What are peoples views on Vivisection? Is it a waste of animals lives or do peeps thinks medical science still needs it?
Vivisection
- Thread starter TexasTom
- Start date
-
Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!
Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.
I think it is wrong, as discussed in previous threads animals have rights as they are entities which can feel emotions and trauma. Just because we are bigger and more powerful does not give us the right to harm other beings for our own gain.
I will no doubt be called a hypocrite for this view, as I'm sure on the odd occasion I use products / medicines which have been tested on animals, however just because I have been born into a society where it is common practice and virtually immpossible to avoid, doesn't mean I have to support it.
imho we should test things on all those child killers who would otherwise be rotting in jail cells for the rest of their lives
(at least if we are not allowed to put them out of their misery 
)
I will no doubt be called a hypocrite for this view, as I'm sure on the odd occasion I use products / medicines which have been tested on animals, however just because I have been born into a society where it is common practice and virtually immpossible to avoid, doesn't mean I have to support it.
imho we should test things on all those child killers who would otherwise be rotting in jail cells for the rest of their lives
(at least if we are not allowed to put them out of their misery )
Last edited:
Whilst I do not agree with the death penalty, I can think of some uses for Child Murderers and Rapists...........................
But a lot of other animals do. Usually for food or for fun. (a lot of predators don't eat everything they kill) I know I do every time I have a bacon sandwich. Is it really any different? After all we are basically predatory animals.
I think it is different - food is necessary for survival on a day to day basis, however medical research is just an attempt to prolong our lives and to fight against either diseases invented by ourselves, or natures way of keeping the population down. Killing for food is in keeping with nature, however medical research is fighting against nature.
And yes other animals kill for fun, but this is because they lack the levels of intelligance and emotions to realise what they are doing is cruel. Also, young animals kill for fun as a learning process - they have to hunt to survive so the mother brings them animals to play with so they can learn how to hunt and kill. Humans do not need this learning process because of the way our society works, and we do have the intelligence to realise killing for fun is cruel.
And yes other animals kill for fun, but this is because they lack the levels of intelligance and emotions to realise what they are doing is cruel. Also, young animals kill for fun as a learning process - they have to hunt to survive so the mother brings them animals to play with so they can learn how to hunt and kill. Humans do not need this learning process because of the way our society works, and we do have the intelligence to realise killing for fun is cruel.
yes and no
let me explain why
Things like resiant new strains of TB and stuff need cures, things like saliva from kemondo drgons (pls excuse spelling) have proved to be effective against such thing but would you want them to be tested on humans ? who knows what it could do. If there was a way to be sure that that things where 100% safe for humans without testing then yes I would be against it but as it is iam not 100% sold.
As for cosmetics that a differant kettle of fish all together, no way in hell something should be tested on animals just so ppl can look nicer and smell better, medical resons yes cosmetics no.
let me explain why
Things like resiant new strains of TB and stuff need cures, things like saliva from kemondo drgons (pls excuse spelling) have proved to be effective against such thing but would you want them to be tested on humans ? who knows what it could do. If there was a way to be sure that that things where 100% safe for humans without testing then yes I would be against it but as it is iam not 100% sold.
As for cosmetics that a differant kettle of fish all together, no way in hell something should be tested on animals just so ppl can look nicer and smell better, medical resons yes cosmetics no.
This is a real tough 1 i reckon...very dodgy ground. So many positives & negatives. Take for example testing for medical purposes, it sounds barbaric but tbh if it had never been allowed then most probably some of the ppl that visit these very forums wouldnt actually be alive today.
The cosmetic testing programs are appalling imo and can never be judged as essential...but the medical stuff hmmmm, i can see its justification...dunno, v hot potato. I also dont sit easy with `its ok for 1 but not the other' either.
The cosmetic testing programs are appalling imo and can never be judged as essential...but the medical stuff hmmmm, i can see its justification...dunno, v hot potato. I also dont sit easy with `its ok for 1 but not the other' either.
Well, if you're against animal testing, I hope you don't use any cosmetics at all and don't take any prescription or over the counter medicines. Because all have had animal testing in their background somewhere.
Otherwise you're a hypocrite.
General comment, not aimed at anyone in particular.
Otherwise you're a hypocrite.
General comment, not aimed at anyone in particular.
Cosmetics testing is a 
. Body Shop for example dont do animal testing, and can still produce decent cosmetics.
But for medical reasons, absolutely.
I think cruelty to animals is a bad thing, but at the end, I value human life far above animal life. For example, blood products, animal testing is carried out there, the difference between this and (gotta be said ) foxhunting, is that the animals are day to day treated very well, yes, there is almost certainly discomfort ( you should see them when rows of rabbits are getting their temperature taken!), and deaths, but the reason for doing it is to preserve life, not for a laugh. I eat meat, I use medicinal drugs that have been tested on animals. I tend to avoid eggs from battery hens (recently banned I think) and cosmetics that have been animal tested.
. Body Shop for example dont do animal testing, and can still produce decent cosmetics.But for medical reasons, absolutely.
I think cruelty to animals is a bad thing, but at the end, I value human life far above animal life. For example, blood products, animal testing is carried out there, the difference between this and (gotta be said
) foxhunting, is that the animals are day to day treated very well, yes, there is almost certainly discomfort ( you should see them when rows of rabbits are getting their temperature taken!), and deaths, but the reason for doing it is to preserve life, not for a laugh. I eat meat, I use medicinal drugs that have been tested on animals. I tend to avoid eggs from battery hens (recently banned I think) and cosmetics that have been animal tested.
Been through this one with some friends...
premise: "the life of a single human being is worth an entire animal species"
to help you see that point of view, consider the "single human being" as your lover, the one person you value more than any other. and think of a nice, non-cuddly animal like a lamprey.
No-one likes lampreys.
so, if you can save a human life by testing a pharmaceutical on animals, it's a no brainer.
as for cosmetics?
No, because your NOT worth it, Mrs Pitt.
premise: "the life of a single human being is worth an entire animal species"
to help you see that point of view, consider the "single human being" as your lover, the one person you value more than any other. and think of a nice, non-cuddly animal like a lamprey.
No-one likes lampreys.
so, if you can save a human life by testing a pharmaceutical on animals, it's a no brainer.
as for cosmetics?
No, because your NOT worth it, Mrs Pitt.
That's true they don't. They just use ingredients (not sure if that's the right word for cosmetics) that other people have already tested on animals.
http://www.bodyshop.com/global/values/aat/aat_believe_purchasing.asp
"We will not purchase any ingredient that they have tested or restested on animals for cosmetic purposes since at least 31st Dec 1990"
They claim to have discontinued 5 products after finding out the ingedients breached that purchising rule.
"We will not purchase any ingredient that they have tested or restested on animals for cosmetic purposes since at least 31st Dec 1990"
They claim to have discontinued 5 products after finding out the ingedients breached that purchising rule.
http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/94/8/body_shop.html
http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/msc_18apr98.html
Counter views, the second is particularly interesting, talks about the hypocracy of the Body Shop
I just used them as an example, I have no particular desire to back them up
http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/msc_18apr98.html
Counter views, the second is particularly interesting, talks about the hypocracy of the Body Shop
I just used them as an example, I have no particular desire to back them up
I thought I'd heard something about it before. Wasn't sure though and thought I was going to be made to look like an ill informed twat. Thanks for the confirmation
Gotta agree that for medical research it is pretty vital, and for cosmetics is a no no. However when you get things like with Cambridge University drugging mice with amphetamine and forcing them to listen to loud music and thus giving them brain damage or killing them it makes you wonder. (Sources here & here). We need tougher guidelines and tougher punishments for breaking them imo. The government gave Cambridge University Scientists a warning and a reminder.
Small article here on a recent EU vote to ban testing cosmetics on animals which will hopefully come into force in 2005.
Small article here on a recent EU vote to ban testing cosmetics on animals which will hopefully come into force in 2005.
I think you might find that IS medical research. It's looking at the effect of drugs and loud music.
Another thing that is related particularly for me cos it's what I do for a living is the killing of animals (well fish anyway) for the purpose of estimating stock numbers.
