Mitt Romney said He is Not Concerned about the Poors!

kokonut said:
We wouldn't have these drugs available if we couldn't test them on animals first. If this thought is unsettling to some people then perhaps those people shouldn't be taking their drugs/medicine in the first place since all new pharmaceuticals undergo rigorous animal testing and when passed would be fit for human use.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Drugs need not go through "rigorous animal testing." :roll:
 
Thank goodness for aspirin, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen. Odds are quite high that each ADer here has either Advil, Bayer, Aleve, Motrin, Tylenol or any medicine containing aspirin, ibuprofen or acetaminophen at home in their medicine cabinet. All of those medicinal properties have undergone animal testing to ensure the efficacy and safety for human intake before it was finally approved by the FDA and made into a household name. People do have a choice to not take those medicine and walk the walk for once.

NIH:
http://oacu.od.nih.gov/ARAC/iracld50.pdf

NIH OACU - ARAC Guidelines

The goals of the meeting were to provide participants an opportunity to examine the traditional role of animal models in drug discovery, the strengths and weaknesses of the animal models, and ways in which to reduce, refine, and replace animal models in biomedical research.
Click to expand...
Environmental Factor:November 2011:Stokes presents at international conference on animal models and drug testing

This two-day scientific conference will provide a neutral forum to critically examine the traditional role of pre-clinical animal models in drug discovery, how these models most effectively contribute to translational medicine and drug discovery, changes needed to increase the predictive power of various models for drug efficacy in humans, and ways in which to further refine, reduce, and replace animal models in biomedical research.
Click to expand...
Animal Models and Their Value in Predicting Drug Efficacy and Toxicity | The New York Academy of Sciences

Plan on having surgery? Don't take it because the anesthesia drugs were tested on animals.

Have allergies and need some over the counter drugs at Walgreens? Don't buy them because they were tested on animals first.

Plan on going to the dentist? Don't! Well, you get the idea.
 
DeafCaroline said:
So saith the man who can't bear to look at animals suffering. Twisted.
Click to expand...

Funny how I have refrained from making personal attacks throughout this blatant thread hijacking, yet you are continuing to paint me as a creep. Ok, let's continue the one-sided namecalling, shall we? You prefer to watch family and friends suffer in order to save lab animals. That does not paint you as the brightest bulb on the tree. There is an order of life in nature. Do you hate all carnivorous animals? When lions attack a water buffalo, do you want to save the buffalo? Here you are, sitting on your throne of rightiousness, yet you use consumer products such as soap, shampoo, etc. You use gasoline to drive. You use cosmetics. What makes you perfect? I did not call you a nut, as others have. Instead, I will let you, the compassionate one, lower yourself to the namecalling. It makes your case much more ominous. Compassion for pigs, none for humans. Thanks for allowing us all to see your priorities.

Feel free to get in the last words...
 
Hey, I did say don't open the door if you "don't want to go there".

I find your attitude about endorsing animal suffering that you can't bear witness to twisted, yes. That is not name calling, that is an expressed opinion of your stance. Please show me where I called you an offensive name or resorted to name calling. I haven't.

if you don't feel any guilt about what you support, then why the need to get hyper self defensive? And it's funny that you are accusing me of hijacking when you are doing the same by responding to me. And if you respond to this post, you are continuing to perpetuate the hijacking.

You seem to find this deplorable that my circle of compassion extends beyond the human race, not limited to it. Strange and very sad.
 
kokonut said:
Thank goodness for aspirin, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen. Odds are quite high that each ADer here has either Advil, Bayer, Aleve, Motrin, Tylenol or any medicine containing aspirin, ibuprofen or acetaminophen at home in their medicine cabinet. All of those medicinal properties have undergone animal testing to ensure the efficacy and safety for human intake before it was finally approved by the FDA and made into a household name. People do have a choice to not take those medicine and walk the walk for once.

NIH:
http://oacu.od.nih.gov/ARAC/iracld50.pdf

NIH OACU - ARAC Guidelines


Environmental Factor:November 2011:Stokes presents at international conference on animal models and drug testing


Animal Models and Their Value in Predicting Drug Efficacy and Toxicity | The New York Academy of Sciences

Plan on having surgery? Don't take it because the anesthesia drugs were tested on animals.

Have allergies and need some over the counter drugs at Walgreens? Don't buy them because they were tested on animals first.

Plan on going to the dentist? Don't! Well, you get the idea.
Click to expand...

Just because "that is the way it's done" doesn't make it right. Most assuredly there are other methods of making medicine. The thing is, when one lowers moral standards against animals, it inevitably means lowered standards for consideration of human beings. *shrugs*
 
DeafCaroline said:
Hey, I did say don't open the door if you "don't want to go there".

I find your attitude about endorsing animal suffering that you can't bear witness to twisted, yes. That is not name calling, that is an expressed opinion of your stance. Please show me where I called you an offensive name or resorted to name calling. I haven't.

if you don't feel any guilt about what you support, then why the need to get hyper self defensive? And it's funny that you are accusing me of hijacking when you are doing the same by responding to me. And if you respond to this post, you are continuing to perpetuate the hijacking.

You seem to find this deplorable that my circle of compassion extends beyond the human race, not limited to it. Strange and very sad.
Click to expand...

Beowulf said:
Just because "that is the way it's done" doesn't make it right. Most assuredly there are other methods of making medicine. The thing is, when one lowers moral standards against animals, it inevitably means lowered standards for consideration of human beings. *shrugs*
Click to expand...

Interesting, in that both of you are most likely "pro-choice/pro abortion" supporters as well. Save the seals, flush the fetus. And no, I have no personal opinion on women's rights. I steer clear of that one.

Wonder how Mitt Romney feels about vivisection. If he favors it for medical research only...:hmm:
 
saywhatkid said:
Interesting, in that both of you are most likely "pro-choice/pro abortion" supporters as well. Save the seals, flush the fetus. And no, I have no personal opinion on women's rights. I steer clear of that one.

Wonder how Mitt Romney feels about vivisection. If he favors it for medical research only...:hmm:
Click to expand...

Say what? You made your personal opinions rather clear, as well as your tendency to finger-point like a toddler. :roll:
 
kokonut said:
Thank goodness for aspirin, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen. Odds are quite high that each ADer here has either Advil, Bayer, Aleve, Motrin, Tylenol or any medicine containing aspirin, ibuprofen or acetaminophen at home in their medicine cabinet. All of those medicinal properties have undergone animal testing to ensure the efficacy and safety for human intake before it was finally approved by the FDA and made into a household name. People do have a choice to not take those medicine and walk the walk for once.

NIH:
http://oacu.od.nih.gov/ARAC/iracld50.pdf

NIH OACU - ARAC Guidelines


Environmental Factor:November 2011:Stokes presents at international conference on animal models and drug testing


Animal Models and Their Value in Predicting Drug Efficacy and Toxicity | The New York Academy of Sciences

Plan on having surgery? Don't take it because the anesthesia drugs were tested on animals.

Have allergies and need some over the counter drugs at Walgreens? Don't buy them because they were tested on animals first.

Plan on going to the dentist? Don't! Well, you get the idea.
Click to expand...

Do you know Bayer made the mustard gas that was used by Hitler to kills overt 6 millions people?
 
whatdidyousay! said:
Do you know Bayer made the mustard gas that was used by Hitler to kills overt 6 millions people?
Click to expand...

That's hardly surprising considering the fact that Bayer is a German company. The company itself has a long history of wrongdoings, it's a wonder they're still in business.
 
Bayer's Aspirin was part of a bigger holding company IG Farben that donated to the Nazis and helped funded some concentration camps. In addition, apparently some of their drugs were tested on concentration camp victims as well.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Bayer's Aspirin was part of a bigger holding company IG Farben that donated to the Nazis and helped funded some concentration camps. In addition, apparently some of their drugs were tested on concentration camp victims as well.
Click to expand...

I can believe that without hesitation. I once met a woman who lived through the Holocaust. She is a hearing woman, she came from a family of deaf people. She was torn away from them and never saw them again.

The only reason why she's still alive is because she agreed to have them perform scientific experiments on her rendering her sterile for life.
 
Banjo said:
I can believe that without hesitation. I once met a woman who lived through the Holocaust. She is a hearing woman, she came from a family of deaf people. She was torn away from them and never saw them again.

The only reason why she's still alive is because she agreed to have them perform scientific experiments on her rendering her sterile for life.
Click to expand...

Also, you would be amazed at the number of doctors who took part in the experiments on the inmates. So much for their Hippocratic Oaths. :(
 
Beowulf said:
Also, you would be amazed at the number of doctors who took part in the experiments on the inmates. So much for their Hippocratic Oaths. :(
Click to expand...

Yes, it was terrible. It's astonishing how many people took part in the camps.
 
Banjo said:
Yes, it was terrible. It's astonishing how many people took part in the camps.
Click to expand...

Their reasoning was that the cruelty would benefit mankind in the long run. Sound familiar?
 
whatdidyousay! said:
Do you know Bayer made the mustard gas that was used by Hitler to kills overt 6 millions people?
Click to expand...

Mercedes made engines in WWII German tanks and airplanes. The engines in Japan's airplanes that bombed Pearl Harbor were made by the Mitsubishi. Your point?
 
kokonut said:
Mercedes made engines in WWII German tanks and airplanes. The engines in Japan's airplanes that bombed Pearl Harbor were made by the Mitsubishi. Your point?
Click to expand...

Mercedes didn't invent a killer weapon or gas. Neither did Mitsubishi.

Illogical post.
 
Beowulf said:
Their reasoning was that the cruelty would benefit mankind in the long run. Sound familiar?
Click to expand...

IBM funded the eugenics projects in Germany. They stuck around after the war broke out. That's not just it, they also developed the punch cards to be used as a way of tracking down the Jews (along with the other non-Arayan races) and rounding them up. They based the punch cards on the census whenever they invaded a country. They even had codes to distinguish one's race, where they lived and how they will be executed. Wonder how many people know about this one.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Mercedes didn't invent a killer weapon or gas. Neither did Mitsubishi.

Illogical post.
Click to expand...

I disagree. German tanks and airplanes need engines to move and are part and parcel of the whole killing of many innocent people. They knew what they were making and what it was for. It took making the powder, the cannon barrels, and myriads of parts to make these killing machines. The end result is the same, people were killed. Quiet relevant. But not so in this original thread.
 
Back
Top