Animal testing.

[Danielle]

I don't know how any of the people feel about this but I am opposed to animal testing. I think it's barbaric and completley hideous idea. I'v found this list of cosmetic companies that test on animals and most of the big names are one there. It's so wrong. I can't believe you'd want to test shampoo on a pour little bunny. Where do the people here stand on animal testing?



http://www.allforanimals.com/cruel1.htm

[YKTMX]

I'm against testing for the purpose of cosmetics, however, I don't see any alternative to animal testing in research into terminal diseases. It saddens me but that seems to be the case.

[timbaly]

National Geographic has some very interesting information on it's website. Scientists are now trying to create mice with human brains, they already have created pigs with human blood last year. Things like this are a bit worrisome, imagine the possibility for animals that are equal or near to our intelligence. The idea is pretty creepy. I heard that human and animal fusions were actually banned in Canada for the fear of such experiments occuring.

[Reuben]

agreed

i oppose the use for cosmetics but if it is possible to save human lives and thre are no equally viable alternatives then i would support it

[h&s]

Why even bother with going on about animal testing? If you manage to stop it, where does that get you? What does the working class gain from stopping it? What is the point in wasting time and resources protesting against testing on the 'poor little bunny wabbits' when you could be campaigning against the cuts in social services, the cuts in pensions, and the general everyday ettacks on the working class by the borgeiose?
Its just a waste of time.... :rolleyes:

[Sabocat]

There's been a few threads about this already. In any case it really belongs in Science/Environment, so off it goes.

[BOZG]

Strangely enough, there was an animals right protest beside my job today, outside UPS, the delivery service. Apparently they're the logistics company used by Huntingdon Labs.

SHAC (http://www.shac.net/)

[pedro san pedro]

i believe there are a serious of protests happening interantionally agaisnt huntingdon at the moment. i recieved a request from a new zealand group to log onto a website at a certian time and download a program to attack their website with. i've been in the bush though, so didnt take part

[ComradeChris]

If we're growing animals with human parts why not just harvest humans. Afterall we are the most compatable with our own parts...at least I certainly hope.

[Eastside Revolt]

Okay you can maybe win me over on primates and other semi intellegent animals, but I could really care less about the fate of few rodents.

And don't go jumping all over me for being a cold bastard. When I was a little kid, I couldn't tell you how many times I got my ass kicked trying to stop people fron killing small animals and spiders. :lol:

It's just that I've grown up now, and I can now admit that I was being irrational then.

[h&s]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 05:04 PM
Strangely enough, there was an animals right protest beside my job today, outside UPS, the delivery service. Apparently they're the logistics company used by Huntingdon Labs.

SHAC (http://www.shac.net/)
God, they're going to end up protesting against pretty much everyone soon. Who's next? The Royal Mail for delivering their post? British Gas for heating the labs? Corus for providing the steal their buildings are built from? Microsoft for providing computers?
Hippies...who needs 'em? :P

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 02:55 AM
Okay you can maybe win me over on primates and other semi intellegent animals, but I could really care less about the fate of few rodents.

And don't go jumping all over me for being a cold bastard. When I was a little kid, I couldn't tell you how many times I got my ass kicked trying to stop people fron killing small animals and spiders. :lol:

It's just that I've grown up now, and I can now admit that I was being irrational then.
I want a pet squirrel speaking of little animals :lol: . THey're the cutest little things.

I still don't understand what the difference between harvesting animals with human parts or just harvesting humans. I mean once you implant certain things into the animals (ie. the human brain in mice example), they'll start being able to feel like humans do.

[Cal]

I can't believe you'd want to test shampoo on a pour little bunny

But the bunny was fully volumised and dandruff free for the next week

and he was worth it!

[Commie Rat]

the sad thing is that in the last 30 years animal rigths have progressed more rapidly then children rights

[MysticArcher]

As a doctor (well, hopefully in a couple years) I think animal testing is ok for drugs and new medical techniques (surgeries, prosthetics, anything else that isn't a drug but involves health)

because you have to put human lives ahead of animals when it comes to saving human lives

But for cosmetics? that's ridiculous, it's not helping anyone and thus any amount of harm to animals for that purpose is wrong

[pedro san pedro]

i'm of the opinion that the cosmetics industry as a whole is rather ridiculous.

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 03:11 AM
As a doctor (well, hopefully in a couple years) I think animal testing is ok for drugs and new medical techniques (surgeries, prosthetics, anything else that isn't a drug but involves health)

because you have to put human lives ahead of animals when it comes to saving human lives

But for cosmetics? that's ridiculous, it's not helping anyone and thus any amount of harm to animals for that purpose is wrong
I agree whole heartedly on the cosmetics issue. But why MUST we put our lives above animals? We are in fact only animals...unless of course you are religious or something along those lines.

It would be more practical growing humans for parts, rather than animals with genetic alterations for human parts.

[h&s]

It would be more practical growing humans for parts, rather than animals with genetic alterations for human parts.
More practical maybe, but evil.

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 4 2005, 09:59 AM

It would be more practical growing humans for parts, rather than animals with genetic alterations for human parts.
More practical maybe, but evil.
How so? Who determines evil?

[October Revolution]

I wouldn't say evil as such but it would just make man a machine to be used as seen fit to help others. It would just create another type of social segregation.

On the main point using animals for something as trivial as make-up is wrong but to use them to further science and medicine i can't see the problem.If it benefits humanity more than it hurts the population of the other species then it should be justifiable. But only with worth while causes.

[Commie Rat]

but isn't this all because the advertising media has told us we have do look better then the person next to us make our selves better then all the other people ?

[pedro san pedro]

i think it may be a little more complex than that - humans have been using cosmectics for a lot longer than we have had media telling us what to do

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by October [email protected] 4 2005, 07:55 PM
I wouldn't say evil as such but it would just make man a machine to be used as seen fit to help others. It would just create another type of social segregation.
I'm just saying that once you start using animals for growing human parts...they themselves are part human. We're bringing them into "our class" as some would say (as many people seem to think animals are there so we can do whatever we want with them). I made the example about the mice with human brains. They could then in theory think along the same lines as we do, maybe even feel emotions. How is that fair to them putting them through that much torment?