Animal Testing

[ArabiaTerra]

See, this is where I have a problem with the animal rights lobby. If they were saying "Don't use cosmetics because they test them on animals" then I would have no problem. Cosmetics are a fashion thing and therefore completely superfluous to leading a long and happy life. But this is not what they are saying, they are saying "don't use cosmetics which have been tested on animals".

 

Now, given the report which I posted earlier which suggests a 69% increase in the risk of cancer (in mice), does this not worry you? Granted, mice are not humans, but they are mammals with skin that is very similar to ours, and they have been used in medical research for years quite effectively. Does this not make you wonder about all the stuff you use every day which has never been tested in any way?

 

Add into this the proposed European legislation which, if implemented, would make it impossible for you to find any cosmetic which had been tested in any way, is this not a case of political correctness gone mad?

[Fjool]

I tend to think that animal testing has a place. I'm not keen on the idea but, as attention grabbing as it may be, much of the testing is no worse than animals are treated for food, sport or fashion.

 

It just doesn't seem right to test on animals for things which are unnecessary. There seems to be no moral justification for this, so the only answer is to avoid such products entirely. Looking for 'BUAV approved' (or whoever they are) says nothing about the safety.

 

Also be careful of some of the stuff you can buy cheaply from overseas. A lipgloss my daughter bought locally was made in China and had an ingredients list that contained known, potential carcinogens. There were no safety markings at all. Almost certainly not tested on either animals ... or people.

[Brink]

Hiya ArabiaTerra.

 

I don't think I can really add much more to my first post on this topic...everything I said there holds true. Sadly I am not very eloquent when putting my thoughts down in words, which is a shame as this is a subject I feel passionate about.

You asked how we felt about using products that were NOT tested on animals..again, can only refer you to my earlier post..yes, I am willing to take that risk. At least I have the luxury of choice.

For those who are not too clear what anti-vivisection support entails, they might want to visit http://www.navs.org.uk/home/.

And to see how animals are treated, well, plenty of stuff on the net, such as

or http://www.youtube.com/AnimalDefenders

 

I warn you, those videos are upsetting. You could argue they are purposefully emotive and subjective. You may be right, but in my opinion, they serve a purpose.

 

Am not trying to convert you btw I think that when it comes to the area of animal testing, you either fundamentally believe that humans have the right to exploit a creature more vulnerable then themselves, or a the responsibility to protect them.

I would not class myself as an activist by any means, but would encourage people to at least conduct their own research into the matter, and decide for themselves if they think the end justifies the means.

[ArabiaTerra]

... At least I have the luxury of choice.

And this is why I am annoyed with the proposed EU rules, it's taking away my choice.

[Brink]

... At least I have the luxury of choice.

And this is why I am annoyed with the proposed EU rules, it's taking away my choice.

 

Well, tough cheese, basically.

 

If you are not prepared to be tested on, fair enough. But I don't see why another creature should be forced to take your place. Like I said in my first post, in my opinion, human rights and animal rights should co-exist. I am tempted to say "Earth does not belong to humans", but am worried I might start sounding like a hippie.

 

(I do hope you realise I say the above in the spirit of the debate..not a personal attack, coz I don't do them )

[ArabiaTerra]

Watched "labs unlocked". It talks about 1991 and 1992 but nothing more recent. Presumably that is when the film was made. That's 17 years ago. How can it be relevant now? Also, how can a rat have learning difficulties, and how can you tell?

 

I agree that the use of animals in circuses should stop, but that is not what this thread is about.

 

As for the fact that there are techniques for testing which do not require animals, that's fair enough, and they should be used where available and we should be investing in new, non animal, ways wherever they may be possible. But, they are not available for all research, yet animal rights campaigners would stop all animal research. I don't see queue's of animal rights campaigners lining up to have their spines severed so that doctors can practice fixing them, yet without this research, how can spinal injuries victims have any hope that they might, one day, walk again?

 

And then there is the basic research into gene therapy, genetic manipulation and modification. Without animal research these fields would grind to a halt, yet it is precisely these fields which hold the greatest potential for new treatments in the future. We have barely begun to scratch the surface of the possibilities opened up by this knowledge and animal rights activists want to shut it all down. This research could lead to cures for cancer, lethal genetic disorders like spina biffida (not sure of the spelling there) and cystic fibrosis and treatments for the diseases of old age like dementia and altzheimers.

 

Another facet is the genetic engineering of animals (mostly pigs) to grow human organs for transplant which would save the thousands of people who currently die waiting for suitable doners and relieve the ones who do get transplants of the burden of taking anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their lives. The animal rights lobby would ban this research completely.

 

Then there's the genetic engineering of animals to produce drugs and other chemicals in their milk. Would it not be better to get our drugs and plastics from a field of cows than vast, polluting, chemical plants as we do at present?

 

I fully support the ethical and humane treatment of animals being used in research and I believe in using non-animal testing where possible, but I fully realise that these methods are not always available or suitable so I do not and never will support the anti-vivisection campaigners who would bring an end to animal testing in it's entirety. To put it crudely, when it comes to a choice between rats and babies, I will always put the babies first.

 

Animals do not have rights, they have uses.

 

(Now, about fox hunting.... )

[KOYAANISQATSI]

I don't see queue's of animal rights campaigners lining up to have their spines severed so that doctors can practice fixing them

 

I wonder what the job title of the person who breaks the rats back is; (RATSNAPPER)

 

Anyway; welcome to the cage

 

The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama, in which 399 poor — and mostly illiterate — African American sharecroppers were studied to observe the natural progression of the disease if left untreated.

By 1947 penicillin had become the standard treatment for syphilis. Rather than treat all syphilitic subjects with penicillin and close the study, or split off a control group for testing penicillin; the Tuskegee scientists withheld penicillin and information about penicillin, in order to continue studying how the disease spreads and kills. Participants were also prevented from accessing syphilis treatment programs that were available to other people in the area. The study continued until 1972, when a leak to the press resulted in its termination. By the time the study had closed, hundreds of men had died from syphilis and many of their wives had become infected and their children born with congenital syphilis.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study injured the level of trust in the black community towards public health efforts in the United States.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright, in a press conference on March 28th, 2008, was asked by the moderator if he honestly believed the U.S. government had "lied about inventing HIV as a means of genocide against people of color". Wright responded in support of the hypothesis by mentioning Leonard Horowitz's book, Emerging Viruses, and citing the Tuskegee Syphilis Study in support of his belief that the U.S. government "is capable of doing anything."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_Male

-----------------------------------------------------

 

Millions in germ war tests

 

Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials.

The Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public.

A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

The report also confirms the use of anthrax and other deadly germs on tests aboard ships in the Caribbean and off the Scottish coast during the 1950s. The document states: 'Tacit approval for simulant trials where the public might be exposed was strongly influenced by defence security considerations aimed obviously at restricting public knowledge. An important corollary to this was the need to avoid public alarm and disquiet about the vulnerability of the civil population to BW [biological warfare] attack.'

Sue Ellison, spokeswoman for Porton Down, said:

"The results from these trials_ will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons."

Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4398507,00.html

 

Oh yes; and if you see an abundance of unmarked, white, American jets overhead (from prestwick airport), as they have been on every sunny day this summer sometimes a dozen or more in a day, with contrails (CHEMTRAILS) which seem to hang about for hours, till they slowly spread out thin and catch cloud vapours in the strangest way.

DO NOT worry, DO NOT question. America is your friend. The planes are your friends.

Relax, breath deep, deeper, deeeeper.

There's a good little mouse.

 

 

Sing along:

 

The following is a snip from the Space preservation act of 2001.

In this act Chemtrails are listed as exotic weapons.

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

 

This Act may be cited as the `Space Preservation Act of 2001'.

s Act:

( Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--

(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;

(ii) chemtrails;

(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;

(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;

(v) laser weapons systems;

(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and

(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/chemtrailsexoticweapons26feb06.shtml

[KOYAANISQATSI]

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/130/image21920sd7.jpg

A young monkey with the word "crap" tattooed on the forehead by "scientists" from the Royal College of Surgeons laboratory in England

 

So come up to the lab and see what's on the slab.

[khitajrah]

contrails (CHEMTRAILS)

 

Is this thread about animal testing or yet another conspiracy theory? Obscure paranoia indeed.

 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/aviation/contrails.pdf A contrails Factsheet compiled by The United States Environment Protection Agency, NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

 

Maybe the contrails over Shetland on those sunny days were because our American and London friends didn't want us to have sunny weather? Aye, and Tavish Scott is one of those reptilian aliens disguised as a human on a covert mission to take over planet Earth.

 

Back to animal testing: I'm all for animal testing when it comes to medical science. I wouldn't want to be laying in a hospital bed with some treatable illness and be given medication that hadn't previously been tested, and retested, and tested again... as the current pharmaceuticals do. As for cosmetics - that's just vanity and if you want to take that risk.. well...

 

[edited after a little bit of research - I'm bored with it now and have better things to do with my time].

[KOYAANISQATSI]

We are just cattle to the elite, so yes it counts here.

 

A contrails Factsheet compiled by The United States Environment Protection Agency, NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

 

Ah yes, people who you can always trust.

 

Maybe the contrails over Shetland on those sunny days were because our American and London friends didn't want us to have sunny weather?

 

We dont mostly get 1 jet here a day, till recently when I've watched them over a period of weeks come and go in large numbers. The chemtrails are mostly laid in the clear patches of sky where others have not been you can watch them switch off and on as they approach an already gassed area.

It's alright, you don't have to believe me, we all get gassed the same anyhow and perhaps ignorance is bliss.

I guess you chose not to read this either:

A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

Of course governments are a lot more caring and truthful these days.

There has been much research put into this as it is very widespread (all results denied or ignored by the powers that be, of course)

 

Perhaps you just need to get out more, we can learn much by going out and talking with other people in the world but then again, if your hiding away at least you may get less exposure to the Chemtrails.

 

Sweet dreams.

[khitajrah]

Ah yes, people who you can always trust.

 

And Wikipedia, the Guardian and YouTube are notoriously accurate sources of information.

 

 

We dont mostly get 1 jet here a day, till recently when I've watched them over a period of weeks come and go in large numbers. The chemtrails are mostly laid in the clear patches of sky where others have not been you can watch them switch off and on as they approach an already gassed area.

 

Well yes, it would make sense that you would see the trails in clear patches of sky, unless, of course, you have developed bionic eyes that can see through the clouds.

 

Why on earth would anyone want to gas Shetland? Especially from that great of a height. With our changeable weather what would the chances be of any of it actually reaching this little tiny bit of land in the vast sea? We don't have enough to people to even generate any useful information on potential side effects even if anything DID end up here.

 

Obscure paranoia? Pot, kettle, black.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Wikipedia, the Guardian and YouTube are notoriously accurate sources of information.

 

Are you saying the Tuskegee Study is conspiracy stuff?

 

The advisory panel concluded that the Tuskegee Study was "ethically unjustified"--the knowledge gained was sparse when compared with the risks the study posed for its subjects. In October 1972, the panel advised stopping the study at once.  A month later, the Assistant Secretary for Health and Scientific Affairs announced the end of the Tuskegee Study.

In the summer of 1973, a class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of the study participants and their families.  In 1974, a $10 million out-of-court settlement was reached.  As part of the settlement, the U.S. government promised to give lifetime medical benefits and burial services to all living participants.  The Tuskegee Health Benefit Program (THBP) was established to provide these services. In 1975, wives, widows and offspring were added to the program.  In 1995, the program was expanded to include health as well as medical benefits.

http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

 

Here's the bit from the 107th CONGRESS 1st Session on the space preservation act of 2001, in case the wiki is too unreliable for you.

http://fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html

 

As for testing over Britain in the past; it is admitted and documented:

 

From 1956 onwards, the so-called Large Area Concept (LAC), emerged as a dominant theme in expert advisory discussions. In the LAC scenario, instead of bombing, an enemy plane would spray a deadly bacteria cloud capable of spreading over several hundred square miles. Under the new defensive policy, the threat of LAC led to a variety of outdoor trials to assess the early detection and danger of attacks. Initial trials, in the late 1950s, involved a plane spraying a fluorescent marker, zinc cadmium sulphide, across much of Britain in a mock biological attack. These experiments were superseded by trials involving ships and planes. They sprayed live non-pathogenic bacteria over the south coast of Britain, across many parts of Dorset.

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/S/science/war/biog_biogweapons.html

 

Chemtrails was brought up to show how suchlike things (maywell) still go on. It's not Obscure paranoia. Paranoia is a disturbed thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear and I'm not scared, I just thought it worth a mention that while folk moan about rats with sore backs; don't think for a seconed that we are immune to such testing.

You can look up (ornot) Chemtrails yourself, if you've got a Google bar. There's 1,260,000 hits for chemtrails compared to 615,000 for contrails.

 

Here's a spotters guide to get you started:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8ap8VE8E8o

 

I didn't mention it to start a debate, that was your choice by your contrail link to counter my mention of Chemtrails, before you start with your hijacking talk.

I am no more stoned than someone who may go for a pint on an evening would be sitting pished at teatime with their kids running around and I resent the implications made to start other abusive threads with.

Just because I dont have faith in the same things you do and a different outlook dont mean I have a "Conspiracy theorist" label I wear and it is no more than another lame attempt to discredit what I post.

 

It is not hijacking to post what I think and I gave you a picture of a big monkey with "crap" tatooed on his head, what more could you want.

But for the sake of the topic;

Here:

Operation Harness, was carried out off Antigua in 1948. In this operation, animals on floating dinghies were exposed to bacteria released up-wind from sprays and munitions.

[JAStewart]

Christ take your conspiracy crap to its own thread and not in this. You might have valid points, so make them in your own thread!

 

 

Back to Animal testing.

 

Although I said I'm against it I'd probably change over to being for it, having recently seen a list of all the things that animal testing has helped to cure.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Tavish Scott is one of those reptilian aliens disguised as a human

 

If there's any more not so funny s%*t you can pull out your a£$e to compare to something I never said in the first place, feel free.

I'm sure the mods will be happy to back your feelings on such matters. If not you can replace it there at your leisure.

 

HINT HINT

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Christ take your conspiracy crap to its own thread and not in this. You might have valid points, so make them in your own thread!

 

School bus back already is it.