Freethought & Rationalism Archive

emphryio · 03-27-2002, 08:57 AM

I did a research paper on PETA many years ago. It seemed that they were perfectly willing to dishonestly characterize animal experiments. And I think in general they are willing to be dishonest in order to achieve their goals.

Mad Kally · 03-27-2002, 09:34 AM

spin,
Would you please answer my questions without calling me a nazi lover this time?

Has anyone in your family ever had:
Vaccines and antibiotics to prevent and treat infections or anesthetics used in all forms of surgery? Diabetes, asthma or high blood pressure?

How about cancer, heart disease, depression, or newly emerged infections such as HIV. Have you ever owned a pet? Veterinary medicine is, by definition, the result of animal research.

How about research to give hope to millions who suffer from serious conditions such as cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's disease, stroke, spinal cord damage and third world infections like malaria?

Are you aware that between 1 and 3 million people still die of Malaria alone each year on this planet? A child dies every 30 seconds of Malaria. (source World Health Organization)

If you start mentioning nazi scientists, please tell me one useful thing that came from the sadistic torture of humans during that period of time.

Corwin · 03-27-2002, 10:20 AM

Quote:

If you start mentioning nazi scientists, please tell me one useful thing that came from the sadistic torture of humans during that period of time.

The verdict at Neuremburg?

Detached9 · 03-27-2002, 10:35 AM

(Mad Kally) How about research to give hope to millions who suffer from serious conditions such as cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's disease, stroke, spinal cord damage and third world infections like malaria?

I know this question wasn't directed towards me, but I decided to share my view on animal testing. I think animal testing is justified if the animals are treated in the most humane way possible and there must be a clear scientific purpose to the experiment. Treating diseases, definitely is a clear scientific purpose.

echidna · 03-27-2002, 01:58 PM

So what about animal testing for cosmetics ?

We all need to look good after all, and we can�t allow that to make us sick, now can we ?

Corwin · 03-27-2002, 02:04 PM

Up to a point I can see it. Being needlessly cruel about it is wrong as far as I'm concerned. (A lot of it can be avoided by using substances you know aren't toxic to begin with...)

Marduk · 03-27-2002, 03:11 PM

I agree with Kally, if it's absolutely necessary and is done humanely I couldn't quite disagree with using animals for some medical research, after all many animals benefit as well, rabies vaccines etc. As long as it's not the "lets nuke a rabbit and see what happens" Bevis & Butthead type research.
Cosmetics NO, they are completely unnecessary and the ones we have already are way more than enough.

[ March 27, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

Pomp · 03-27-2002, 03:18 PM

I'm apparently in the minority then, as I have no problem with someone nuking a rabbit to see what happens, provided that I don't have to watch. I find the idea disgusting, but I can't see any good reason to coerce others not to engage in it.

spin · 03-27-2002, 03:32 PM

Mad Kally,

I have already dealt with your stuff. You could go back and check that out. If you are lazy, just work on the basic idea that different organisms react differently to extremely complex chemicals. You should be aware that numerous scientists have spoken out on the irrelevance and ability to mislead of animal experiments.

spin · 03-27-2002, 03:35 PM

I have no problem with someone nuking a pompus bastard to see what happens, provided that I don't have to watch. I find the idea disgusting, but I can't see any good reason to coerce others not to engage in it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-27-2002, 08:57 AM	#71
emphryio Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: WV Posts: 4,369	I did a research paper on PETA many years ago. It seemed that they were perfectly willing to dishonestly characterize animal experiments. And I think in general they are willing to be dishonest in order to achieve their goals.

03-27-2002, 09:34 AM	#72
Mad Kally Banned Join Date: May 2001 Location: LALA Land in California Posts: 3,764	spin, Would you please answer my questions without calling me a nazi lover this time? Has anyone in your family ever had: Vaccines and antibiotics to prevent and treat infections or anesthetics used in all forms of surgery? Diabetes, asthma or high blood pressure? How about cancer, heart disease, depression, or newly emerged infections such as HIV. Have you ever owned a pet? Veterinary medicine is, by definition, the result of animal research. How about research to give hope to millions who suffer from serious conditions such as cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's disease, stroke, spinal cord damage and third world infections like malaria? Are you aware that between 1 and 3 million people still die of Malaria alone each year on this planet? A child dies every 30 seconds of Malaria. (source World Health Organization) If you start mentioning nazi scientists, please tell me one useful thing that came from the sadistic torture of humans during that period of time.

03-27-2002, 10:35 AM	#74
Detached9 Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 341	(Mad Kally) How about research to give hope to millions who suffer from serious conditions such as cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's disease, stroke, spinal cord damage and third world infections like malaria? I know this question wasn't directed towards me, but I decided to share my view on animal testing. I think animal testing is justified if the animals are treated in the most humane way possible and there must be a clear scientific purpose to the experiment. Treating diseases, definitely is a clear scientific purpose.

03-27-2002, 01:58 PM	#75
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	So what about animal testing for cosmetics ? We all need to look good after all, and we can�t allow that to make us sick, now can we ?

03-27-2002, 02:04 PM	#76
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	Up to a point I can see it. Being needlessly cruel about it is wrong as far as I'm concerned. (A lot of it can be avoided by using substances you know aren't toxic to begin with...)

03-27-2002, 03:11 PM	#77
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	I agree with Kally, if it's absolutely necessary and is done humanely I couldn't quite disagree with using animals for some medical research, after all many animals benefit as well, rabies vaccines etc. As long as it's not the "lets nuke a rabbit and see what happens" Bevis & Butthead type research. Cosmetics NO, they are completely unnecessary and the ones we have already are way more than enough. [ March 27, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

03-27-2002, 03:18 PM	#78
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	I'm apparently in the minority then, as I have no problem with someone nuking a rabbit to see what happens, provided that I don't have to watch. I find the idea disgusting, but I can't see any good reason to coerce others not to engage in it.

03-27-2002, 03:32 PM	#79
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Mad Kally, I have already dealt with your stuff. You could go back and check that out. If you are lazy, just work on the basic idea that different organisms react differently to extremely complex chemicals. You should be aware that numerous scientists have spoken out on the irrelevance and ability to mislead of animal experiments.

03-27-2002, 03:35 PM	#80
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	I have no problem with someone nuking a pompus bastard to see what happens, provided that I don't have to watch. I find the idea disgusting, but I can't see any good reason to coerce others not to engage in it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.