Obama and Vivisection

Discussion in 'Politics' started by conchis, Mar 24, 2009.

  1. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
    I have a question for you americans...
    what's the position of your new president Obama on vivisection (or, as the vivisectors love to call it, animal experimentation)?
    Will he be a paladin of the Big Pharma industry?
    Will he struggle to abolish this ridicolous scientific fraud?
     
    #1 conchis, Mar 24, 2009
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2009
  2. D_Chaumbrelayne_Copprehead

    D_Chaumbrelayne_Copprehead Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    8,978
    Likes Received:
    11
    I don't honestly remember hearing him say anything on the subject.
     
  3. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
    Does Animal Testing Help Human Medicine?

    33 Facts to be Considered

    (1) Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals.
    (2) According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree only "5%-25% of the time".
    (3) 95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.
    (4) At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in laboratory animals. They are allowed because it is admitted the animal tests are not relevant.
    (5) Procter & Gamble used an artificial musk despite it failing the animal tests, i.e., causing tumours in mice. They said the animal test results were "of little relevance for humans".
    (6) When asked if they agreed that animal experiments can be misleading "because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans", 88% of doctors agreed.
    (7) Rats are only 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.
    (8) Rodents are the animals almost always used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (e.g lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: the two cannot be compared.
    (9) Up to 90% of animal test results are discarded as they are inapplicable to man.
    (10) The results from animal experiments can be altered by factors such as diet and bedding. Bedding has been identified as giving cancer rates of over 90% and almost nil in the same strain of mice at different locations.
    (11) Sex differences among laboratory animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.
    (12) 9% of anaesthetised animals, intended to recover, die.
    (13) An estimated 83% of substances are metabolised by rats in a different way to humans.
    (14) Attempts to sue the manufacturers of the drug Surgam failed due to the testimony of medical experts that: "data from animals could not be extrapolated safely to patients".
    (15) Lemon juice is a deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulin are safe according to animal tests.
    (16) Genetically modified animals are not models for human illness. The mdx mouse is supposed to represent muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate without treatment.
    (17) 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which are passed as being safe in animal tests, according to a study in Germany.
    (18) 61% of birth defects are caused by drugs passed safe in animal tests, according to the same study. Defect rates are 200 times post war levels.
    (19) One in six patients in hospital are there because of a treatment they have taken.
    (20) In America, 100,000 deaths a year are attributed to medical treatment. In one year 1.5 million people were hospitalised by medical treatment.
    (21) A World Health Organisation study showed children were 14 times more likely to develop measles if they had been vaccinated.
    (22) 40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.
    (23) Over 200,000 medicines have been released, most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organisation, only 240 are "essential".
    (24) A German doctors' congress concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.
    (25) The lifesaving operation for ectopic pregnancies was delayed 40 years due to vivisection.
    (26) According to the Royal Commission into vivisection (1912), "The discovery of anaesthetics owes nothing to experiments on animals". The great Dr Hadwen noted that "had animal experiments been relied upon... humanity would have been robbed of this great blessing of anaesthesia". The vivisector Halsey described the discovery of Fluroxene as "one of the most dramatic examples of misleading evidence from animal data".
    (27) Aspirin fails animal tests, as does digitalis (a heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would have been banned if vivisection were heeded.
    (28) In the court case when the manufacturers of Thalidomide were being tried, they were acquitted after numerous experts agreed that animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.
    (29) Blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies, corneal transplants were delayed 90 years.
    (30) Despite many Nobel prizes being awarded to vivisectors, only 45% agree that animal experiments are crucial.
    (31) At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.
    (32) At least thirty-three animals die in laboratories each second worldwide; in the UK, one every four seconds.
    (33) The Director of Research Defence Society, (which exists to defend vivisection) was asked if medical prgress could have been acheived without animal use. His written reply was "I am sure it could be".
    References
    Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p6.
    "Animal toxicity studies: Their relevance to man", Lumley/Warner (Eds).
    SmithKline Beecham Internal report.
    Dr Vernon Coleman, "Why Patients Never Win In Drugs Wars".
    Ethical Consumer, Nov/Dec 1995, p24.
    Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p103.
    F. J. Di Carlo, "Drug Metabolism Reviews" 15, pp409-13, quoted in Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p44.
    NAVS Campaigner, Jan/Feb 1988, p13.
    Prof Dennis Park, advice to WHO, speaking at Humane Research Trust Convention: quoted in "Animals In Research" leaflet, Advocates for Animals.
    Pietro Croce Vivisection or Science - A Choice to Make, p43.
    E. J. Calabrese, "Toxic susceptability: Male/female differences", quoted in Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p41.
    Laboratory Animals, vol.26 no.3, p159, quoted Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p33.
    Parke/Smith (eds), Drug Metabolism from Microbe to Man, quoted Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p45.
    AVA leaflet "We can't change the past".
    Pietro Croce, Vivisection or Science - A Choice to Make, pp22-24.
    "Access Denied" report, NAVS.
    Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34, 1969, quoted in Hans Ruesch Slaughter of the Innocents, p365.
    Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34, 1969, quoted in Hans Ruesch Slaughter of the Innocents, p365.
    Dr Vernon Coleman, "Animal experiments kill people as well as animals".
    Hans Ruesch, quoted in BAVA leaflet, "After prolonged tests".
    National Health Federation Bulletin, 1969.
    D. Icke, "It doesn't have to be like this".
    Hans Ruesch, Naked Empress, pp.12,91.
    Congress of Clinical Medicine, 1976. PC p14.
    Hans Ruesch Slaughter of the Innocents, pp175/6.
    Dr Hadwen The difficulties of Deguerre, p357. General Anaesthesia, Gray/Utting/Nunn, p152.
    Hans Ruesch Slaughter of the Innocents, p364. "Cancer", NAVS Campaigner Jan/Feb 1988.
    Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p9.
    Hans Ruesch Slaughter of the Innocents, p361-362.
    Plan 2000, "How much longer".
    VIN Newsletter 2.
    Pietro Croce, Vivisection or Science - A Choice to Make, p22-24.
    Plan 2000 leaflet.
    Written reply to enquiry by member of the public quoted in Tony Page, Vivisection Unveiled, p101.
    The above was taken from VIN Newsletter 4
    Produced by V.I.N., P O Box 223, Camberley, Surrey, GU16 5ZU.
    Email: vivisectionkills@hotmail.com
    References available on request
     
  4. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
  5. Pitbull

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    3,753
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Your list does not sound believable.

    I can believe some of the reasons cited.
    Others I can't.
    From obviously biased sources.

    Quoting someone in a leaflet
    "Prof Dennis Park, advice to WHO, speaking at Humane Research Trust Convention: quoted in "Animals In Research" leaflet, Advocates for Animals."
    Need to do better than that.

    I would say 9% death rate from anesthesia seems very far fetched to me.
    Also the vaccination for measles increasing the chances of getting measles?
    The only reason measles is almost unheard of nowadays in the civilized world is the measles vaccine.

    Much animal research is basic science research and not using animals as models of human disease.

    And since you have such a great interest in the welfare of mice and rats would you care to really stir up the forum? Tell us your position on abortion and start a thread about abortion and Obama.
    And put on your flame proof suit.
     
  6. joyboytoy79

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,557
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC-ish
    Sir, If I wanted to, and was willing to take snippets of quotes completely out of context, I could find several "reputable" sources that say there is life on Mars. That isn't to say there is not life on Mars. Nobody has ever set foot on that planet to actually do some good old-fashioned human exploration.

    My point, however, is that when a source is blatantly biased, it tends to also be patently false.

    For example: Humans experience both carcinomas and sarcomas (along with teratocarcinomas). Your "leaflet" would have us believe that humans only experience carcinomas and mice only experience sarcomas, and never the two shall meet. I have news for you. It was by studying laboratory mice that scientists first discovered that estrogen plays a significant role in breast cancer development. The lab mice actually had breast cancer. Breast cancer is - a carcinoma. From this research scientists have found various anti-estrogen drugs that slow or reverse the growth of breast cancer.

    Furthermore, I find interesting your claim on a previous thread that AIDS is the result of primate vivisection. That's a very intersting claim. I'd also like for you to back it up with some unbiased proof. You know, find someone who isn't out to further an agenda. I'd also like to point out to you that HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) has been documented in human blood and tissue samples going back to 1959 in the Congo. Please explain how vivisection of primates (in the developed world) had caused infection in semi-remote areas of Africa.

    My source is from Wikipedia, and is not in relation to anyone trying to make claims that HIV came from or did not come from primate vivisection: Origin of AIDS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  7. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
    to joyboytoy: The Origin of HIV and the First Cases of AIDS
    is a theory, isn't?
    to pitbull and the wikipedia apt pupil:I would recommend the reading of Slaughter of the Innocent by Hans Ruesch or Vivisection or Science by Pietro Croce.
    that wasn't MY leaflet, was a brief compendium of facts about vivisection. the source is indicated below. just to start the topic. sorry, pitbull, I don't know that dr Dennis Park, but here you can find the most quoted books or scholars in the list:

    Vivisection Unveiled: An Expose of the Medical Futility of Animal Experimentation: Tony Page: Amazon.co.uk: Books
    Slaughter of the Innocent: Amazon.co.uk: Hans Ruesch: Books
    Vivisection or Science?: An Investigation into…Amazon.co.uk: Pietro Croce: Books
    Hans Ruesch Centre
     
  8. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Can we get a PETA spokesperson in here?
     
  9. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
    I asked only the opinion of your new president.
    but I would be happy to hear a peta/lpsg spokeperson...
     
  10. joyboytoy79

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,557
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC-ish
    Conch,

    Yes, it is a theory. But so, too, is my new postulation that HIV originated first in underwater sea sprites who out of fury toward the human kind for polluting their pristine home, infected unsuspecting sailors and mariners, thus exacting revenge on humankind. I can find scientists to back my claim. I can find scientists to back any claim. I'm sure if I dug deep enough I could even find books that have already been written on the subject and quote them.

    The reason my theory (and also the one you espouse) is not valid is that it can not be validated. There is no way to prove (or conversely, disprove) either theory. They both originate from a point of bias that already assumes an answer to the question asked: "where did HIV come from?" Both are also meant to further a personal agenda, and thus are tainted from the start.

    Do you understand? Or am I speaking Russian again?
     
  11. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
    Toy,
    I understand. Now could you tell me, 'cause I am a poor troglodyte from Italy, WHAT'S THE FUCKING POSITION OF YOUR PRESIDENT (BECAUSE THIS IS THE THREAD, NOT SIMIAN VIRUSES, MON AMOUR) ABOUT ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION?
    thank you
     
  12. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Obama strikes me as a completely unenlightened soul (read humanist)

    accordingly, if correct, he would endorse vivisection
     
  13. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nick...Nick.....Nick.....
    You sad sick fuck.

    I just gotta add that jem of your wisdom to my sign off collection of stupidest shit i have ever read on this site.
     
  14. seterwind

    seterwind New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    216
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    Take Peta and those protesting Vivisection seriously after watching this. I assure you, at minimum it will be a laugh.

    Sea Kittens
    ------------
    http://www.peta2.com/sea_Kittens/


    (Edited the right link in there)
     
  15. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    OH DEAR......Non-sensical thread merge on aisle 3.........Republican extraction ....AGAIN. Environment-LIBERAL. Atheist-LIBERAL. Provable science-LIBERAL. Conservation=LIBERAL. ANIMALS=PETA=LIBERAL=EVIL=Downfall of Moral AMERICA.
    OBAMA=VIVI-SECTION ?
    Can we get a clue here?
     
  16. Flashy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    8,097
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Well, i am anti-vivisection and animal experimentation...

    unfortunately, i do not think this is high on congress or the president, democrat or republicans list of important issues unfortunately.

    I saw a very sad short documentary about chimps and monkeys being held in one of the State Universities of Louisiana that made me very upset, and i sent an e-letter to Bobby Jindal about it.

    the humane society is trying to get them retired to chimp haven, which is a great sanctuary in Louisiana.
     
  17. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    Obama has no stated position on animal rights. But his positions on disability, HIV and science more generally leads me to guess that he's cautious and pragmatic, as he is about most things.
     
  18. conchis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,208
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Roma
  19. dreamer20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,492
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    N.Providence
    Yes it does.


    Pro-Test:standing up for science

    FACTS

    Without animal research, medicine as we know it today wouldn't exist. Animal research has enabled us to find treatments for cancer, antibiotics for infections, vaccines to prevent some of the most deadly and debilitating viruses and surgery for injuries, illnesses and deformities.

    Pro-Test: standing up for science

    For more information, please click on the above link. To go into the issues in further depth, Understanding Animal Research offers an unparalleled database of hard facts to counter the junk science of anti-vivisectionists.
     
  20. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    none of which to say that it has to be done that way

    there are always alternatives; justification ends up being might is right

    what nonsense is next?

    meat-eating is actually good for you?
     
    #20 B_Nick4444, Mar 25, 2009
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2009
Draft saved Draft deleted