Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply The Main Forum - Intelligent Debate
Vivisection- is it justifiable? Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Vivisection?
  Yay!
  Nay.
View Results

Badgerkin

Partying Shapeshifter

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:34 pm


moon_child113
Badgerkin
I support humane research organisations which work to find cures for human diseases without using animals. The truth of it is that vivisection doesn't help human medicine because of differences in the bodies and systems of humans and the animals used in testing. In fact, it has often proved misleading - drugs passed 'safe' for humans by animal tests have gone on to cause unforseen side effects in humans which harm and kill people. The first time a new drug is trully tested is when it is first given to human volunteers.

The way forward is to use modern methods like computer models, cell and tissue cultures and molecular studies rather than using the unreliable, unscientfic and barbaric methods of vivisection.


Thank you, that was almost exactly what I was going to say.

Another thing, testing on animals, is it the testing or the conditions under which they are tested that most people object to?
The quantity of specimens used and thrown away is unacceptable. They dont see them or treat them as if they are living breathing creatures or animals with brains and instincts and many of the things that make us as humans. They see them as test subjects, units, disposable, and treat them accordingly. The conditions that the animals survive in are diplorable and numbing. I think that it is as much to oppose as the testing its self.


I personally object to both the testing itself and the conditions the animals are kept in. All animal experiments are unneccesary and the testing itself at best causes discomfort and fear to the animal and at worse causes extreme pain.

I agree that the conditions the animals are kept in makes vivisection even more deplorable. The barren cages provide a environment without stimulation or social interaction. The treatment of animals by some lab workers has been exposed by undercover filming. At Huntingdon Life Sciences in Cambridgeshire, England, HLS staff were filmed for Channel Four shouting at, shaking, hitting and punching beagle puppys (two people were subsequently convicted of cruelty to animals) In Covance Labs (also in England) an investigation by the BUAV (British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection) found amongst other examples of cruelty that "monkeys were slapped about the body, shaken and prodded whilst restrained. One monkey was called 'Rape' by staff because she screamed frequently." cry

It makes me wonder how many more instances of animal cruelty and abuse by workers occur in these places without anyone finding out about it.
PostPosted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 1:46 pm


WOAH i'm having flash backs of my year 10 debate in high school, i had to justify reasons FOR vivisection sweatdrop

Lulu~Love


rittie

PostPosted: Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:08 am


Well, ok ye, it IS sorta cruel to the animals but what about to human-beings????
As far as I am concerned, I am sure to hear my social studies teacher mentioning something about a a doctor impulging the chinese healthy people to think that they are ill in order to test something on them... and I guess there were many others... I'd rather kill the animals than humans.
PostPosted: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:50 am


rittie
Well, ok ye, it IS sorta cruel to the animals but what about to human-beings????


Animal testing is unreliable and the misleading results often end up harming or killing people too.

rittie
I'd rather kill the animals than humans.


Firstly, humans are animals.

The most reliable way to test a drug or procedure developed for use in human patients is to try it out on human volunteers.
This is what already happens. I believe that the animal testing which is carried out prior to giving a drug to humans should be abolished because it is both pointless and cruel. Instead which should stich to humane research methods - eg. cell and tissue cultures, molecular studies, computer modelling and finally volunteer trials.

Badgerkin

Partying Shapeshifter


Le Aristocrat
Vice Captain

PostPosted: Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:54 am


Badgerkin
rittie
Well, ok ye, it IS sorta cruel to the animals but what about to human-beings????


Animal testing is unreliable and the misleading results often end up harming or killing people too.

rittie
I'd rather kill the animals than humans.


Firstly, humans are animals.

The most reliable way to test a drug or procedure developed for use in human patients is to try it out on human volunteers.
This is what already happens. I believe that the animal testing which is carried out prior to giving a drug to humans should be abolished because it is both pointless and cruel. Instead which should stich to humane research methods - eg. cell and tissue cultures, molecular studies, computer modelling and finally volunteer trials.


Yes, we have the technology to create inanimate human cells. We can test on them. Why not? It's much safer.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 10:53 am


Animal testing...it has it's pros and cons. I don't believe it's right to abuse animals, pack them in tiny boxes, and then do all sorts of evil things to them as the stereotype says. Then again, testing on humans is scary as well. I don't think there is a real clear answer; All I know is that I don't use any kind of product that says tested on animals.

wolfbane_eyes

4,600 Points
  • Dressed Up 200
  • Wall Street 200
  • Hygienic 200
Reply
The Main Forum - Intelligent Debate

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum
//
//

// //

Have an account? Login Now!

//
//