Alternatives to Animal testing.

dreama said:
Another example: My rat has cancer. I am told by the vet just to make her comfortable until it's time to let go.

They have been experimenting on rats for over 30 years to find cures for cancer. So if their is no cure for rats by testing rats how do they expect to find cures for humans by testing rats.
Click to expand...


The cost of treatment is way too high. In CML, assuming commonly used drugs, 3000-6200$ for imatinib and just over 4600$ a month for dasatinib, give or take some change- and both are not sold in generic forms.

Your rat might respond to human chemotherapy, but you would not likely be able to afford it, even in the considerably smaller doses required for a rat. Your vet was offering the reasonable option- managing pain as best you can- as opposed to playing 'torture you and the rat' to extend it's life by a small amount.
 
dreama said:
Because animals and humans don't react the same way.

We DO already test on humnans eventually. I just want to remove the animal componant in research so that we go straight from computer modelling and human stem cell research to microbiotic dosing in concenting human volunteers.

They have so many new methods on the market that animal testing has become very much unncessary.

I'm sorry if my explaining is unclear. That's why I provided the links because some people who are Doctors and scientists can explain about these things better then I can.

I read an article after mother died that said that big cancer buisnesses don't even want to cure cancer. It was just after mother died and it made me really mad.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that the scientists are so focused on animal testing which "doesn't work" that they don't spend time on the other methods, therefore possibly delaying cures? Which is why your mother would still be alive because a cure would have been found by now if we didn't waste all that time in animal testing? Is this right, dreama?

May I suggest something? You've read a lot of articles from scientists (if they indeed are scientists) who are against animal testing, I can tell. However, I also can tell that you've never read articles that are FOR animal testing. If you're so strong minded, I'm sure you can point out the flaws in those articles, but you cannot deny that there is AT LEAST some benefit in animal testing. You just don't think its WORTH the animal suffering.

By the way, I am not crazy about animal testing. Obviously, I'd prefer the awesome super computer to figure out what's wrong with me and cure me. The problem is we do NOT have the technology to do that yet. Also, a piece of the puzzle to find cures is stem cells research and right now people are getting upset about that. Can't please everyone, can we?
 
Daredevel7 said:
So you're saying that the scientists are so focused on animal testing which "doesn't work" that they don't spend time on the other methods, therefore possibly delaying cures?
Click to expand...

that's the thing.... lot of medical discoveries came from accidents.... like viagra. lot of research on one procedure/drug testing produced unintended result for other problem. For ie - viagra drug which was intended for erectile dysfunction but was later discovered that it is great for people with too low-blood pressure problem. (i'm just making it up but you get my point)
 
Jiro said:
that's the thing.... lot of medical discoveries came from accidents.... like viagra. lot of research on one procedure/drug testing produced unintended result for other problem. For ie - viagra drug which was intended for erectile dysfunction but was later discovered that it is great for people with too low-blood pressure problem. (i'm just making it up but you get my point)
Click to expand...

LOL. A hard on, will quickly raise blood pressure.

A lot of medicines are flukes. that what makes modern science great. Medicine that was intended for one thing can be used for another
 
Babyblue said:
LOL. A hard on, will quickly raise blood pressure.

A lot of medicines are flukes. that what makes modern science great. Medicine that was intended for one thing can be used for another
Click to expand...

:thumb: you've said it better!
 
dreama said:
I was just using chocolate as an example. By the way you can get vegan chocolate. Some brands of dark chocolate are vegan.

Of course I would never give Jilli chocolate. But they do give dogs things that are bad for them in laboritories. It is part of research.

Another example: My rat has cancer. I am told by the vet just to make her comfortable until it's time to let go.

They have been experimenting on rats for over 30 years to find cures for cancer. So if their is no cure for rats by testing rats how do they expect to find cures for humans by testing rats.
Click to expand...

Would you really propose that we spend millions developing a cure for cancer in rats? Would a rat voluntarily take themselves to the vet when they start to experience symptoms? Would a rat have the insurance to pay for treatment? Would a rat even have the cognition to know that they needed to go to the vet?

The fact is that experimentation on rats have help to develop cures for cancer and numerous other diseases and disorders. And don't forget that an over population of rats has been responsible for the death of millions of human beings.
 
Babyblue said:
LOL. A hard on, will quickly raise blood pressure.

A lot of medicines are flukes. that what makes modern science great. Medicine that was intended for one thing can be used for another
Click to expand...

...and there are a ton of off-label uses for many medications approved to treat a specific ailment.
 
dreama said:
Because animals and humans don't react the same way.

We DO already test on humnans eventually. I just want to remove the animal componant in research so that we go straight from computer modelling and human stem cell research to microbiotic dosing in concenting human volunteers.

They have so many new methods on the market that animal testing has become very much unncessary.

I'm sorry if my explaining is unclear. That's why I provided the links because some people who are Doctors and scientists can explain about these things better then I can.

I read an article after mother died that said that big cancer buisnesses don't even want to cure cancer. It was just after mother died and it made me really mad.
Click to expand...

You keep overlooking the fact that in order to do computer modeling, we must have human data.

If you skip the animal based trials, the only thing you accomplish is less safe treatment for human trials. That is where your argument looses steam. Your proposal is sacrificing relatively safety for humans. You are sacrificing human safety for an animal.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
I'll remember this the next time I have a panic attack. :roll:
Click to expand...

don't forget to spray it at where your heart is. it will calm you down. :cool2:


** for those who are puzzled about my Windex joke - it's from a hilarious, extremely enjoyable movie called My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The father is so old fashioned and ignorant that he sprays Windex on any medical problems like zit, soreness, etc. :laugh2:
 
Jiro said:
don't forget to spray it at where your heart is. it will calm you down. :cool2:


** for those who are puzzled about my Windex joke - it's from a hilarious, extremely enjoyable movie called My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The father is so old fashioned and thick-headed that he sprays Windex on any medical problems like zit, soreness, etc. :laugh2:
Click to expand...

*sigh* Jiro! I wish you'd explain your humor more often! I jumped at you for no reason. Now, I feel like an idiot. :roll:

Sorry, dude.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
*sigh* Jiro! I wish you'd explain your humor more often! I jumped at you for no reason. Now, I feel like an idiot. :roll:

Sorry, dude.
Click to expand...

it's ok! it's ok! You're not the only one. My jokes are usually known to be cryptic since a lot of my jokes refer to movies and politic. Some people do not watch those often so they get very puzzled at my crazy jokes LOL
 
Jiro said:
it's ok! it's ok! You're not the only one. My jokes are usually known to be cryptic since a lot of my jokes refer to movies and politic. Some people do not watch those a lot so they get very puzzled at my crazy jokes LOL
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, I SAW that movie! I just don't remember that reference.

At any rate, it's all good.
 
Hear Again said:
dreama,

in what way are humans being tested nowadays? human testing is unethical and invites all kinds of problems when it comes to legalities.

where do you get the idea that cancer companies don't want to cure cancer? i'd like some data to support that claim.
Click to expand...

Humans were experimented in Nazi germany and Japan. I don't agree on testing humans at that level. As the tests were cruel, the same as they are for animals. We're talking about basic testing here. However, I do believe that the testing, as cruel as they were did provide Medical advancement. Probably more so then the animal testing as it was scientifically revilant to test humans for human ailments.

However I will REPEAT that I do NOT approve of Testing humans. Except in final stage trials which are done at the moment, and I feel could be done a lot more safely if animal testing was scrapped and computer modeling and Adult stem cells replaced it.
 
Hear Again said:
where do you get the idea that cancer companies don't want to cure cancer? i'd like some data to support that claim.
Click to expand...

Top


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 1997 by the Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research, We are all victims of fraud in medical research

This article may be copied or distributed, provided the copyright and disclaimer messages are clearly attached.

Disclaimer: This article is presented for educational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for professional or medical advice. CAFMR disclaims all liability to any person arising directly or indirectly from the use of the information provided.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:
d'Espaignet, E.T. et al., Trends in Australian Mortality 1921-1988, Australian Government Publishing Service (AGPS), Canberra, 1991, p. 33
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Causes of Death, Australia 1992, ABS, Canberra, 1993, p.1
Dr. Bailer, speaking at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in May 1985, as quoted in Bette Overall, Animal Research Takes Lives - Humans and Animals BOTH Suffer, NZAVS, 1993, p.132
Robert Sharpe, The Cruel Deception, Thorsons Publishing Group, Wellingborough, U.K. 1988, p.47
Robert Sharpe, op. cit. 1988, p.47
Hans Ruesch, Naked Empress - the Great Medical Fraud, CIVIS, Massagno/Lugano, Switzerland, 1992, p.77
Robert Sharpe, op. cit. 1988, p.65
as quoted in Hans Ruesch, op.cit. 1992, p.65-66
Edward Griffin, The Politics of Cancer, (audio cassette) American Media, 1975 available from CAFMR $14.
Sydney Singer, Medical Demystification (M.D.) Report, Vol.1 No.1 p.5., Medical Demystification Crusade, 1992, CA, U.S.A.
Irwin Bross, as quoted in Robert Sharpe, op.cit., 1988 p.179
Dr. Werner Hartinger, in a speech given at the 2nd International Scientific Congress of the Doctors in Britain Against Animal Experiments (D.B.A.E.), London, 24 Sept. 1992.
Click to expand...

This is the article I read. I had no problem believing it because the big animal testing charities did not lift a finger to help mother when she was dying of cancer. They were too busy with their scedule of torturing animals. As I said it made me feel very very angry. To think people were making money out of mother's suffering and claiming she was cured 3 times, and promising new cancer cures that are yet to come on the market.
 
dreama said:
Humans were experimented in Nazi germany and Japan. I don't agree on testing humans at that level. As the tests were cruel, the same as they are for animals. We're talking about basic testing here. However, I do believe that the testing, as cruel as they were did provide Medical advancement. Probably more so then the animal testing as it was scientifically revilant to test humans for human ailments.

However I will REPEAT that I do NOT approve of Testing humans. Except in final stage trials which are done at the moment, and I feel could be done a lot more safely if animal testing was scrapped and computer modeling and Adult stem cells replaced it.
Click to expand...

If you don't approve of testing on animals, and you don't approve of testing on humans, the only alternative left is to use untested medicines and procedures. Exactly how is that safer?
 
Aleser said:
The cost of treatment is way too high. In CML, assuming commonly used drugs, 3000-6200$ for imatinib and just over 4600$ a month for dasatinib, give or take some change- and both are not sold in generic forms.

Your rat might respond to human chemotherapy, but you would not likely be able to afford it, even in the considerably smaller doses required for a rat. Your vet was offering the reasonable option- managing pain as best you can- as opposed to playing 'torture you and the rat' to extend it's life by a small amount.
Click to expand...

Chemo and radiation doesn't cure cancer. I believe some people use that method on dogs if they can afford it but I don't think many vets would use that method on a rat and I wouldn't be interested in subjecting my rat to it even if it was.

My mum had radiation and Chemo therapy. She still died after only 4 years.

The only sure way of curing cancer is if you catch it really early and they manage to give you a hysterectomy or remove breast, eye, leg or other body part that the cancer is. That only works if the cancer is in a body part that can be safely removed and it hasnt spread past the limit. They did operate on mum but the cancer had spread too much due to the fact that it had been left too long.

If you catch the cancer at the stage where it's still contained in one place that can safely be removed they also can be cured but that is only in the early stages.

I know of a few people who survived cancer by operation in early stage but don't know anyone who survived cancer after it had been left for too long. It seems most people in that situation has already died.

By the way, I heard the person who originally invented Chemo originally tested this method on herself. Don't ask me for a link. It's just something I remember but I've no idea from where. I think it was Marie Curie who did that? Again I can't remember any more details.
 
Back
Top