Wolf History

A haggis by any other name tastes just as sweet, lol.
 
Jiro said:
simple. dead wolves and bears would be food for nature. ever heard of scavengers?
Click to expand...

Yes I know what scavengers is about... there're plenty of overleft meats go to scavengers after butcher the animals for the foods... It's not just Alaska but around the world... I see no excuse to have bears/wolves's meats for scavengers.

Accord Alaskan Wildlife websites, the wolves and bears are not overpolutation... I see no excuse for that.
 
I was reading in a disabled rights website the other day to see what both parties had to offer the disabled.

This is a quote that I came up with that greatly concerned me.

Quote:
We need to invest in biomedical research and stem cell research, so that we are at the leading edge of

prevention and treatment. This includes adequate funding for research into diseases such as heart

disease, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, breast cancer, diabetes, autism

and other common and rare diseases, and disorders. We will increase funding to the National Institutes of

Health, the National Science Foundation, and the National Cancer Institutes.

So it seems Obama is going for extra funding in biomedical research.

Taken from here: http://jfactivist.typepad.com/jfacti...e-the-rnc.html

It concerns me so much that I've done a google and found more information here:

http://www.bioresearchonline.com/art...?VNETCOOKIE=NO (unfortunately it's not accessable for me but

from Google it said it was about Obama's stand on biomedical research)
http://www.highlighthealth.com/resou...nd-healthcare/
http://medical.bizcommunity.com/Arti...323/28521.html

Please note that all these sited are PRO animal testing so you will have to read between the lines. That is

to say Obama is their buddy and will help them torture more animals as part of the american tax increase

wheras Macain is going to reduce Biomedical research as part of his tax cuts. He also believes in an ethnical aproach to research.

This paricular quote stands out:

Quote:
"Obama's STEM agenda shows his commitment to investing in the physical and life sciences".


What I want to know is why is it not concerning anyone else?
 
My mother had terminal cancer and after watching her suffer for several months before her death, I've come to the conclusion that I completely support Obama's stance on biomedical research.
 
As you know my mum also had terminal cancer. Which makes me feel all the more strongly AGAINST animal based research. I felt we were being used by the big major cancer charities who did not lift a finger to help my mum.

This isn't to say I don't support ethnical cancer charites who use more up to date methods such as computer modelling, adult stem cells, etc... Every year on the aniversery of her death I donate to various cancer charites but I make sure they are non animal testing first. Not just because animal testing is unethnical. It's irrelivant too. If it wasn't for animal based research my mum would have stood so much better chances of being cured.
 
dreama said:
This isn't to say I don't support ethnical cancer charites who use more up to date methods such as computer modelling, adult stem cells, etc... Every year on the aniversery of her death I donate to various cancer charites but I make sure they are non animal testing first. Not just because animal testing is unethnical. It's irrelivant too. If it wasn't for animal based research my mum would have stood so much better chances of being cured.
Click to expand...

Let me if I get this straight.. if there were no animal testing, your mom's cancer would have had a better chance of getting cured? Not seeing the reasoning here. You don't believe in animal testing? Fine I accept that, but I don't see how it INTERFERES or DELAYS with the process of curing cancer? I don't like animal testing much but only a handful of people will do experimental testing, and it simply is not as efficient as testing 100 hamsters at the same time for 100 different possible cures. When it comes to finding cures, I am for animal testing. But if it comes to "Let's see if this shampoo is bad for the skin!", screw you, test it on yourself.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Let me if I get this straight.. if there were no animal testing, your mom's cancer would have had a better chance of getting cured? Not seeing the reasoning here. You don't believe in animal testing? Fine I accept that, but I don't see how it INTERFERES or DELAYS with the process of curing cancer? I don't like animal testing much but only a handful of people will do experimental testing, and it simply is not as efficient as testing 100 hamsters at the same time for 100 different possible cures. When it comes to finding cures, I am for animal testing. But if it comes to "Let's see if this shampoo is bad for the skin!", screw you, test it on yourself.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, Daredevel.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Let me if I get this straight.. if there were no animal testing, your mom's cancer would have had a better chance of getting cured? Not seeing the reasoning here. You don't believe in animal testing? Fine I accept that, but I don't see how it INTERFERES or DELAYS with the process of curing cancer? I don't like animal testing much but only a handful of people will do experimental testing, and it simply is not as efficient as testing 100 hamsters at the same time for 100 different possible cures. When it comes to finding cures, I am for animal testing. But if it comes to "Let's see if this shampoo is bad for the skin!", screw you, test it on yourself.
Click to expand...

Animal testing DELAYS human testing. I can say that, for sure. A mother, who will die because there is no "research" on her treatment. A father, who will die, because his treatment is not found to be "understanding" with a bunch of monkeys (it would kill him). Human life is the priority, folks. HUMAN is the PRIORITY.

Thinking that humans are not the priority means you think less of yourself.
 
Wokamuka said:
Animal testing DELAYS human testing. I can say that, for sure. A mother, who will die because there is no "research" on her treatment. A father, who will die, because his treatment is not found to be "understanding" with a bunch of monkeys (it would kill him). Human life is the priority, folks. HUMAN is the PRIORITY.

Thinking that humans are not the priority means you think less of yourself.
Click to expand...

I honestly do not understand this. Do you think scientists PREFER testing on monkeys rather than humans? If it were up to them, they would take 100 humans over animals ANY DAY. They can't for the following reasons: Liability and lack of volunteers. Human testing is like a gem to them, they take advantage of that opportunity when they can. Animal testing is just something that is "the next best thing".

I really am trying to understand this "delay" stuff. I don't see it at all.
 
Daredevel7 said:
I honestly do not understand this. Do you think scientists PREFER testing on monkeys rather than humans? If it were up to them, they would take 100 humans over animals ANY DAY. They can't for the following reasons: Liability and lack of volunteers. Human testing is like a gem to them, they take advantage of that opportunity when they can. Animal testing is just something that is "the next best thing".

I really am trying to understand this "delay" stuff. I don't see it at all.
Click to expand...

I have a new medicine. I'm gonna test it (along with a theory). So, I'm gonna test it on a bunch of animals that, yes, die and survive. I'd learn what works.

You'd prefer that I'd test it on a bunch of humans that, yes, die, and, perhaps, survive? My objective, as a human, is that humans are a priority - above all else.

What is your priority? Animals over humans?
 
Wokamuka said:
I have a new medicine. I'm gonna test it (along with a theory). So, I'm gonna test it on a bunch of animals that, yes, die and survive. I'd learn what works.

You'd prefer that I'd test it on a bunch of humans that, yes, die, and, perhaps, survive? My objective, as a human, is that humans are a priority - above all else.

What is your priority? Animals over humans?
Click to expand...

I am so confused. I think you, dreama, and I are on totally different pages. A priority for what? being cured or being tested? I prefer animal testing over human testing, but what I don't understand is what dreama said "Not just because animal testing is unethnical. It's irrelivant too. If it wasn't for animal based research my mum would have stood so much better chances of being cured." Dreama was saying that animal testing GETS IN THE WAY of finding a cure. I'm asking how is this possible??
 
dreama said:
I was reading in a disabled rights website the other day to see what both parties had to offer the disabled.

This is a quote that I came up with that greatly concerned me.

Quote:
We need to invest in biomedical research and stem cell research, so that we are at the leading edge of

prevention and treatment. This includes adequate funding for research into diseases such as heart

disease, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, breast cancer, diabetes, autism

and other common and rare diseases, and disorders. We will increase funding to the National Institutes of

Health, the National Science Foundation, and the National Cancer Institutes.

So it seems Obama is going for extra funding in biomedical research.

Taken from here: http://jfactivist.typepad.com/jfacti...e-the-rnc.html

It concerns me so much that I've done a google and found more information here:

http://www.bioresearchonline.com/art...?VNETCOOKIE=NO (unfortunately it's not accessable for me but

from Google it said it was about Obama's stand on biomedical research)
http://www.highlighthealth.com/resou...nd-healthcare/
http://medical.bizcommunity.com/Arti...323/28521.html

Please note that all these sited are PRO animal testing so you will have to read between the lines. That is

to say Obama is their buddy and will help them torture more animals as part of the american tax increase

wheras Macain is going to reduce Biomedical research as part of his tax cuts. He also believes in an ethnical aproach to research.

This paricular quote stands out:

Quote:
"Obama's STEM agenda shows his commitment to investing in the physical and life sciences".


What I want to know is why is it not concerning anyone else?
Click to expand...

Hear Again said:
My mother had terminal cancer and after watching her suffer for several months before her death, I've come to the conclusion that I completely support Obama's stance on biomedical research.
Click to expand...


As do I. If it weren't for medical research, I would not be alive.

When I was six years old, I developed a massive systemic infection that affected the shunt I have that filters fluid off my brain. It had to come out because it was killing me slowly. I had developed sepsis and was in a coma. I was given a ZERO chance of survival unless they removed the shunt and replaced it; only problem was there was only a limited amount of places they could divert the fluid to. The shunt was already directing the fluid to my excretory system and that was no longer an option. Fortunately for me, there was an experimental procedure where they replaced my neuro-peritoneal shunt with a neuro-cardiac shunt. In laymen's terms, this is directing the fluid into my bloodstream. At the time, I was only the 5th child to have this procedure. I was also only the third child to survive it. The odds sucks. Two of the children who they had attempted this on were dead. Two were alive, but came out of the surgery brain damaged.

Fast foward 30 yrs or so, I still have the shunt that was placed and I'm doing well. The procedure itself is not real common because it's still considered risky, but it's an option for people when appropriate.

Most of you know how I feel about abortion and my views in general regarding the right to die, but I'm also for medical research. It saves lives. It saved mine.
 
Back
Top