Should we be able to use animals in Pharmaceutical reasearch

[Retribution]

I don't have a problem with such research, as long as it is done without cruelty, and not on endangered species.

 

Also, my tolerance is greater for potentially human life saving medical research vs. superficial things like cosmetics...

I go to page one of the thread, and see my thoughts completely copied in the first reply. Lucky me.

[dezdimona]

I wish, personally, that footage of elderly dementia patients being abused by their "carers" provoked such high emotion. But no, these poor old folks are not fluffy and appealing I guess.

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure people who tend to feel compassion, feel it for all helpless creatures.

How true and yet some never see it that way. Like a horse with blinders,they see whats in front of them but not what may apply off to the sides.

[ginnyfizz]

I wish, personally, that footage of elderly dementia patients being abused by their "carers" provoked such high emotion. But no, these poor old folks are not fluffy and appealing I guess.

 

 

That's really an unbelievable assumption. I personally was fired over 25 years ago from an "old folks home" when I dared complain about the conditions of the elderly, and tried to alleviate them as best I could as an 18yo minimum wage nurse's assistant.

 

I'm pretty sure people who tend to feel compassion, feel it for all helpless creatures.

 

There is nothing unbelievable about what I said - I did not say ALL carers for the elderly abused the old people in their charges. But the abuse DOES go on. In the UK a report has recently been made by the standards body, and there have been exposes by investigative journalists, showing the poor standards and abuse in some care homes. I can't talk about the case I know PERSONALLY of, as it is sub judice.

 

It is a FACT that when animal testing is mentioned there is often a near hysteria. But certainly here in good old England, people abuse such as of the elderly, or of children, does not attract the same level of sustained campaigning that animal testing does. That is a FACT, not an assumption.

 

Oh yes, and did I mention? Not only do I not use cosmetics / detergents that have been tested on animals, which is a different matter entirely from pharmaceutical research, I have also stood in front of the trucks at Millbay Docks in Plymouth taking live animals abroad for slaughter, as I am a firm believer in "on the hook, not on the hoof".

 

It's all a matter of proportion, and where animal research is concerned, the emotions engendered and the amount of violence that some of the animal rights campaigners apply, is disproportionate.

[myrmaad]

You got me wrong.

 

What is unbelievable is that you assume that people who care about humane care for animals would not also care about humane care for the elderly.

 

 

If any of you were handed a loaded gun and given the choice of killing an animal or a human being, that choice would be clear.

 

Not necessarily.

Edited December 13, 2009 by myrmaad

[Pushkatu]

I would agree to use animals in pharmaceutical research, but only if I'd be 100% sure that no suffering is involved. If I'd knew that these researches would benefit both animals and humans, I would not be so pissed about it I guess. I know that by doing so, many could get some help with what ever their sufferings are so when I think about little children that could benefit from these researches I could not say no, with the condition mentioned above and if posible to find a way so that animals would not notice whats going on. :)

[Marxist ßastard]

If any of you were handed a loaded gun and given the choice of killing an animal or a human being, that choice would be clear.

Not necessarily.

Wow. That's the creepiest thing I've heard all week. Wouldn't want to meet you in a dark alley.

[myrmaad]

If any of you were handed a loaded gun and given the choice of killing an animal or a human being, that choice would be clear.

Not necessarily.

Wow. That's the creepiest thing I've heard all week. Wouldn't want to meet you in a dark alley.

 

 

Good. As a woman I'm not crazy about dark alleys anyway.

 

 

Second, it's not creepy in the least.

 

If said animal is my family pet, and said human is trying to harm me or my family, the choice is very easy. I do own a gun, I do know how to use it, I will protect myself and my loved ones, including my four legged family members.

 

 

I call that "equalizing".

Edited December 13, 2009 by myrmaad

[Pushkatu]

If said animal is my family pet, and said human is trying to harm me or my family, the choice is very easy. I do own a gun, I do know how to use it, I will protect myself and my loved ones, including my four legged family members.

 

 

I call that "equalizing".

 

I feel as I said those words myself. +1

[nosisab]

It's sad to say but it seems many do not know 'animals' are not the only species used in pharmacological and medical researches...

 

Many are the countries that suffer from a dissimulated form of it, some have whole generations marked by drugs like thalidomid, tested in pregnant women at '3rth world' countries.

 

There is no limit when ethics allows chosen ones.

[Pushkatu]

It's sad to say but it seems many do not know 'animals' are not the only species used in pharmacological and medical researches...

 

Many are the countries that suffer from a dissimulated form of it, some have whole generations marked by drugs like thalidomid, tested in pregnant women at '3rth world' countries.

 

There is no limit when ethics allows chosen ones.

 

True, we can't imagine how things are at a larger scale, we judge having only few examples to think about. I'm sure that somewhere out there, as we speak, both a human or an animal suffer becouse of this. We as a species harm not only our kind, but everything else that is within our power.