Home General Chat
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options

Animal Testing

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
OK, I've been watching too much Big Bruv...

Basically, Fed said something last night that enlightened me to a new point of view. he said that he wouldn't likely use a product unless it was tested on animals. He said he'd rather that happened than it was tested on a little kid.

Never heard this point of view before, and I just wondered what everyone else thinks about it?

Do you think animal testing is right, and if not then what would you put forward as an alternative?

By the way, I've no fixed opinion on this, I'm just interested as to what everyone thinks about it.
«13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Animal Testing
    Originally posted by Bri-namite
    he said that he wouldn't likely use a product unless it was tested on animals. He said he'd rather that happened than it was tested on a little kid.
    But the alternative to testing on animals isn't testing on little kids, so I don't understand why he would say that!

    I don't think there is any need to use products tested on animals when there are products available that do exactly the same thing that aren't tested on animals.

    I think it is quite sick to be honest.

    I don't use any products tested on animals and I very rarely take over the counter drugs for things like headaches etc. I am not preaching or trying to sound like some weird eco warrier, but I just don't believe it is right.

    I don't think it is right to do medical tests on animals either as we have different genetic make ups and suffer from different diseases. However I know that there is a need to find cures for some diseases and in the past without the painful deaths of many innocent animals there would not have been breakthrough cures for..... oh, well I can't think of anything there has been breakthrough cures for so maybe someone can enlighten me. I also believe that there aren't cures for some things.

    Anyway, Federico sounds like a vain fuckwit to me. Tsh. :p
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Animal testing is evil,
    Look at places like huntingdon life sciences and the way that they treat animals it's fucking disgusting. HLS claim that they love and respect animals, this however, is a lie.

    They also say that their research is absolutly nessecery for secientific and medical research , which just isn't true , as most of their tests are on things like make-up and cleaning products. HLS have caused deaths of people by testing a product on an animal which survived and then saying it was fit for use on humans which it wasn't. They have also been known to change test resaults to make products look safe so after all this cruelty and abuse the resaults are completly useless anyway, It's a fucking disgrace

    Ooh and as an alternative there are alternatives such as computer simulations to see what the medicine/whatever would do to the human body so I can't see how there is possibly a use for animal testing.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    perhaps he was thinking of little african children in particular :rolleyes:

    has anyone ever noticed that body shop products don't say not tested on animals, rather against animal testing. this is slightly different and i think that even their products contain chemicals that have been tested on animals.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Re: Animal Testing
    Originally posted by BumbleBee

    Anyway, Federico sounds like a vain fuckwit to me.

    Yup.

    Anyway, I did a quick search on Google, and it's damn hard to find any unbiased evidence of specific medical breakthroughs directly because of animal testing, mainly because all I can find is religious mumbo jumbo, or stuff from the Animal Liberation Front, so it's hard to know what the real story is.

    As far as my own buying of cosmetics/whatever else goes, I must admit I never reallycheck to see if something has been tested on animals or not. It's just when you see what a lot of animals go through on documentaries etc, it does make you sit up and take notice, and I can't help wondering whether the compaines who make these products are aware/do something about what goes on, because it's pretty sick as you say.

    Still, I'm open to debate.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I suppose part of it comes down to "Should we be looking after ourselves as the Human race, or should we be taking the view that we are all animals, we are all one species".

    Cosmetic testing is a different thing, but if testing on a few animals saved thousands (or maybe millions) of lives, is that a price worth paying, or is it a just wrong full stop?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Bri-namite

    Cosmetic testing is a different thing, but if testing on a few animals saved thousands (or maybe millions) of lives, is that a price worth paying, or is it a just wrong full stop?
    I would like to see the proof that animal testing has/ will do this before I comment further.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    I would like to see the proof that animal testing has/ will do this before I comment further.

    *has a dig around*

    This is interesting. Just a set of opinions by the looks of it, but some interesting ideas.

    I'm not sure how easy it would be to put it into statistics as such, probably because it's near enough impossible to quantify how many lives have/have not been saved because it's near enough impossible to say how many animals were tested, how important they were in tests.

    What I'm trying to say is there might not be a clear and direct link between animal testing and human lives saved, although medical research does obviously saves lives, the proportion of the research that was carried out on animals would be hard to suss out.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Animal-rights activists' literature claims that between 20 and 70 million animals are used. The Office of Technical Assessment states, "Seventeen to 22 million animals are used, of which 90% are rodents" (McCoy). So it's not as if scientists experiment on endangered species; they use animals with a fast reproduction rate that are abundant.
    Ooooh, so thats ok then! Phew, I thought they were using poor defensive animals, but it turns out its ok because, well, you know, they 90% of them reproduce at a fast rate. :rolleyes:

    I believe that animal testing for medical research is more important than for cosmetic use but I am still not sure. My mother has an incurable disease that makes her life a living hell, and she is dead against animal testing. It seems people who aren't even in that position but are all for it should really think about it a little deeper.
    As I said, I am undecided with regards to medical research. :confused:

    some more interesting reading
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    duh, what a twat that federico is. The alternative to animal testing isnt testing on little kids, they usually either do cell culture tests, or they pay the general public to test products. Ive done it before years ago, you have a product put on your skin and you have to observe any reaction and you have to go back once or twice a week for a few weeks just for about half an hour at a time and they question you about it. I do try not to buy things that are tested on animals. I find the easiest way to do that is to buy supermarket brand products, I know tescos sainsburys and superdrug are against animal testing. for makeup either BWC or bodyshop.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    I find the easiest way to do that is to buy supermarket brand products,
    :yes:

    And Asda.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by rainbow brite
    I know tescos sainsburys and superdrug are against animal testing.

    Good.

    BTW I admire people who take a stand against such things, regardless of whether they are wrong or right. Standing up for what we beleive in is very, very important.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It personally doesn't bother me in the slightest, I can see how people think it is cruel etc. but I don't care. If a product has been tested on animals I wouldn't think twice about using it.
    Don't know the facts but if medical research wasn't getting anywhere by testing on animals then surely they'd stop doing it. What would be the point of testing stuff on animals if they didn't get results from it? Over the years there has been excellent advances in medicines etc. and the animals must have helped us to get there.
    It doesn't really bother me but I don't think they should test skin products and stuff on animals, but medical stuff I think they should.
    Rats are rats at then end of the day, who wants them?? Who wants them diseasing the streets? Not me.
    *waits for backlash* :)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Lickalotapuss

    Rats are rats at then end of the day, who wants them?? Who wants them diseasing the streets? Not me.
    But they wouldn't be spreading disease in the streets because they wouldn't have been bred in the first place.

    Also, you contradicted yourself by saying "It personally doesn't bother me in the slightest," and then later saying "I don't think they should test skin products and stuff on animals"
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Lickalotapuss

    Don't know the facts but if medical research wasn't getting anywhere by testing on animals then surely they'd stop doing it. What would be the point of testing stuff on animals if they didn't get results from it? Over the years there has been excellent advances in medicines etc. and the animals must have helped us to get there.

    I have to agree with that, but it'd be interesting to get the facts from somewhere.

    BTW, does animal testing necessarily equal animal cruelty?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by BumbleBee
    But they wouldn't be spreading disease in the streets because they wouldn't have been bred in the first place.

    Also, you contradicted yourself by saying "It personally doesn't bother me in the slightest," and then later saying "I don't think they should test skin products and stuff on animals"
    About the rats, can't they breed on their own? Have you seen them places swarming with rats on the street, :yuck:
    I knew I kinda contradicted myself but not really. I said
    It doesn't really bother me but I don't think they should test skin products and stuff on animals, but medical stuff I think they should.
    In other words it doesn't bother me but really there is no reason to test skin products on animals.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Bri-namite

    BTW, does animal testing necessarily equal animal cruelty?
    That is another question which would have good arguments for both sides and also different situations would lead to different answers.
    E.g. An animal might get stuff tested on it and lead a perfectly normal life with no side effects and therefore I say there is no animal cruelty. But an animal could say die from whats been tested on it so that could be argued as animal cruelty.
    Also people could say it is cruel to test on animals even if there is no side effects.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I only ever agree to testing on animals if it was absolutely vital and it was to save lifes...even then im not keen to want it to happen. But sometimes its unavoidal but it should be done in the most humane was poss. I dont agree to animal cruelty and id rather see people hurt than them, we have a choice in what we do and it makes me sad to think about animals being hurt. Ive always been a strong animal lover.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    oooh contraversial..

    as far as im concerned- animal testing in search of finding and experimenting with medicines doesnt bother me too much (i dont like the idea-its not a nice thought at all-but i would never protest against it, or argue against it) as humans are likely to get helped out at the end of it all

    cosmetics, is a different story--im against testing cosmetics on animals. im a body shop junkie.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm totally against animal testing for comestic purposes, but I'm undecided for medical research. I guess that if the research helped to cure an illness and saves lives, then it might be acceptable.

    I guess it's a question of whether it's OK to test to animals that will later die in favour of saving humans.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sarahisgreat - the protesters outside huntingdon claim to hate cruelty, yet they see no problem with blowing peoples cars up, and posting workers letter bombs.

    i think cosmetic testing on animals is ridiculous, especially when people now know what ingredients are safe to use and what aren't.

    but

    if animals weren't used for medical research then my sister wouldn't be alive today. she was born with a congenital heart defect which should have killed her before she was 2. she just celebrated her 12th birthday 2 weeks ago, and for that i will never condemn medical testing.

    the pioneering operations she's had have also been used by vets to save other animals, so i do actually think in the long run the sacrifice of the research animals will save millions of lives, and not just human ones.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No, groups against huntingdon life sciences say they hate cruelty to animals, and anyway Huntingdon life sciences kill 500 animals a day and no animal has left there alive unless it has been rescued by an animal rights group etc.

    So I wouldn't call blowing up a few people that cause pain and suffering to animals for their own profit cruelty I'd call it justice.

    People keep saying how it's for medical research blah blah blah but do you think people who can treat animals that way give a shit about people? they do it to make money.

    So they should burn in hell.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Bri-namite
    BTW, does animal testing necessarily equal animal cruelty?
    Well, they inject animals with things and put drops of acidic materials in their eyes.

    Johnson & Johnson can claim "no more tears" because they tested their formula over and over again on animals.

    Urgh, to be honest, animal testing for cosmetic reasoning makes me want to cry, I am upset just thinking about it. It should be banned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    monkey~1.jpg
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    usamono.jpeg
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    08.jpg
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    despair.jpg
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Y&S, could you have given some warning you were gonna post those pics because I found them quite disturbing. :(
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry...just thought that made my point quite clear. Animal testing is wrong. Its cruel. Theres no way anyone can justify it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Looking at those pics makes me want to repeat the experiments those fucking sick bastards on them , fuck blowing them up , nothings better than a touch of irony.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by sarahisgreat
    So I wouldn't call blowing up a few people that cause pain and suffering to animals for their own profit cruelty I'd call it justice.

    They just bring to light what completely stupid cunts they really are (the protesters, that is).

    There's nothing wrong with peaceful protesting, however, blowing people up goes way to far.

    I don't think cosmetics should be tested on animals, but am undecided on potentially life saving medical procedures.
This discussion has been closed.