Testing on animals - Is it killing your kids?

[Morrissey the 23rd]

Please visit this site and read it.

How You Can Help
Please petition and/or send POLITE letters to the EPA’s administrator requesting that he support PETA’s rulemaking petition and repeal the agency’s DNT test guidelines:

The Honorable Michael O. Leavitt
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Bldg., #1101A
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
202-501-1450 (fax)
[email protected]




http://www.peta.org/feat/braindead/

 

[broken]

animal testing saves human lives

Therefore it is a good thing. Human life is more valuable than animal life.

These sorts of movements generally appeal to the disenfranchised and desperate who have given up home in human nature and in people in general - thus they are driven to caring for virtually inanimate objects - primitive animals such as rats and rodents. I find it quite sad on a psychological level that these people twist the facts and realities to suit their argument. Animal testing is an essential stage in the development of a medicine, and is therefore a very positive thing, as long as animals are not made to suffer unnecessarily, and as long as it's conducted in as humane a fashion as possible.

If you'd lived just a little, perhaps you'd agree.
> Please visit this site and read it.

> How You Can Help
> Please petition and/or send POLITE letters to the EPA’s administrator
> requesting that he support PETA’s rulemaking petition and repeal the
> agency’s DNT test guidelines:

> The Honorable Michael O. Leavitt
> Administrator
> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
> Ariel Rios Bldg., #1101A
> 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
> Washington, DC 20460
> 202-501-1450 (fax)
> [email protected]

 

[nobody's nothing]

There are too many humans in this world already

"Human life is more valuable than animal life."

Well, so say you. If you could ask the animals, I'm sure they'd tell you they were more important.

 

[Girl Unafraid]

attn M23

Slam poets thurs bbc3 10 or 10.30pm

or watch out for the adverts for this on bbc3

see anybody u recognise?

i know i do

(sorry this was quicker than writing a text)

 

[A Well Educated Gent who sometimes forgets what da]

Re: animal testing saves human lives

Sorry broken, how many drugs have been taken off the market due to their side-effects, after having already been tested on animals?

How long has the Cancer Research Trust been testing on animals?
Any real cure found yet? NO!
Not all human life is more valuable than animals anyway.
I consider animals far more valuable than most of the human race.

> Therefore it is a good thing. Human life is more valuable than animal
> life.

> These sorts of movements generally appeal to the disenfranchised and
> desperate who have given up home in human nature and in people in general
> - thus they are driven to caring for virtually inanimate objects -
> primitive animals such as rats and rodents. I find it quite sad on a
> psychological level that these people twist the facts and realities to
> suit their argument. Animal testing is an essential stage in the
> development of a medicine, and is therefore a very positive thing, as long
> as animals are not made to suffer unnecessarily, and as long as it's
> conducted in as humane a fashion as possible.

> If you'd lived just a little, perhaps you'd agree.

 

[Morrissey the 23rd]

You clearly responded without reading my post. NM

> Therefore it is a good thing. Human life is more valuable than animal
> life.

Why?

> These sorts of movements generally appeal to the disenfranchised and
> desperate who have given up home in human nature and in people in general
> - thus they are driven to caring for virtually inanimate objects -
> primitive animals such as rats and rodents.

I find it quite sad on a
> psychological level that these people twist the facts and realities to
> suit their argument. Animal testing is an essential stage in the
> development of a medicine, and is therefore a very positive thing, as long
> as animals are not made to suffer unnecessarily, and as long as it's
> conducted in as humane a fashion as possible.

> If you'd lived just a little, perhaps you'd agree.

I have a certificate which allows me to legally spray. I understand the subject because I've been educated in it.

'Virtually inanimate object such as primitives.' Shall we test on babies or the brain dead? Rats are intelligent animals. Are you?

There was no twisting of the facts you didn't bother to read. Not only is animal testing essential but it is very rarely done without a great deal of suffering. Nor is it humane.

If you'd read just a little, perhaps you'd agree.

Please do not think you will continue to grab my attention by posting nonsense about something you clearly know nothing about or have the intelligence to research before commenting. This is a one and only. Like in the chatroom. You will be ignored and left to seek the attention you crave elsewhere.




http://www.abcread.com/adult_learn_to_read_b.html

 

[THE ANIMAL]

Re: attn M23

> Slam poets thurs bbc3 10 or 10.30pm

> or watch out for the adverts for this on bbc3

> see anybody u recognise?

> i know i do

> (sorry this was quicker than writing a text)

GET A LIFE FATSO

 

[A Well Educated Gent Who Sometimes Forgets What Da]

Re: attn M23

> GET A LIFE FATSO

I see you are still not using the thesaurus I sent you.

 

[THEN KILL YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]

Re: There are too many humans in this world already

 

[broken]

grow up little boy

Grow up and learn to conduct yourself likea normal adult.

I'll respond to people who have made cogent points without the bitchy remarks.

> Why?

> I find it quite sad on a

> I have a certificate which allows me to legally spray. I understand the
> subject because I've been educated in it.

> 'Virtually inanimate object such as primitives.' Shall we test on babies
> or the brain dead? Rats are intelligent animals. Are you?

> There was no twisting of the facts you didn't bother to read. Not only is
> animal testing essential but it is very rarely done without a great deal
> of suffering. Nor is it humane.

> If you'd read just a little, perhaps you'd agree.

> Please do not think you will continue to grab my attention by posting
> nonsense about something you clearly know nothing about or have the
> intelligence to research before commenting. This is a one and only. Like
> in the chatroom. You will be ignored and left to seek the attention you
> crave elsewhere.

 

[broken]

yes, only they can't

because they can't speak. Are you honestly saying wasps have the same worth as human beings? If not, please clarify exactly what you mean.

> "Human life is more valuable than animal life."

> Well, so say you. If you could ask the animals, I'm sure they'd tell you
> they were more important.

 

[broken]

thanks for the considered response

To address your points, yes a number of drugs have been taking off the market due to their side effects, even after having been tested on animals. However this is to be expected. Early stage trials use animal models to conduct in vivo studies, with in vitro studies having already taken place: this is the best method scientists have for establishing the possible side effects or toxicities of potentyially beneficial medications. The nature of the beast is that obviously toxic drugs can be ruled out before being used on human beings, but that yes, in some cases, other less toxic drugs with serious side effects on humans may pass this test, possibly causing side effects only noted during human studies. However, this can't at present be avoided. The alternative of doing NO animal studies would not only allow these less obvious toxins to be used on humans, but would also result in the unnecessary use of highly toxic drugs on humans which would have otherwise proven to be toxic in animal studies. Thus, it undoubtedly saves human lives, but as you rightly point out cannot save every human life or predict every side effect - but surely this is not a reason to ban animal testing? Because it's very good at saving lives, but not quite perfect, let's ban it altogether so that we simply test them out on humans? That makes no sense whatsoever and would result in serious damage to many people's health!

"> How long has the Cancer Research Trust been testing on animals?
> Any real cure found yet? NO!"

Many great steps have been taken in the journey towards finding a cancer cure - hormonal therapies, chemotherapies and adjunct therapies have all been animal tested before being used successfully to treat humans and, in some cases, cure cancer. Not all cancer, but at least 30-40% are now successfully treated.

A blanket sure may take much longer or may never be found. Frankly I don't see how this is relevant.

> "Not all human life is more valuable than animals anyway.
> I consider animals far more valuable than most of the human race."

That's entirely subjective. I respect your views, and I personally love my dog more than most human beings! But I don't accept that animal life can ever be more valuable than human life. If the bizarre situation arose whereby my dog could be sacrificed to save a child's life, of course I would allow this to happen.

Anyway, at least you responded in a mature way, rather than resorting to insults and pettiness.

> Sorry broken, how many drugs have been taken off the market due to their
> side-effects, after having already been tested on animals?

> How long has the Cancer Research Trust been testing on animals?
> Any real cure found yet? NO!
> Not all human life is more valuable than animals anyway.
> I consider animals far more valuable than most of the human race.

 

[likea normal adult]

Re: grow up little boy

I think he was saying you should read before acting childish.

 

[alreadytoldya]

Re: attn M23

Gent, I told you that you have to FEDEX it. Jesus Christ, don't you listen?