2006-11-03 [Corazie]: The biology is so similar with some species though...
The animals were bred to be tested on.
There are very few human volunteers despite the money involved. And the volunteers are for the clinical trials that come after preliminary animal testing and developement. They know what's coming only because of the animal testing.
2006-11-03 [Lady Neit]: Well think about it. Your a rabbit or something. Bred in captivity to be tested on. You may never see sun light, you have no idea who your parents are. You're being held down and forced to have injections every day then having scientists poking and prodding you. You have no idea whats going on. Your contantly petrified.
2006-11-03 [Corazie]: Think about this:
Your father died two weeks ago. Your mother is about to die. You will have to care for your siblings. You are going to die. Your brothers and sisters are going to die. You will never have an education. You will never have a life. You will never have enough money to feed and clothe your brothers/siste
2006-11-03 [Lady Neit]: then your fecking unlucky
2006-11-03 [Corazie]: And so are the animals (bred for such a purpose) that tragically die.
2006-11-03 [Lady Neit]: i won't deny that you have a point, but its still unfair.
2006-11-03 [Blaithin]: Dangerous Salome, I don't believe we should test on animals for the same reasons you are for it, just from a different perspective.
Death is a part of life and it's inevitable. Disease is a component of life in that it helps control the population the same as the food chain does. For instance, the coyotes become to plentiful they deplete the rabbits to much so, as a balance they become severely diseased to reduce their population and soon everything is back to normal. In the case of humans we have more or less completely removed the natural selection components. 1. The weak aren't hunted and removed by animals which allows the spreading of diseases and genetic defects that would otherwise be limited. 2. By placing ourselves in the highest level of authority and testing on animals we are removing them from the ecosystem and altering that. If the ecosystem becomes unbalanced everything is affected, even us high and mighty humans.
If you look at all of the major problems today, war, plague, pollution, all are direct results of overpopulation
2006-11-05 [Lady Neit]: i agree ^^
2006-11-06 [babycheechee]: me too
2006-11-08 [Neya]: describing the worst possible place you could be in..like your father and mother and everyone is dying.. is just playing into peoples emotions, but you also have to look at the facts.. what gives us the right to kill animals for our own problems? personally, I don't look at animals like they are worth "less" than we humans are worth
2006-11-08 [Corazie]: But is it not the truth?
The worst situation would be happening for millions...
2006-11-08 [Blaithin]: And it would happening for millions because those millions made themselves more susceptable. The truth is humans as a whole are becoming a pathetically weak species. Our natural immune systems our shit which is a direct result of so many vaccines. It's all going to come back and bite us in the ass.
2006-11-08 [Neya]: it might be the truth, but that still doesn't take away the facts..in my opinion emotions don't overrule facts
2006-11-08 [Lady Neit]: i agree again with [Blaithin]
Most of the deaths that cause the worse possible scenario would be somehow self-inflicted (if that makes sense =S) like lung cancer (from smoking), obesity, untreated or badly treated diabetes etc
So why should animals suffer for our cock-ups (excuse the language)
2007-03-05 [babycheechee]: that so sad l agree to
2007-03-21 [Corazie]: What about HIV through family over which you have no control? Or something gentetic? Surely put in that position you would rather animals were tested on (bred for that purpose) than a whole family line suffering painful deaths due to a genetic deformity?
2007-03-21 [Blaithin]: Do we test to save animals from genetic mutations such as Chrone's disease? There's no reason we should take precedence over animals just because we've made ourselves more submissable to diseases. Besides, the human body is a wonderful thing, given enough time exposed to one disease, we will grow protection and perhaps even immunity to it. That won't happen if we keep contributing to the diseases growth and mutation by exposing it to possible antibodies our body could be using though.
2007-03-25 [kittykittykitty]: I completely disagree that the life of a human is worth any more than the life of another sentient being. In fact, I would usually argue that a human's life is worth less, as humans are quite a disgusting species IMO :X
HIV was originally contracted supposedly by men having sex with monkeys... maybe it's not an individual's fault that they got HIV in their bloodline or from a blood transfusion, etc., but another species shouldn't have to pay for stupid mistakes from ours.
Every life should be given the same consideration. Utilitarianism doesn't work.
2007-03-25 [Blaithin]: The rumor about HIV is false. It was contracted through Chimpanzee excretement. They're immune to the disease and many carry it unknowingly. It's through their fecal matter than humans came in contact with it and since we are susceptable, the rest is history. However, if Chimps grew a natural immunity to the disease and uphold it even today after it has morphed so much in humans (There's no reason it hasn't mutated in them as well), then there's no reason we can't eventually do so as well.
Letting Nature take her course is something that, as humans, we have to get better at doing. It'd make life easier lol
2007-04-22 [kittykittykitty]: Well that's just what I have been told, which is why I didn't express my conviction on the fact ;)
Letting Nature take her course...
Haha! I totally agree! Medicalisation is a huge problem... something such as grieving is a natural and normal course to take, but if you go to a doctor because you're grieving they'll put you on pills because they think it's an illness.
2007-05-13 [Corazie]: Then you're going to one bad doctors who should most likely be fired. Or at least go through all of their training again. Doctors in the 21st Century have been educated, trained, not to give patients medication unless it's needed. There are wonderful texts out there like The Times, New Scientist, Cosmos... Read them maybe?