Poll: Animal Right's Organizations: Terrorists, Vigilanties or Heroes

[Orekoya]

Considering we no longer drill people's heads open to "let the demons out" to cure a headache, it's a mystery to many in the medical community why we still kept this inaccurate, medieval practice of animal testing.

A flimsy and inaccurate argument. First of all, animal testing is a step, not the whole procedure of medical testing. Secondly, most of the medical work done is based off ancient roman medical advancements [http://www.richeast.org/htwm/Greeks/Romans/medicine/index.html] thus you don't see many, if any, of the medical community questioning why old medical practices are still being used as you say. Thirdly,

Spoiler: Wall of Text from JJMUG

Um not terrorists; that's "Patriot Act" speak. Anyone voicing any kind of dissent suddenly became a terrorist thanks to that one piece of legislature. Anyway, back to an argument the OP made.

PCRM [http://www.pcrm.org/] (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine) is a site everyone reading this thread needs to look at and read in depth before continuing any further. Most of the argument people are going to start making (or already have) have already been covered in depth by scientists, researchers and doctors with a lot more knowledge and experience than any of us on here at the Escapist. So I'm begging everyone - before you continue an argument on this thread, read this site!

This is a group of medical professionals and doctors who are arguing against animal testing, calling it futile, useless, inaccurate and prehistoric. 100+ years ago before computers or accurate instruments, you may have brought a canary into a coal mine. Nowadays technology has replaced that need, the same as it has in every other "research" aspect.

You test something on a rat, you get the results of it on that rat. Human application is still a mystery, but we know for certain that it may cause cancer in rats. This is just bad science.

For instance, I know Teflon is toxic for birds; it's been well documented through human error and veterinary reports. For humans though, we can burn Teflon all day long and not notice a single side-effect.

As I said before though, PCRM has covered all of these argument in much greater detail than I can. They are also a non-profit not looking to make money out of their stance. Really (and I can't stress this enough) read their information before drawing a half-baked conclusion the multi-billion dollar corporations out there have brain-washed us into believing.

You do know the PCRM is a PETA front. Neal D. Barnard sat on the board of Foundation to Support Animal Protection which became the PETA Foundation, which gave more than 1.3 million the PCRM. There is so much stupidity in statements like "You test something on a rat, you get the results of it on that rat. Human application is still a mystery, but we know for certain that it may cause cancer in rats. This is just bad science." Really? do you really believe that let me find the list of Medical advancements found through animal testing.
Year


Medical Advancement


Animal credited

1796


Smallpox vaccine developed


Cow

1881


Anthrax vaccine developed


Sheep

1885


Rabies vaccine developed


Dog, Rabbit

1902


Lifecyle of Malaria discovered


Pigeon

1919


Immunity mechanisms discovered


Rabbit, Horse, Guinea Pig

1921


Insulin discovered


Dog, Fish

1932


Neuron function discovered


Cat, Dog

1933


Tetanus vaccine developed


Horse

1939


Anticoagulants developed


Cat

1954


Polio vaccine developed


Mouse, Monkey

1956


Open-heart surgery & pacemakers developed


Dog

1964


Cholesterol regulation discovered


Rat

1973


Social & behavioral patterns in animals discovered


Fish, Bee, Bird

1982


Leprosy treatment developed


Armadillo

1990


Organ transplant techniques advanced


Dog, Pig, Sheep, Cow

1997


Prions discovered & characterized


Hamster, Mouse

2000


Brain signal transduction discovered


Sea Slug, Mouse, Rat

2002


Cell death mechanism discovered


Worm

all from http://cflegacy.research.umn.edu/iacuc/public_media/medadvances.cfm its also just a sample from the list.

oh hey, I don't have to keep going on, thanks jjmug.

 

[RobCoxxy]

Mostly total pussies.
How many PETA members does it take to change a lightbulb?
None, PETA can't change anything.

And those US anti-whalers with a TV show? Who genuinely do nothing?
Please.

Animals have the right to remain tasty.

Also this. I don't want to be a vegetarian, because vegetables are what food eats.

 

[Lilani]

The ASPCA and whatnot are cool, but PETA and the Animal Liberation Front are insane, intolerant meat-haters and violent, crazed human-haters, respectively. Neither of those two groups will ever make any change. They have no footing in reality and are not reasonable in any way, shape, or form. In order to get what they want, their biggest enemies aren't poachers or animal abusers. It's common sense.

 

[Duol]

Completely agree that PETA are a bunch of nut jobs. Then again I'm not one that cares much for animal rights... I think it's a shame when people abuse their pets, that just seems silly.
However once it comes to fur, meet or testing then I couldn't care less. I'll happily wear fur and leather while scarfing down on meat.

 

[Soushi]

Um not terrorists; that's "Patriot Act" speak. Anyone voicing any kind of dissent suddenly became a terrorist thanks to that one piece of legislature.

I know,and it pisses me off. That whole thing is a perfect set up for the ones in command, the ability to silence anyone who stands agianst them by giving them a label that the government, intelligence services, special interest groups and the courts hope will scare people into falling in line. This is why this whole Wikileaks thing as me so damn mad.

Anyways, i dunno, some of thier actions do seem rather like the actions taken by terrorists. I have been unable to confirm this, but i thought i heard about a case were some of these people broke into a lab in britain and nearly beat several people to death with baseball bats. Besides, with a slogan like "Short term violence for long term gain." something as ambiguos and wide spanning as that, does kinda give me pause and casue to be a little nervous.

 

[Sarahcidal]

most are sensationalists. a few do some good.
they all have good intentions, alas organizations like PETA take things wayyyy too far.

 

[Srdjan]

Idiots, fuck them.

If you want to represent someone elses rights, try human, because those things have like free will and consciousness and soul.

Animals are not worth it. Am not saying it OK to slaughter them for fun, but activist are simply overreacting, they are mostly spoiled kids with good financial standard who don't have their own problems and whine about killing animals, I haven't heard for any poor African of Indonesian people complaining about animal rights, they also don't eat meat but only because they can't afford it or any other food to be precise, why you don't represent their rights?

And also fur coats are elegant and warm, try them sometimes.

 

[GiglameshSoulEater]

Idiots, fuck them.

If you want to represent someone elses rights, try human, because those things have like free will and consciousness and soul.

Animals are not worth it. Am not saying it OK to slaughter them for fun, but activist are simply overreacting, they are mostly spoiled kids with good financial standard who don't have their own problems and whine about killing animals, I haven't heard for any poor African of Indonesian people complaining about animal rights, they also don't eat meat but only because they can't afford it or any other food to be precise, why you don't represent their rights

Yes.
Help people, then animals.

Aside that, as soon as they start throiwing paint or bullets or molotovs, or ruining peoples livelihoods, thy desereve nothing more than a beatdown.

I'm all for change. But violence oversteps the line, and must be punished.

 

[Coidzor]

You can't group them all together like that because there's several of them and they don't all fit into the same category.

That said, of course the *worst* of the lot are terrorists. Firebombing civilians' homes while they're in them and issuing threats against the lives of children is not heroic nor is it vigilantism as there's no laws allegedly being broken by their victims, or, y'know, the non-violent branches of the movement would use that to bring them to court, so that only leaves terrorism or "other," for covering that subset of activities.

 

[JJMUG]

oh hey, I don't have to keep going on, thanks jjmug.

That is what I am here for...not really

 

[Hashime]

Um not terrorists; that's "Patriot Act" speak. Anyone voicing any kind of dissent suddenly became a terrorist thanks to that one piece of legislature. Anyway, back to an argument the OP made.

PCRM [http://www.pcrm.org/] (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine) is a site everyone reading this thread needs to look at and read in depth before continuing any further. Most of the argument people are going to start making (or already have) have already been covered in depth by scientists, researchers and doctors with a lot more knowledge and experience than any of us on here at the Escapist. So I'm begging everyone - before you continue an argument on this thread, read this site!

This is a group of medical professionals and doctors who are arguing against animal testing, calling it futile, useless, inaccurate and prehistoric. 100+ years ago before computers or accurate instruments, you may have brought a canary into a coal mine. Nowadays technology has replaced that need, the same as it has in every other "research" aspect.

You test something on a rat, you get the results of it on that rat. Human application is still a mystery, but we know for certain that it may cause cancer in rats. This is just bad science.

For instance, I know Teflon is toxic for birds; it's been well documented through human error and veterinary reports. For humans though, we can burn Teflon all day long and not notice a single side-effect.

As I said before though, PCRM has covered all of these argument in much greater detail than I can. They are also a non-profit not looking to make money out of their stance. Really (and I can't stress this enough) read their information before drawing a half-baked conclusion the multi-billion dollar corporations out there have brain-washed us into believing.

I hate to disagree but animal testing is invaluable. There are many tests that can be performed using the convenience of similar anatomy without putting humans at risk. Software models can and should be used to reduce animal tests when possible, but every drug I take better have been properly evaluated using real anatomy. Computers can make mistakes, an animal instantly dying after taking a drug (repeated, vs control) in unmistakeably a bad sign

Computers may make mistakes, but people have already made even worse mistakes [http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/dangerous_med.html] and not all of them were unintentional.

Specifically, look up Rezulin on that list. Not only was it harmless in the animals tested but fatal to humans... they changed the name repeatedly to keep it on the market - and that was only 10 years ago!

Considering we no longer drill people's heads open to "let the demons out" to cure a headache, it's a mystery to many in the medical community why we still kept this inaccurate, medieval practice of animal testing.

Recently the idea of reducing animal testing has become more popular and science hasn't been any worse off for it [http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/without_animals.html]. In fact, that one example alone showed a 24% increase in human accuracy using human tissue instead of living rats.

Which is what I said, reduce animal testing, but use both to be safe. It is also hardly medieval, modern test animals are genetically engineered to be better human analogues.

 

[Zergadooful]

Animals have less developed brains than humans, they don't feel pain in the same way. When you see a worm squirming around on a hook, it isn't feeling pain, it's simply reacting to bodily harm. Animals have a very strong will to live, they only react to "pain" to stay alive.

Also, is it murder when a cat eats a mouse? Animals need to be eaten by others to survive, it's just a part of life.

Animals have no rights, and the Animal Rights groups are just a bunch of dumbasses with nothing better to do.

 

[Jamboxdotcom]

i wouldn't go so far as to call them terrorists, but i would call them misguided loonies. human life > animal life, whether you view that from a religious stance or a secular one. that's not to say that there aren't legitimate abuses of animals that need to stop, but organizations like PETA and others are just not reasonable.

 

[Worgen]

they vary, but I doubt I would call them terrorists since really as far as I know none of them actually want to hurt people, the weirdest just hate animal testing and get their panties in a twist over it and sometimes set fires but dont actually want anyone to die directly

 

[Syphous]

Animal rights? hahahahahahahahahaha

 

[JasonBurnout16]

Animals should always be treated with care and respect.

Many organisations such as the RSPCA do their best to care for animals, while other organisations such as PETA give useful organisations a bad name when they are all categorised as 'animal caring charities'.

But I've never liked animal testing, even for medicine. Some of the pictures, and some of the things that happen to those animals are just wrong. Morally wrong. I understand we need to test on animals for medical advance, but we must realise that the animals still need care and attention. Just using an animal for our own gain like that just seems sad to me.

 

[FolkLikePanda]

I see PeTA as terrorists and anyone who will resort to violence over testing on animals over medical purposes.

 

[Something Amyss]

Animals have the right to remain tasty.

"Anything you say can be used against you in a quart of barbecue sauce."

 

[rokkolpo]

We are killing them for food, therefore I believe they deserve some respect.

This seems contradictory.