Animal Rights

[!ightoftruth]

i have just read this article in the bbc

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4753333.st m

I personally think that anyone with any link to huntingdon life sciences or any company which tests on animals is no better than anyone who profited from the holocaust because animal iis just as sick and pointless as the holocaust.

[edited by AB]

[THECORBYLOON]

!ightoftruth what would you do if you, or a loved one, had a fatal condition which could be reversed by using treatment developed after testing on animals?

[shammydodger]

Vivacia

If it wasn't for one of your earlier posts, in which you said that you agreed with everything that lightoftruth was saying, then I could admire you for your stance, even though I don't agree with you. Unfortunately, and despite the wriggling that ligtoftruth has since attempted, he/she quite clearly stated in the original post that they would be prepared to [edited by AB] to "save many animals lives." The wriggling has been to include humans in this set of "animals", when I doubt very much that that was the intended meaning of the post. I simply cannot respect the opinion of anybody who places the life of an animal on an equal footing with that of an upstanding member of the human race.

[QueenOfSheba]

So what would someone rather? Themselves or a relative suffer from one of the terrible diseases and conditions there are, cancer, EB, Parkinsons, Alzheimers, etc. rather than the very real possibility of discovering a cure for them through the sacrifice of some animals?

God knows I love animals and this may sound controversial or heartless, but we are higher up the chain being a more "intelligent" (not sure after !ightoftruth's "[edited by AB] comment, [edited by AB]) life form.

How do you think we have so many of the drugs that we use, knowing they're safe, to treat people with potentially fatal, but controllable conditions, diabetes, heart conditions, asthma etc?

Just look what happened to those lads at Northwick Park Hospital a few weeks back.

Any kind of intentional long-standing cruelty, like the horse that was found recently with huge welts where his rein had cut into his face, ought to be punishable by stringing up the perpetrator by the goolies or similar.

I am interested in !ightoftruth's view on the scum who inflict this kind of disgusting treatment... Is it not worse surely?

At least the animals who are sacrificed for us in the labs are kept clean and fed...

Putting "ightoftruth's scenario in reverse, if say a lion was putting several people into danger after escaping from a zoo (for example) would "ightoftruth shoot the lion to save the people?

(Waiting for "ightoftruth to say they shouldn't be in zoos in the first place, but they are and its that is not about to change)

I appreciate !ightoftruth, that you care deeply about the animals, but sometimes, as hard as it is to swallow, things happen that we don't like, but it is ultimately for the greater good.

Cont...

[QueenOfSheba]

Cont...

For the record, I abhor foxhunting, this isn't a "sport", they're just selfish, cruel baskets.

Sorry posters if this is going on a bit, but I think !ightoftruth's comments in original question were outrageous!

PS: I also have a very pampered puss whom I love dearly.

[PhilBy]

Just throwing another log on the fire ;-)

http://www.rds-online.org.uk/pages/home.asp?i_ToolbarID=8&i_PageID=94

[elerrina]

waldo - on your comment about animal testing developing vaccines you mentioned polio whereas it is quite the opposite animal testing delayed this vaccine for years as they induced it in monkeys which contracted it nasaly not through the mouth. scientist therefore ignored the other research in favour of the animal research which delayed the much needed vaccine. keep it up lightof truth i totally agree with you on this subject. and i hate to break it to you queenofsheeba many of the animals in the labs are treated cruely by the vivisectors there are manny a video of them being hit and such because they bit the vivisector as they were in pain and suffering

[PhilBy]

Any thoughts on the following extract found in the above link?

The gene therapy techniques used to treat children born without a working immune system could be riskier than scientists originally thought. The therapy is used to treat children with X-SCID, a genetic disorder that leaves people with little or no immunity to infection. New research in mice shows that the treatment may cause cancer.

[PhilBy]

or:

US scientists have identified a key molecule that is crucial for the spread of human breast, head and neck tumours. By blocking the protein the researchers stopped the spread of tumours in mice, and they hope it may offer a valuable target for cancer therapies in humans.

[flip-flop]

Has lightof truth issued a retraction on the [edited by AB] comment? Or is it doggedly clinging on to its ridiculous hypothesis in the same manner as a child asserting it has not eaten the biscuits depsite the crumbs around the child's mouth?

It truly worries me that people like this have the vote. Brain dead simpleton.

[squiperly]

Perhaps you haven't noticed but there is actually a difference between humans and animals?

I'm sure survivors of the holocaust will be MOST offended by your thoughless comment.

[!ightoftruth]

Tp philby-it would have been qite easy to identifty that link without the use of animals. the treatment could have been used in synthetic human tissue and the effects upon the tissue make-up then studyed. If the treatment caused cancer we would have been able to discover the exact gene that the treatment had its carciogenic effects.

As for the comment upon the lion scenario. The lion is acting upon its insticts of defence and need to find food. Humans act upon a sick desire for superioity and pleasure. As the beings of "higher intellect" we should acknowledge that we have no right to mindlessly cause great suffering and pain.

[dogfish]

"a sick desire for superiority and pleasure" from the person who [edited by AB] to satisfy their own version of how the world should be, laughable. LoT, how about putting yourself forward for experimentation to see if we can find a cure for crass, bleedin' stupidity? I think you'd be the perfect candidate.

[admarlow]

How come people usually care about nice cute fluffy animals, we never hear about things like snakes, snails , sluggs, frogs, only Monkeys, Mice etc. And as for someone who would [edited by AB] over animal testing, isnt that called a Psycopath, in all seriousness?

[admarlow]

http://www.rds-online.org.uk/pages/home.asp?i_ToolbarID=8&i_PageID=94

[admarlow]

sorry AB i should have said ''dispatch someone''

[flip-flop]

There is no comparison - if we sacrificed 1, 10, 100, 1000, 1,000,000 or however many animals in the interest of medical research, and that medical research saved even 1 human life, then the end justifies the means.

[admarlow]

I agree, and also where do the 'activists' draw the line, it seams at fluffy bunnies.

[PhilBy]

l.o.t,

Had you took the time to read the link provided you will of read that with the research against the spread of cancer that they first identified the molecule, called lysyl oxidase (LOX), by growing human breast cancer cells on an artificial gel to mimic the environment inside the body. Cancer cells in which the production of LOX was inhibited could not grow and spread over the gel.....So you see, they do do the research you claim they do not! If you are now saying the next step of the research should of been with human cancer suffers as opposed to mice.... well that is where you and me differ strongly!

[admarlow]

who can even listen to animal welfare groups when they do things like this...

http://www.vare.org.uk/