Animal Testing

[Medusa]

Re: Animal Testing

Additionally... nature provides all the medicine I need to survive. I was cleared of having to go on a heart/lung transplant list (my specialists are still scratching their heads wondering how this happened) using only nature to cure the supposed incurable.

Can you expound on this a bit more. Are you saying natural items were used to keep you cleared from your transplant? As in their pure form with no help from any scientific fiddling? I assume you use absolutely no store bought medicines?

[Auseklis]

Re: Animal Testing

Can you expound on this a bit more. Are you saying natural items were used to keep you cleared from your transplant? As in their pure form with no help from any scientific fiddling? I assume you use absolutely no store bought medicines?

Yes this is correct, no store brought medicines... I have/had a genetic disorder (heart and lungs) of a mitral valve prolapse which has been worsening since I was 13 years old and Bronchiectasis with pulmonary fibrosis. I had spent more times in hospital than I care to remember and my home decked out with all sorts of machinery for assisted breathing, heart monitoring, blood pressure monitoring (mine drops dangerously low into coma levels). But not anymore... I keep a portable nebulizer on hand for emergency needs but I haven't needed it. In winter, which has just passed I see my doctor every week or if I am doing well I see the doc every few weeks. I am not supposed to go into shopping malls or crowded areas to avoid any infection... that is why I retired to live by the rain forest away from mainstream society.

I am very fortunate to have a doctor who is also holistic and into naturopathy. They have agreed to monitor my progress with trying alternatives but if I was told to go straight to hospital I would, for monitoring. My last visit was about 3 months ago for a heart check up and the specialist was astounded at the progress in my condition. He said 'I could have 200 people in here today and 100 would show the same low grade signs you have now'. A nice change from 'You are a walking time bomb and one day you will drop but you won't even know/feel it'. I used to drain fluid from my lungs numerous times a day, sometimes having to use a bucket because there was so much... sleeping sitting up to avoid choking in my sleep. Now I lay flat in bed and cough up a little bit of phlegm now and then. I am yet to see my lung specialist as he has to come from another area (due to the special needs of my condition) and both my doctor and I believe he will also be surprised with how I have reversed my condition.

I had peacefully accepted death as I had died 3 times and come very close on many occasions... now I celebrate life as long for as I have been given this blessing.

PS I think I see my specialist in about a months time... I can't wait!

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Animal Testing

The "Prof" should know better than to pull on naive legs.

There is no logical contradiction there, just sloppy use of language - the phrases "like us" and "not like us" are used with two different meanings. "Like us" is used to mean physically like us, while the phrase "not like us" is used to indicate that they are a different species.

His statement is clever "poetry," but bad science.

[jcaternolo]

Re: Animal Testing

I think any testing that causes animals pain is wrong. Like seeing how fast certain germs kill rats. That is just wrong, even if they're just rats. They can feel pain just like we can.

[Medusa]

Re: Animal Testing

I think any testing that causes animals pain is wrong. Like seeing how fast certain germs kill rats. That is just wrong, even if they're just rats. They can feel pain just like we can.

Well we should all go back to a time before we knew how science worked. Of course I'd have to probably burn you at the stake if you have a mole on your body. But hey, what good is science really. Does it suck that tests have been done on animals to help find cures etc for human illness? Sure. But would you really really want a world where it was never done in the first place? Do you really want to see what that life was actually like? I'll pass and be eternally grateful for those animals.


Auseklis. Thank you for your post. I take 11 different medications for Diabetes and I had a heart attack with a v stent placed in my heart. I also have bi polar. I rely on medications to actually live. But.. I do try to look into non medical resources as well. Glad to hear this worked for you.

[Auseklis]

Re: Animal Testing

Well we should all go back to a time before we knew how science worked. Of course I'd have to probably burn you at the stake if you have a mole on your body. But hey, what good is science really. Does it suck that tests have been done on animals to help find cures etc for human illness? Sure. But would you really really want a world where it was never done in the first place? Do you really want to see what that life was actually like? I'll pass and be eternally grateful for those animals.


Auseklis. Thank you for your post. I take 11 different medications for Diabetes and I had a heart attack with a v stent placed in my heart. I also have bi polar. I rely on medications to actually live. But.. I do try to look into non medical resources as well. Glad to hear this worked for you.

Blessings and good luck with finding what works for you.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Animal Testing

Test on serial killers, pedophiles, rapists etc. We certainly don't have a shortage of them on the planet.

Unfortunately this is very problematic. It's sort of like the death penalty. In theory, it's fine in a system that is 100% infallible, but in reality, that system does not exist. At worst you have situations like Nazi Germany, where human testing WAS carried out on innocent people who were deemed "enemies" of the state, and at best you always have the chance that the test subject legitimately convicted of a horrific crime was innocent.

[KahlanAmnell]

Re: Animal Testing

I think you may definitely have a point with the ineffectiveness. I always wondered how exactly we were sure that something would work on humans as well as it did on a rabbit...I mean kinda not the same "species" lol.
So do you think we should test on humans? And what if the "human test objects" die or get really ill from something that was tested on them? Who would sign up for this? Suicidal people? Criminals being forced to do this? All this testing seems to be one of those necessary evils, but what is the right way to do so?!

If you give a cat aspirin, it will kill the cat or make it very sick. However, aspirin can ward off strokes and heart attacks in humans. So, no vivisection is not effective and it is cruel.

http://www.vivisectioninformation.com/index.php?p=1_10_50-disasters-of-animal-testing

[Auseklis]

Re: Animal Testing

Unfortunately this is very problematic. It's sort of like the death penalty. In theory, it's fine in a system that is 100% infallible, but in reality, that system does not exist. At worst you have situations like Nazi Germany, where human testing WAS carried out on innocent people who were deemed "enemies" of the state, and at best you always have the chance that the test subject legitimately convicted of a horrific crime was innocent.

Yet innocent animals are openly subject to torture and immeasurable pain in vivisection labs... millions killed each year.

[Denarius]

Re: Animal Testing

http://www.vivisectioninformation.co...animal-testing

Most of these are dumb as hell, anyone can tell you that animal trials are nowhere near as good as human trials in gauging the effects on humans. On the other hand, if medical trials were exclusively human it would result in directly causing death and misery on humans by the thousands due to the testing and/or indirectly causing death and misery by the millions due to impeded medical advancements.

Is animal testing morally wrong? Duh, of course. But it is not without merit and necessity. If you want to do something about it, then help humanity advance technologically and culturally so we won't have to do it.

Animal testing is barbaric and crude, just like pretty much everything in medicine started out as. We're working on it, as I mentioned in my previous post, but we aren't there yet.

[MoonRaven]

Re: Animal Testing

Yet innocent animals are openly subject to torture and immeasurable pain in vivisection labs... millions killed each year.

Let me start by clearing up what vivisection actually is. It comes of the two latin words vivus, which means 'alive', and sectio

[Lilium of the Valley]

Re: Animal Testing

Test on serial killers, pedophiles, rapists etc. We certainly don't have a shortage of them on the planet.

Instead of the death penalty an opportunity to "make up" for ones crimes by "saving lives", due to being sentenced to 'Life as Lab Rat'.
^ Why am I liking this?! My subconscious may be a Sadist... >_>

- - - Updated - - -

I would as one last thing like to point out that speaking about animal testing in general must by necessity become extremely vague to the point of being misleading, since we are addressing a subject with so many facets, that is conducted in so many ways depending on what is being examined. Are we talking about testing new medications? Examining the progress of a disease? Testing a new surgical procedure? Or what? Because each of these the research, and as follows the animal testing, is conducted in many different ways. What is useful and a good way to go about one of the above, might yield nothing in the others.

As far as this goes, I see no issue with the generalization of Animal Testing. That is what this thread was for, to speak of it IN general. Everyone is able to bring up a new factor and a new point, like it has been done throughout the last 3 pages. Seemingly working perfectly fine. On top of that I would like to add, that's actually what is fun about a friendly debate, everyone will always see things from a different angle/perspective or bring in another point of view. (in this case a different research area or whatever you wish)

[Auseklis]

Re: Animal Testing

This is a subject close to my heart as my family run a full time sanctuary for animals with medical/mental conditions from ex lab animals to exotics no longer able to live in Zoos etc and wildlife rehabilitation. In Australia it isn't overly difficult to obtain a license to carry out vivisection experiments on animals if you have a grant to test pharmaceuticals or new products such as paints, food additives etc. In Australia it is legal to use animals dumped in pounds for vivisection. Thankfully it seems the Aus gov is going to put a stop to such practices. The vivisection lab in western Sydney that is using everything from rats to crab eating macaque's for cancer research. I have actively been involved for over a decade with releasing and re-homing the animals that survive testing procedures. The primates have to be released to facility that has proper enclosures and licensing. This facility is just outside of Penrith owned by a friend. I have personally taken on the more domestic type animals such as rats riddled with cancer to give them the best quality life possible before euthanasia. There is another facility near Brisbane also taking on animals from the neuroscience lab in Brisbane (QBI)... again, from rats to primates. These are the only two I have been personally involved with however there are vivisection labs in every state of the country.

Regarding the amount of animals used world wide... people can Google and do their own research and email relevant orgs etc to get information... a report can be found at - http://www.aavs.org/site/c.bkLTKfOSL...m#.UlPgMn8wCSo
Another link worth checking out is - http://www.vivisectioninformation.co...imals-are-used

- - - Updated - - -

But it is not all gloom and doom... this is a lovely story about Britches who is now living a lovely life - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwrVatrD_pU

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Animal Testing

Does anybody but me find it odd that people are so deeply loving and caring of varmints, yet are so willing - even anxious - to inflict suffering and pain on their fellow human beings - in preference to the critters?

Strikes me that maybe this - the self loathing which humans are taught on a daily basis by those who pretend to be our moral betters - may be the curse of being human, and the root of a s'load of our problems.

Consider, those of you who seem so confused -

If you, a human child, a dog, and a duck were stuck in a snowstorm, starving, would you have a hard time deciding who to eat?

I'm thinking some people might.

(Corbin woke up today feeling like an Old Testament prophet. Don't take me too seriously. I know most of you would eat the [spoiler alert - correct answer] duck first, despite any claims which might be made to the contrary. We value our fellow human beings higher than other species, no matter what we preach out loud. And that's as it should be)

[Denarius]

Re: Animal Testing

If you, a human child, a dog, and a duck were stuck in a snowstorm, starving, would you have a hard time deciding who to eat?

The dog would probably be the easiest to prepare for cooking, and would be the most practical in terms of sharing with the child.

Though that really depends on what kind of dog it is. Plus the duck would be the easiest to feed as it will happily eat bugs, grass, and seeds. The dog is unlikely to survive anyway, but there is a slightly higher chance to scrounge up a passable diet for the duck.