Testing on animals

[Hair Flick]

It’s a good point. The majority of animals used in medical testing are fruit flies and nematode worms.

Then zebrafish are another major one.

Most would think nothing of swatting a fly in their house or guzzling a cod on a Friday night despite not needing to for survival.

Why zebrafish? I seem to remember fruit flies (drosophila?) from Biology lessons and summink to do with their genetic make up, or was it just they had such a short breeding cycle you could observe changes through successive generations more quickly?

 

[Charmless Man]

Flies i just normally open the window for they eventually make their way out.

Yes but not before four more and a blackbird have made their way in.

Why zebrafish? I seem to remember fruit flies (drosophila?) from Biology lessons and summink to do with their genetic make up, or was it just they had such a short breeding cycle you could observe changes through successive generations more quickly?

Bits of both. They’re similar enough genetically to make testing on them a valid starting point for human research. And yes, their reproductive cycles/numbers make them perfect.

With zebra fish it’s the similarity and the ease of keeping them. One of their main uses currently is researching heart tissue regeneration.

 

[super noodles]

 

[cornish mackem]

And rodwell. Get him on the table i'll help hold him down.

He’d let you do it for £70k/week I reckon

 

[Deleted member 40035]

He’d let you do it for £70k/week I reckon

Best to wait until he gets his place back in the England squad, I don't want to scupper England's chances in the next Tournament.

 

[Andy_Roker1983]

It’s a good point. The majority of animals used in medical testing are fruit flies and nematode worms.

Then zebrafish are another major one.

Most would think nothing of swatting a fly in their house or guzzling a cod on a Friday night despite not needing to for survival.



The medical community would have a problem given the total lack of control you have over testing on people who have lived to adulthood in totally unknown circumstances.

That’s why it’s a totally f***ing stupid idea, before the human rights issues come into play.

Anyone who murders children shouldn’t have rights but that’s a seperate debate.

So testing on a hamster or a rabbit is more accurate than a human because you don’t know how they’ve lived? Give them a full medical check first ( sure it’s easy enough to check the medical records).

 

[Narraback]

I was kind of against it until my youngest son ended up on life support.

 

[Deleted member 40035]

I was kind of against it until my youngest son ended up on life support.

Sorry to hear that.

 

[Narraback]

Sorry to hear that.

Thanks. He's fine(ish) now. I honestly didn't care how many animals could have died to save his life though. Terrible I know but I'm just being honest.

 

[The Neutral]

meh, we have loads of rabbits in our place to test our stuff, not a problem, the wife never agrees like, miserable cow , ( i work in a hammer factory btw)

 

[Deleted member 15970]

If its ok to test on animals then whats the issue with testing on humans? I'm not sure at which point we thought we were better than everything else.

So if you had a infection caused by animal parasites then you'd just leave them to get on with it rather than have them treated, which would mean killing them off?

A Parasite like this one...

 

[Deleted member 40035]

meh, we have loads of rabbits in our place to test our stuff, not a problem, the wife never agrees like, miserable cow , ( i work in a hammer factory btw)

lol

 

[raindog]

I feel like a Guinea pig every time i set foot into a GP surgery or Hospital lately. Still rather me than the dog.

 

[Pants]

Anyone against animal testing for medical purposes should be denied medical treatment. Would solve all kinds of problems.

 

[Charmless Man]

Anyone who murders children shouldn’t have rights but that’s a seperate debate.

So testing on a hamster or a rabbit is more accurate than a human because you don’t know how they’ve lived? Give them a full medical check first ( sure it’s easy enough to check the medical records).

Yes. It’s literally pointless to test new medicines on heinous criminals because it would not be useful scientifically. Not enough of them, not a homegenous enough sample.

We’d just be satisfying the bloodlust of people who are almost as sadistic as the criminals themselves.

 

[Brian Griffin]

Are you for or against?

I'm against, they should find other ways to test things that will benefit the human race. I don't mind them testing on wasps though.

Medical is fine

Cosmetics is not on

In my opinion, of course

 

[anth]

I know someone who works in the safety testing department in Rolls Royce engines. They have a farm for birds that they kill, freeze, then fire at the engines to test they are fine if they hit one in flight. So chances are everyone, even vegans will have benefitted from animal testing at some point.

 

[Rob the Ref]

That eye shadow could cause eye cancer.

Don’t use it then

Not really. In the grand scheme of things i arent really am I. It depends on what you consider to be "better" I guess.

I agree
It’s all about priority/survival etc.
If there was a burning building with a man and an animal inside and you could only save one then it would be the man (unless he was wearing a mag top of course).
If however there were two men inside but one was a relation then you would save your relation. In the grand scheme their lives are equal.

 

[Geronimo]

I think there are bigger problems to get hung up over than this

 

[Rob the Ref]

Thanks. He's fine(ish) now. I honestly didn't care how many animals could have died to save his life though. Terrible I know but I'm just being honest.

Understandable as most would do anything to protect their kids including losing their own life if need be.
I don’t know how Jehovas Witnesses can refuse their kids blood transfusions but that’s another debate.