont.
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
is torture and is very unpleasant for them. Lets say I was forced to hold onto a rope which was tied to someone hanging off a cliff, if I fell asleep the person falls to their death. I would hold on for as long as I could even though it would be very unpleasant for me. Or how about a monkey who is given a switch to press, if he presses it he gets a snack but the switch activates an electric current which shocks another monkey in an a joining compartment. (That actually happened in an...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
3. As Ive said there were many experiments and yes some of them involved the rats drowning. They wont tell you this themselves because it gives vivisectors a bad light and shows their true colours. I think cats were also used with such water based experiments.
What is torture? When something becomes so unpleasant one wants to escape it but cannot because they are stuck to endure it for any given period of time in whatever given way. So if a rat is forced to go without sleep or drown that...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
what past vivisectors have done and said themselves.
2. On the actual experiments, no I am not misinformed about the level of shocks given. They did raise the electric current with many experiments and not just with rats, they have used, monkeys, cats, dogs and probably others too. There is nothing to be learned about humans from these experiments. You only find out how the rats will react in them...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
1. Ill answer your replies in numbers.
I did consider the video shown here to be yours as with the other one I also commented on. But one cannot be sure if it was yours or by someone else, the only hint of it not being by actual vivisectors is the look of it. If you have seen other videos of actual past experiments you will see they exactly as I have described them, or better.
Your description of this experiment sounds very little different to what I have said. In fact you are repeating...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
You cannot extrapolate the data of animals to humans, they can only be compared or favoured in ways that give the illusion they benefit people.
The struggle between truth and lies continues.
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
ShroedingerWatcher, first of all, I appreciate that you took the time to write a nice, decent intelligent response, which shows youve thought about it well.
Of course I believe you are misinformed, especially with your description of experiments ;) The one in this video is one of mine, called the elevated plus maze, is a paradigm often used by neuroscientists to measure anxiety behaviour. Rats are naturally scared of open spaces but they also like to explore.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
If a rat is anxious, they will spend more time in the enclosed arms of this maze, like this rat did.
You describe other common experiments, but in a misinformed way. The first one, I think you are talking about fear conditioning? A tone is sounded, and then the rat is given a small millisecond shock from the floor, which startles the rat, without hurting it. After a few shocks like this, the rat will startle to the tone alone, without the shock. A similar thing is also done with humans.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
I would indeed be lying to say that it isnt stressful for a rat. It is. But it isnt torture, thats for sure.
Then there is the Morris water maze. This is a simple memory task, rats can swim fine. The one about seeing how long the rat gives up, I think you are referring to the forced swim test, which is meant to screen for depressive behaviours. Giving up DOES NOT mean drowning. The rat does not like being in that water, so it will look for a way out.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
If the rat is showing depressive behaviour, it will stop trying to get out. It will NOT drown!! They are left for ten minutes.
The one about deprived of sleep placed on rotating discs... I used this just last year, and again, its NOT about drowning. Its called the flowerpot technique The ethics committee would not allow it through if the rats had any chance of drowning, even on accident. This experiment is used to selectively deprive REM sleep from a rat.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
The rats cages are now lined with water, about 4cm high. The rat can comfortably walk around in it. In this cage, there are some platforms which are big enough to stand and sit on, but too small to lie on. A rat can sleep sitting, but only non REM sleep. When they get to the REM stage, they lose muscle tone (as is normal, same with humans)and fall over and lie down. Only they fall in the water, which wakes them up. Thats the purpose of it.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Not to see how long they can stay awake because their lives depended on it. That really does sound shocking and I really do hope nothing like that is done anywhere. I only really know the law in Victoria, Australia, I have a copy of the Act, but not other countries. Feel free to search for the name of these experiments on Wikipedia and google for a more in depth explanation, no room here for it :P
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Also, yes, animals are often dissected to look at the effects on the brain, and other organs. They are killed first, or put under deep anaesthesia from which they will never recover (think of taking a pet to the vet to be put to sleep) and shouldnt be cut up without it! Thats just disgusting, and Ive heard of it being done before the 50s, but I dont know how true it is, or if they were just urban legends or being trying to shock me.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
A newbie would probably agree vivisection cant be abolished on the medical grounds and even take the likes of Pro-Test seriously when they claim there has been some benefit from animal research.
But then you have the thinkers, the ones not afraid to ask question even if they themselves are not scientists. And then you have actual vivisectors who realized one day what they were doing was a major mistake because they could see why it was a mistake....
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
Then of course should folks forget them we only have to wait for vivisectors to give us more examples.
However, there is favoured journalism when it comes to so-called animal welfare organizations or those claiming to be against vivisection. They show the graphic content, they show some examples of animal abuse, but they never point out the scientific facts and that is because it is very damaging to their business. They focus on morals while ignoring the medical facts and science...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
results. I can easily give you the opposite results of animal experimentation.
No surgery, nothing, not a single thing has been of benefit because of vivisection. In fact there are enough examples to put it to absolute shame although some dont like having those examples pointed out so its all discreetly forgotten.
But not all of us forget them, and not all of us are silly enough to take the words of vivisectionists because they are all misinformed, uneducated on the basis of science...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
abdomen and yes the rat had no anesthetic as you could easily notice the rats feet twitching vigorously when he cut the rat open, not before.
The claims in this YouTube video are of favoured journalism, it is one of the many misleading tricks vivisectors fool newbies into thinking things are not that bad. And as far as vivisection goes, no it has never benefited anyone and never will.
I have been given so-called examples from those that believe in it, all they have shown me is favoured...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
long it took for the rat to give up and drown in the water. Another water based experiment was of rats deprived of sleep placed on rotating discs just above water, if the rat fell asleep they would drown or would try to stay awake for as long as possible. At the end of all experiments all animals are dissected and particular parts of them studied. In particular I remember very old footage of a rat strapped down on a table on his/her back, the laymen was recorded as he cut open the rats...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
mentioned. Others involved the rats placed in deep water filled containers with a maze, the same thing is being researched, the rat has to swim around the maze to find their way out. In some of those electro shock experiments some rats manage to climb onto the food racks or anything to hang onto...the researchers removed them so the rats could not escape. Of one water experiment in particular a rat was placed in a glass container roughly the same size as the rat, the laymen wanted to see how...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
press the button every time the rat walks over the grid. Notes are taken over observation. Then there are other experiments using electro shock techniques. You notice the rat in the video is completely unharmed, that is not the case later on regarding the experiments later used, they operate on the rat attaching this long wire which if I remember right is rigged to a machine or computer to record the animal's brain or thought processes while used in the experiments including the one I...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
Poor attempt to lie about animal experiments. That footage is old but looks similar to what past researchers did to rats, apparently they used them to study the psychological aspects, they would begin with something similar to the video above but it does not end there. They also conduct other tests, a rat is placed in a container large enough to run around in but the flooring is partly rigged to an electric current that is operated by a switch. The "researchers" (laymen or vivisectors) would...
ShroedingerWatcher 2 years ago
I used to work in a pharmacology lab as a technician in my gap year. We'd "stun" the animals (rats) by cracking them off the desk or guillotining them. We'd pop the guinea pigs' necks so it's not all rainbows and sunshine, though it depends on the field. Didn't do much for the hangover on a morning! But necessary...
andywaggott 2 years ago
thats the truth man
sparkolbaxter 2 years ago
wow, this video popped up when i searched for an example of 'elevated plus maze' and it looks like i've stumbled on a hardcore debate. props to nervousneuron for showing the other side of animal testing. though for sure some animal tests are cruel and unnecessary, a vast many more are as humane as possible and contribute invaluable data to bettering lives around the world. wanting to abolish animal testing because some people abuse it is a narrow and misinformed argument.
shishicd 2 years ago
lol, same thing with me. I typed in call of duty.
music4you99 2 years ago
Listen, i agree that not all experiments are horrible but it is still unfair And still there are animals out there that are being treated unfairlly and horribly as if they are just a wasted life. sorry biut i dont like this message. If you want experiments on animals to stop (which it should) then you should try to get people to realize what is happening.
zdfab15 2 years ago
but i have taken many classes throughout my college education that have covered how they test animals to determine how their brain works and most of them arnt like yours. they use electroshock many of the times but. your right it is not as bad because the mice are not as understanding as monkeys. and thats where my problem comes in when we use animals and blaintantly mistreat them and torture them for the benefit of the sick minded people that work their.
kski10 2 years ago
companies still mistreat animals whether we like it or not. under cover video footage shows us. and to monkeys! who are as almost as understanding as us. Like i said watch some video footage and put yourself in the monkeys position and then you tell me whether its humane or not. But we use all these great fancy drugs that make it okay right? according to your laws of nature. this is fine.
kski10 2 years ago
its sad how your regard these actions as "humane"? what does that mean?. To be completely honest you and most of us are ignorant citizens who only know what people tell us. u think it might b this way but your wrong. Tests like this benefit our economy and businesses. They do happen whether law say not 2 or not.
It is not humane at all. Imagine if your life was pissed away, for someone to remove part of your brain. Think before you speak. Its irrelevant when you have video footage from recent
kski10 2 years ago
irrelevant! Some studies might not harm animals. But 90% of them probablly do. Because we regard them as nothing, because they cant voice their opinions in a way we understand. And because they benefit corporate america. Testing on animals for new drugs, chemicals/pesticides, brain exp. etc. helps corporation and industriy remain competitive with new products. No1 funds for a lab to test which way a rat runs down a 4 way bridge. It is a problem, people are changing it and have been. You can sit.
kski10 2 years ago
Wow.
'90% of them probablly do.' Guess what, 74% of stats are made up. 98% are made up when not cited.
'No1 funds for a lab to test which way a rat runs down a 4 way bridge.'
Yeah, that's true if we are talking about COSMETIC TESTING, which we are not. That is banned in many countries. As for pure research, like this video, how you think I got funding for this one? From the money tree? 4 way bridge.. lol, learn some about behaviour testing, psychology and neuroscience.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Comment removed
kski10 2 years ago
I know some pain can't be prevented but isn't every little and big meaningless and unneccessary pain just too many ? but good point with that video, I don't believe that every testing is cruel, but some of them are cruel enough to say that this is really the point were you wish those testings never happened
hybridhelix88 2 years ago
nervousneuron you've got a point.there are more harmless testings on animals than harmful ones but take just the word brain research. I know there are some harmless tests too but aren't most ones quite awful? brain research contains monitoring of brain activities,cutting out parts of brains,replacing parts of brains,stimulate brain areas and so on and all those tests contains a big machine with you skull (mostly forehead) staying open until they die shortly after the test.
hybridhelix88 2 years ago
And it's fair enough to be concerned about that kind of brain research. I was before I knew anything about it.
Those experiments are done anesthetized. Most of the time, the animal is humanely killed before waking up. Animals can be awake for it with appropriate anesthetic, the brain has no pain receptors. Which is why we can operate on humans in the same way. As for cutting out parts (lesion studies) animals are not aware of what happened, and is given post surgery analgesia.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Animals also should not die as a result of the experiment (there is toxicity testing, I don't support that). Most of the time, animals are humanely killed (for example, anesthetic overdose, ie. 'put to sleep') at some point after the experiment, depending on what the experiment was.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Im from argentina, so scuse my english or what ever.
You´re stupid mother fucker you know? why dont you see the others experiments with animals?
To much people make suffer to the animals just for a stupid study or i dont know, but that mouse walking there is not an excuse for the animal experimentation, mother fucker!
maxiv815 2 years ago
You have good grasp of the English language.
I can tell because you use the most versatile word in the language - 'fuck' very well.
nervousneuron 2 years ago
Check out "Good science versus bad science" on youtube
kursk124 2 years ago
It doesn't matter if some of the testing is boring & not gory...The fact is that alot of animals do suffer immense pain and torture & are forced to live in tiny cages only to go completely insane from isolation and sheer boredom..Alot of "the worst of the worst" that peta shows is actually far from the "worst of the worst" try and find some of chinas animal torture testing & tell me that animal testing is still ok.
Whiterhin018 3 years ago
they leave out the boring stuff cause they no that won't make people think. that wasn't testing for medicine that is just testing to see how it thinks. Animal testing has ups and downs, not all of it is bad but most is.
neverfall0940 3 years ago
This is not what draize and LD 50% testing looks like, hun. The animal testing you show is not even common. This is not cosmetic testing, this is not medical research. How often do you think the psychology of rats is tested?
You are sadly mistaken.
KnittyGrittyNatch 3 years ago
This isn't about cosmetic animal testing, this is medical research, hun.
'How often do you think the psychology of rats is tested?' Heard of a field called neuroscience, by any chance?
nervousneuron 3 years ago
Wow... the elevated plus maze is a widely used paradigm used to assess anxiolytic effects of drugs among other things. So I believe you are mistaken...
anthonygador 2 years ago
what kind of drugs are you on? it`s great that they`re all not horid , but what about the ones when animals suffer horribly.& who the hell give anyonethe right to take any life AT ALL or USE IT for their own purposes? what gives anyone the right to play GOD!!!
these animals are electricuted put through depravation & a ton of shit more. why don`t YOU check out some facts before saying something so rediculous...THEN GET BACK TO US!!
ginamaltese 3 years ago
The TRUTH is that animals and people are different, and not exact in an bodily function. Imagine this, if you will... Beagles and small monkeys force to smoke and wear back packs with nicotine for the good of human kind. Now that's real productive, right? We already know what cigarette smoke causes in humans, there is no need to continue testing these on animals. Also, feeding beagles high fat high cholesterol diets to see the effects of harding of the arteries-IN A CARNIVORE??
sealgryhnd 3 years ago
No, we are very similar, biochemically. Animal testing is legitimate because we are so similar. We do react to certain things differently, but humans do not make good research subjects for ethical and practical reasons.
reaperkin 3 years ago
are you kidding me?you must be a medical/science student, who is blinded by the books they want you to read. Ever read the book that has Splenda in it, where the animals died from eating Splenda, and yet it still made the market for human consumption? Now are we the same?I never heard of any human dying from Splenda. Please don't refer me to senseless vids. anyone can make those kinds of videos. Educate yourself, watch videos on Covance and what they do to animals and continue to get away with.
sealgryhnd 3 years ago
lol! Oh noes, the education is making us stupid! Blinded by knowledge.
A simple wikipedia search explains why Splenda is still marketed
"Results from over 100 animal and clinical studies in the FDA approval process unanimously indicated a lack of risk associated with sucralose intake.[8] However, some adverse effects were seen at doses that significantly exceeded the estimated daily intake (EDI), which is 1.1 mg/kg/day. [cont]
nervousneuron 3 years ago
When the EDI is compared to the intake at which adverse effects are seen, known as the highest no adverse effects limit (HNEL), at 1500 mg/kg/day, there is a large margin of safety.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
THERE YOU GO! I knew you were some kiknd of medical/science student. BTW, THE DEFINITION OF WIKIPEDIA- a dictionary for dumb people by dumb people. Anyone can add information to a subject there. I recently went back for my Masters' degree and NONE of my professors would let me use Wikipedia for any of my research papers. It is the most unreliable source out there. And Splenda did kill EVERY animal they gave it too. Kinda like smoking,we know it kills humans and animals don't smoke,by U make 'em.
sealgryhnd 3 years ago
its good for small checks friend obviously not for any rigorous academic exercise or publication. A majority of articles are accurate enough for a layman understanding
anthonygador 2 years ago
@ sealgryhnd Okay MA or MSc big difference especially when discussing research. If you're talking about fidelity of results then I'll pose a very specific example. How are we to intimately explore the structure-function relationships of the brain without invasive techniques. Tissue culture (plated neurons) and other non-animal methods will prove to be inadequate in determining BEHAVIORAL responses from treatments, interventions or drugs
anthonygador 2 years ago
They very well may be inadequate, but thus far, so have the tests that have been executed on helpless animals. There have been very few successful tests on the brain. We have the technology to do the proper tests, but somehow, people don't use it. Furthermore, BEHAVIORAL responses to treatment are lacking, because each person is made up differently (animals, also),there are never any finite answers to these questions with a blanket statement about a certain treatment.You have to agree with that.
sealgryhnd 2 years ago
Sealgryhnd, THERE YOU GO! making assumptions without evidence to back it up.
Firstly, I'm a research assistant, not a student. I obviously was a student once, and I hope you were too. Occupation has no bearing on the argument
Now wikipedia. The reason it is unreliable is because it can be edited any time so it cannot be accurately referenced. You don't even know who the author is! Like a textbook, it's a secondary source, not the original paper. This isn't an academic journal publication{cont}
nervousneuron 2 years ago
{cont}
this is an informal discussion/debate on the Internetz. Wikipedia is easy to look up for everyone, and everyone has access. Not everyone had access to papers of original research. Wikipedia also does cite its sources (if the article is good lol) so you can go to the splenda page and have a look for yourself. OF course animals will die if you give something way way over the average human consumption. It can be splenda, it can be caffeine or even water!
nervousneuron 2 years ago
All articles are not cited properly on Wikipedia, therefore it is not at all reliable. It is the gossip column of the Internet. Furthermore, I don't make assuptions when debating. And you are right occupation has no bearing on the argument, because I am definitely more informed than most lab assistants, lab researchers, and without question most students in the Science field. Wanna hear the best part... I am a Computer Forensics Investigator, not a scientist. It isn't even my specialty! WOW,HUH?
sealgryhnd 2 years ago
In addition, Splenda, like all of the ARTIFICIAL SWEETNERS, is not good for you and they killed numerous animals to figure that out! That's genius!! I suppose you agree that they should continue to test tobacco on monkeys and dogs too,eh? I do see that you don't agree with animal cruelty, and for that I applaud you, however; what do you consider animal cruelty? Please don't be blinded by the senseless tests performed daily to rationalize animal testing.
sealgryhnd 2 years ago
Dogs are omnivore.
Karyn64 3 years ago
dogs are not omnivores. They will eat most anything, but are considered carnivores.
sealgryhnd 3 years ago
twat.
guttedsophie666 3 years ago
...so.......not all animal testing is bad?..... i'm confused, are you saying that groups like 'PETA' dramatise situations to make people want to help?... because, i just saw a documentary in which showed a fox being skinned alive, i don't think the investigators could add any more stress to the animal. please elaborate. or humor me, tell me it's all CGI :/ ?
SgtVadge 3 years ago
uhm yes, people show the worst, because this sort of animal testing isn't hurting the animal and putting it in great pain. there is no killing involved in this kind. its the bad,painfull,hurting that we need to stop! not them running around...retard
debraaacxo 3 years ago
Maybe you should do a little research on the issue before making such comments and calling names.
There is killing involved in almost every research project. These rats I used were eventually put down. This video is about animal rights videos (ban animal exploitation, whether pain is involved or not) NOT animal welfare. They make the situation look worse than it is. For example, 'undercover agents' stress the animals out just for the camera.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
What a smart ass constructing this video. This video demonstrates a rat in a a mechanical arm maze for testing of spatial memory, it is not an example of VIVISECTION which literally means 'live cutting', which is a deprivation of animal rights that many people are against. Not simple psychological testing where the animal is not harmed. Perhaps next time you would like to show a cat restrained in stereotaxic equipment with electrodes in its brain?
lioxoda111 3 years ago
Better be a smart arse than a dumb arse ;)
This video is actually of an elevated plus maze for testing of anxiety related behaviour. Now as to vivisection, while what you say is true to the dictionary meaning, this is how ALF define it: "Vivisection is defined as the act or practice of performing experiments on living animals."
nervousneuron 3 years ago
This is still a deprivation of animal rights, and I do not waste my time trying to convince animal rights activists this is not the case. What my POV is it is not a deprivation of animal welfare, which is what most people are concerned with.
Stereotaxic devices are there to assist with brain surgery, including with humans. It may look nasty, but it's there to keep the head still and to provide co-ordinates. All done under anesthesia of course.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
Sweetheart, difference is, people volunteer for brain surgery that might help them, lab animals are forced into brain lesions which might destroy them. That, is the ethical difference. That is why the stereotaxic device in the later instance is used to restrain an animal which is NOT sedated, seeing as brain surgery is not done under general anaesthetic. And here, 'restrain' is the right use of the word.
lioxoda111 3 years ago
Sweetheart, we wouldn't be able to develop the methods (or even obtain basic information about how the brain works, to start with) without working with animals first. I like how you conveniently overlook this fact.
Also, I've done some neurophysiology experiments during my studies (now I work with cell cultures and slices, mostly) and sedatives were always used. Same goes for every other experiment I can think of. Commonly used s.d.'s is not even *built* for restraining a non-sedated animal.
menelzwanyludwikiem 3 years ago
There is no excuse for restraining something against it's will to inflict a life of degradation and pain on it. If science has shown us anything, it is that all beings, in being alive, are the same.
If research is for the sole benefit of human kind, then why the competition for sucess & recognition? Why don't pharmaceutical companies sell affordable HIV/AIDS treatments to countries most highly afflicted with HIV/AIDS? Profit. The whole function of this institute is completely transparent.
lioxoda111 3 years ago
In reply to your first comment, kudos for being both.
Furthermore, this is hardly pioneering research, is it? It's just a slightly adapted versions of a million similar experiments, if that. How original. I'm glad your ethics committee approved this, it certainly justifies that the benefit to man-kind clearly outweighs animal suffering (i.e. intense boredom on both parts).
Seriously though, joking aside, you don't really believe in vivisection, do you?
lioxoda111 3 years ago
you should post some active or passive avoidance,,,,not elevated plus maze...there is the true action
alinmimi 3 years ago
fuck you dumb ass you are doing the same thing. selective journalism... you are only showing the mild stuff. anyway it doesnt matter its still animal testing and its still fucked up
wogger12330 3 years ago
I've work with mices. And I've made about 50+ Gb of Morris water maze video. Of course - no any blood, pain and so on. Typical neuroscience (memory and cognition) experiment - is experiment with mazes.
freeresearcher 3 years ago
Yes but injections or lesions on the animal are made before the experiments with mazes. So I'm not sure that there is no pain at all.
OlimpiaS1 3 years ago
There isn't any pain. They put the animal to sleep when they do the lesions...
Jayla137666 3 years ago
Nice that you're using music by a guy who is a vegan and did work for PETA.
Face it, humane experiments on animals in labs is rare. MOST of the animals get tortured and abused. What YOU'RE doing is selective journalism.
stephjuhler999 3 years ago
moby worked for peta? ...
NICOCLUBVIEWER 3 years ago
Yes, he did. Google it!
stephjuhler999 3 years ago
Okay you have also used selective journalism...you could have done that in your bedroom
I realise that not all labs are cruel, and more alternatives have arived without animal tested products, but the issue still remains, there are unecessary tests on live subjects that go towards nothing but pain and agony, so maybe your half right then
There are those who abuse and those who can change in any industry, sadly i havent seen any real major breakthroughs, so your video is just as misleading
shinyponie 3 years ago
I'd also say that in certain cases, it's preferable to hurt an animal than a human in the clinical tests, for reasons that have only to do with ethics, and not with scientific things.
As far as medical questions, certain animal tests can be reliable. Certain ones cannot. It's all shades of grey. I can't just take a side for or against "animal testing," as it's such a subjective term that it means almost nothing.
madlutist 3 years ago
Well, to be fair, I'd say that this video perhaps deals in the same black and white that PETA does: It's either all horrifying, or it's all perfectly fine.
Not all animal testing involves pain. There's also the difference between testing animal psychology, which is painless, and using animals to test the dangers of something, in place of humans.
I'm not going to assert an ethical position, because someone will attack it either way, and I'll make nothing but enemies by saying it on YouTube.
madlutist 3 years ago
Hey Nervous Vivivsector who posted this video...
Have you thought over my suggestion to turn your career to REAL research instead of chopping up defenslesss animals and other experiments like this which are ALL a waste of time and money? You pointed out that drugs go through clinical trials which most people realize. The problem is trials on humans are not done long enough or on enough people and that is why the unknowing public are test subjects. Animal tests only provide misleading results.
corycatlady 3 years ago
Animal testing proved penicillin worked as an antibiotic.
True story.
Jayla137666 3 years ago
Just because it's the minority doesn't mean everything is ok now
Ravendb 3 years ago
What about injecting cancer cells on animals?? And forcing monkeys to smoke? We know that this happened. Industry it's really cruel, yes. You can't denay. Maybe ones are less worse than others, but most are very cruel with animals.
jerryaltman 3 years ago
You make a good point, the test where a rabbit is blinded with clorox is prominant rarely seen is the test where the rabbit infact doesnt not want to play monopoly. good vid,I'm against animals being harmed this rat looks like he was bored more than anything.
UtahRaider 3 years ago
Nervous Vivisector,
Ofcoarse you will never admit you are torturing animals. You are inflicting pain on a defenseless animal, that's torture.
I am well aware about the different ways animals are tortured in experiments. It's what I think ahout all the time because I was injured at a demonstration at UCLA asking why they refuse to debate what they claim is helping human beings with our tax money.I would ask you to debate a MD but you are no one special.But maybe you are, who do you work for?
corycatlady 3 years ago
I am no one special, just a mere post grad student from Australia.
I have heard so many anti-viv sites say "no vivisector will debate us!!', and I wonder why. Even if they lose the debate, it doesn't change whether animal experiments are wrong or right, just how good the debaters were in convincing the audience. I do think it would be a good idea for more debates on the issue so both sides can understand the other side a little better.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
You seem to think vivisection debates are for proving whether vivisection is right or wrong ethically. A scientific debate has NOTHING to do with ethics, its' about proving that it's not safe for humans to use a different species as a model for the human being. Vivivisectors won't debate because they are incompetant and hide what they do to animals from the nieve public. I seriously suggest that you change your career plans and conduct REAL research, meaning don't use animals. The ALF is alive.
corycatlady 3 years ago
Scientific Fraud. Vivisectors are the most evil people living on this planet because not only do you inflict torture and murder on defenseless animals, you cause sufferng in humans with your drug recalls do to the fact that animals react differently thatn humans. It's a fact. Vivisection will be abolished one way or another.
corycatlady 3 years ago
The most evil person in the world? Me?
Torture and murder.... perhaps you should look up those words in the dictionary. Yes, there is killing, but no murder! Also, any drugs released are based on human trials. I agree, it would be stupid to release drugs tested *only* on animals. Animals are not only used for drug testing, but for theory testing too, from which our knowledge of the world is based upon.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
Bottom line is there are animals getting killed for experiements. Isn't this selective journalism too?
JCUSAF23 3 years ago
I offered to drop a lawsuit against UCLA if they would just debate and pay my medical bill. They injured me at a demonstration. UCLA has not debated in 20 years! Chancellor Block likes to experiment on mice. Regardless of the "amount" of suffering in this video, a mouse is not a minature man. Animals are different species that react differently to drugs and that is why vivisectors run when you beg them to debate what they claim is helping human beings. Tax dollars down the drain.
corycatlady 3 years ago
even though its a rat , its still wrong
561718 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Animal testing and and this "true" video blow
moose ass.
nerdy1351 3 years ago
Sure, they may be using the worst of the worst, but that just means that it HAPPENS. It's not like it's rare. Many animals are being mistreated in animal testing. For example, where is this rat going to go when this mild test is complete? Probably back to a too-small cage. And is he ever going to be set free? No. He'll never know what it's like to be loved and cared for as a pet because of testing.
hawaiiatheart 3 years ago 3
Thank you!
{I was about to write that but that explains it perfectly}
audreyyerdua14 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
cant stand this. all these ppl that abuse and test on animals are making this world a horrible place for these innocent animals.
retards who kill animals for fun,anger, entertainment,testing or any other reason. they're god's creatures! they're creatures who don't murder, steal, or make war. if you kill or hurt an innocent animal, you might as well go kill your neighbor while you're at it. STOP ANIMAL TESTING AND ABUSE NOW.
RawrxitzxRachel 3 years ago 2
Sure, many animal experiments are perfectly benign. So what? People who care about animals object to experiments that cause animal suffering. I don't see what's wrong with that position.
WizardKing78 3 years ago 2
ugh
Thatchick789 3 years ago
OMG i totally love this video! sooo true:D
overallsBgone 3 years ago
Errr...I wouldn't go pointing out that the AR/anti-viv movement uses emotive propaganda, to cause individuals guilt, sadness and anger.
This is exactly what pro-vivers do! choose between a rat or your child, no scientific debate...isn't that emotive??
Furthermore, on the topic of selective journalism, isn't it ironic that M,R&M features just one study. Selective? Isn't it also strange that they left out any "bad" bits as well!! And they claim its the truth...ironic, isn't it?
untilallarefree 3 years ago
to the maker of this. yea ok go ahead and tell your self that animal testing is ok. it doesnt matter how many hours go by without the bad shit. the bad shit still DOES happen and it is not ok. animals have hearts and feelings, and it is not ok to ever be cruel to them, not even to test stuff out that would help humans. so keep lying to yourself to make it feel better.
julzperry 3 years ago 3
There is no connection between a Heart and Feelings im afraid. The Heart is the thing that makes the blood squirt all over the place when you cut somethings head off :)
ShalloeThought 3 years ago
Yeah and we need animal experimentation! stupid experiments on animals should be stopped like when they put screws in their head.. However, we do need some experementing. Like that is how we found khemo to treat cancer. And the khemo helped the animals too, it treated their cancer as well. So yeah, when it is unnessicary, it should be banned but if it is for a good cause I am all for it. I care about people more than animals by a long shot.
SenorMatthew 3 years ago
How can u say u r NOT using the technique called selective journalism ?????????
How can u assume this one real video clip present the whole story of so many different types of animal tests ???????????
If there were no cruel things going on, how would the people against animal testing be able to use the technique called selective journalism ??????????
NixKah 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
THANK YOU!!!!!! finaly a video that displays how fukin gay animal rights groups and that kind use propaganda to pass their point.
upthera5 3 years ago
duuuuuude, as a pet owner i must say animals bring joy to my life, i know there is no other way but this just doesn't seem right and it makes me sad
TuttiOfruti 3 years ago
by the way im so totally being sarcastic....but yeah i must say i expected something else
TuttiOfruti 3 years ago
Resources are limited to obtain footage of animal experimentation, vivisection, and other animal cruelties. They're prized and exploited do to difficulty in obtainment. Sure, it is noted not all experiments entertain blood, and gore, yet, PUT YOURSELF IN THAT ANIMAL'S POSITION. The video you portrayed as boredom, is it not truly boring to the subject? Sad, and alone, and in captivity. Even this, as dismissive as it may seem to you, would not be, if you endured this experimentation, ignorant ass.
pickchick33 3 years ago 2
Resources are limited to obtain footage of animal experimentation, vivisection, and other animal cruelties. They're prized and exploited do to difficulty in obtainment. Sure, it is noted not all experiments entertain blood, and gore, yet, PUT YOURSELF IN THAT ANIMAL'S POSITION. The video you portrayed as boredom, is it not truly boring to the subject? Sad, and alone, and in captivity. Even this, as dismissive as it may seem to you, would not be, if you endured this experimentation, ignorant ass.
pickchick33 3 years ago
All in all, we have to remember that we're not subjecting animals to cruelty for our morbid pleasure. Instead, we are providing valuable information for the development of bioscience and humanity. Selective journalism or not, one cannot deny the pragmatic goals of animal experimentation.
danzh 3 years ago
Valueble my ass! If we're going to do a torturing experiment then atleast let it live its life then do it!
lxoxsxox 3 years ago
I do tests like this called the elevated plus maze. This video is correct in saying not all testing is cruel. As a vegetarian and animal lover who is getting and education in physiology I was hesitant to even know... All my mice do is eat high fat diet, get weighed every two weeks, and do mazes like this. They live a long happy life. I did watch a beagle video and it breaks my heart. Researchers can make a choice to be more humane and not cause pain or suffering. We do it all the time.
LlamBomb 3 years ago
Thanks for this reply :) I'm doing physiology now, using a radial arm maze. I remember my first year of undergrad, reading my first paper on research which used animals. I was so shocked to read the rats were 'sacrificed' (I still remember the wording) so they could use the muscle tissue. I thought they picked rats up off the street!
Now things are much different that I understand the process.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
And your method was also to leave out the terrible stuff also still known as selective journalism.
How about showing the corporate agenda with rows of dogs and rabbits with eyes full of bleach and acids along with other harmful commercial substances.
Those are the test we're making the real noise about.
osity 3 years ago
It's satire (or parody, what ever, not sure if I used the right word), as the point is you can't show a few experiments (most of which look worse than they are, others are breaking the law) to represent them all.
By selective journalism, I mean either staging a photo (like PETA's raids on primate labs where they put the monkeys in restaints themselves and took pics) or leaving out vital information (eg. letting us know the animal is unconscious during that surgery).
nervousneuron 3 years ago
As for rows of dogs and rabbits - that sounds like the draze test, which is illegal in many countries/, and it should be! Inflicting suffering like that on conscious animals for cosmetic testing. For that there are alternatives, as I haven't died from any of my 'not tested on animals' products.
And that has little to do with academic medical experimentation.
nervousneuron 3 years ago
Technically, those against animal experimentation are telling the truth. Animal experimentation is wrong, but without it a lot of our population would be dead. It is how you look at it, and I am compeletly AGAINST ANIMAL EXPERIMENTAION.
blondiechelle1 3 years ago