I can accept people have different views and they believe it is morally wrong to test on animals even if it has cured/controlled some of the worlds biggest viruses etc.

But then surely they should not use any medicines/treatments that have directly come from animal testing.

the so called scientist you used to quote in the statement said animal testing hasn't worked. Hmmmmmmmm strange considering the drugs and cures that have come from it.

Secondly how do you think understanding organ transplants can be done without actually doing well errrr organ transplants.

It isn't something you can well lets just swop over their heart with this one and hope for the best.In the future brain transplants have even been mentioned as a possibility, and there are serious complications with that one. 100% animal testing will be needed.

So detesting animal cruelty is taking the moral high ground.
A pretty pathetic summing up of your argument but akin to your stance on the subject.

If scientists are saying that animal testing has not worked, then why are new puppy farms being built ?

Signed by me and the missus.

If labs need to carry out these tests, maybe it would be an alternative career choice for people who are considering joining ISIS to become suicide bombers. All the benefits of martyrdom without the hate. 

Just a thought.

They should use some of the UK's prison population for testing, those that are serving 15 or more years.

im not at all into animal cruelty in the slightest.

But the reality is animal testing has given a lot of medical benefits that everyone use. That's a fact, its a bit hypocritical to condemn animal testing but then use the products that have come as a direct result of it. Which you have not denied akabula.

http://news.sky.com/story/1523375/new-drug-may-slow-alzheimers-decline-by-30-percent

Another big breakthrough in helping Alzheimer suffers announced today (link above). Mice where used in these experiments.

So Akbula should all research like this be stopped? And as its to do with the brain living animals (mice) do have to be used. So you cannot answer the research is fine but there is no need to experiment on animals as the researchers say they have to have functioning brains to do the research.

so should these experiments continue or not?

a simple yes or no will do.

or is the question to difficult for you?

it also has not gone un-noticed that several of those who have signed on here or the thread starter haven't commented since.

its because its a difficult question that some like to turn a blind eye too and ignore.

There is very few people in this world who turn down life saving treatments because of animal testing has been used in the development of the treatment.

The question is then at what point should animal testing have been banned? 10 years ago? 20 years ago? 50 years ago?


Its not cost the reason animals are used, it because they need living organs and tissues bigger than stems including fully working brains. You seem to disregard this even with the news out TODAY regarding Alzheimer's and the work currently being undertaken.

what about saving yourself?

ok so you honestly would turn down life saving treatment for yourself and die, rather than use a drug that had been tested on animals?

If so then you make a fair stance.

Do you also see the dilemma in this question steamship and as to why its not a simple black and white issue?

akbula you talk some bullsh1t.

like a vegetarian spouting off about not eating animals whilst pouring milk into their coffee.

I don't support animal cruelty as mentioned.

However I am in favour of animal testing where absolutely necessary to improve medical advancement.

License's should be strict and should be applied for with reasons given why certain animals are needed and why current knowledge in the field is not enough. Cost is not enough reason for animal testing.

The animals should all be well cared for, well fed, watered and housed in a fair environment and given enough mental stimulation.

The sight of a young child living a normalish life after various transplants, drug treatments rather than dying is enough for me to see the importance of such experiments.

Signed. I hate testing on animals. So cruel. If we can't find a way to cure a disease without hurting innocent animals, so be it. What right do we have to make innocent, intelligent animals suffer so cruelly?

I tell you what, I'll accept testing on animals when we test animal treatments on humans. What gives us the right to not suffer while other creatures, many who were on earth before us, do.

And nobody is 'supporting animal cruelty.' You are putting an emotive context into supporting science to help humans and other animals. Yes other animals. Any two bob bit animal rights quack can spout nonsense about not needing animals for research and development but it flies in the face of the vast majority of reputable scientists.

According to the US-based Foundation for Biomedical Research, 'animal research has played a vital role in virtually every major medical advance of the last century - for both human and veterinary health.'

But animal research hasn't benefited humans alone. Animals also have improved healthcare and a longer lifespan. Farm animals, household pets, wild species and endangered species are all benefiting from the research conducted through animals. There are vaccines for rabies, distemper, tetanus, parvo virus and numerous other illnesses in cats, dogs and countless other domesticated animals. Cats now have a treatment for Feline Leukemia. It's obvious that animal research benefits all living species and that we are all able to live longer, healthier, happier lives because of it.

Emotion over logic here .

First of all a "puppy farm" by nature is not cruel ,its  a for profit breeding installation ,often the term  puppy farm is all too easily misused ,to instill a picture and narrative of squalor , and mistreatment ,the truth is that these units will be a modern state of the art facility
Just because the animals are then used for testing and research does not make the breeding unit cruel ,this is really an ethics debate. What people are  actually saying is that  all animal breeding is cruel ,from wool to meat production ,if thats your position then fair enough but thats a diff argument , to suggest this facility would be subjecting the animals to cruelty is not correct

It would make more sense to target where these dogs were going and to what they were going to be subjected to ,if they have nothing to hide they should have nothing to fear (love rolling that old chestnut out ).

One thing that does annoy me is Scotland is a leader in animal science and biotech ,But the SNP have a very anti hunting stance on a animal welfare argument .Mike Watson the disgraced labour lord was the man that tabled the anti hunting bill in Scotland ,the bill(like lord watson) was fast tracked in Scotland by a very willing Scottish Parliament  and  quickly taken south of the border and the rest is history ,truth was the man in the street in Scotland did not give a flying **** about foxes or hunting . There was hardly any hunts in Scotland anyway . A cursory glance through the history books show the ordinary  people of Scotland and indeed most parts of the UK are steeped in a an ancient  hunting/fishing/shooting culture,handed down through the generations . It was a set up imo ,maybe thats why the jailed and shamed labour lord tried to burn his fellows  in the  hotel ? who knows he has never offered an excuse for his actions .

Now the SNP are involved in the debate and taking an strong  anti hunting stance but again it is a false flag, a game, a lever ,a  perceived  class / politics war  ,they are trying to take  new labours ground and voters with this pseudo anti hunting rubbish  .There was more ordinary working class people caught up  in the hunting ban than tory toffs  ,UK has a working class with a  rich culture of  hunting/fishing/shooting  ,its all being cleansed in a horribly crass pseudo manor and i would suggest one of new labours biggest mistakes was enacting this unfair legislation on the ordinary  working man ,they wasted something like 700hrs of parly time on it and used the parly act to push it through as they had taken so much money from the animal charities and had went past the point of no return ,a frenzied and sustained attack that the ordinary man in the street hardly had an opinion about .
Was really just retribution for the destruction of the mining and unions ,but it was a revenge that caught many of their own in collateral damage and the fallout from it will rumble on for a long time .

If the SNP were going  to be honest to their word they would not be inviting the worlds biotech and Frankenstein farmers to Scotland and would not be investing in large scale biotech including animal testing  ,but i doubt they would want to talk about that ,dont fit the agenda at all not to mention economics  .Would have a pound on it these puppies are headed north .
Thats where the pressure should be ,the facilities that do the testing ,we should know whats happening in these places ,just like hunting lets see what the people have to say ,i am sure the Scottish people wont be wanting no puppies killed here .

End SNP puppy death camps now imo .

I believe there is a massive sprawling biotech animal science  facility on the outskirts of Edinburgh .
The Bush estate ,near Roslyn and reckon it needs the same scrutiny as what the SNP afford to hunting  ,whats the difference ?

Of course its all politics but when you decide on behalf of the Scottish people whats right and whats wrong you cant then cherry pick can you ?  easy for SNP to oppose summit like foxhunting when it does not actually affect the country but perhaps their animal ethics policy need an airing with a view to potential animal cruelty and abuse for economic purposes ,the worst reason imo .

For what its worth i think this argument is fraught with danger , emotion over logic and prob boils down to where you place animals in relation to mankind ,in the future they will want to clone and grow humanoids from stem cells ,out of test tubes and use them for all sorts ,its a can of worms ,medicine does need tested but some cant accept that ,however in light of hunting legislation i think a debate is only fair .

Are  puppies tortured in Scotland for economic purposes ?

breadnbutter Joined: 29 Aug 06
| Topic/replies: 6,972 | Blogger: breadnbutter's blog
Emotion over logic here .

First of all a "puppy farm" by nature is not cruel

This footage was filmed inside B&K Universal in 2012. It shows the tragic reality of 'life' for these beagles as they struggle to make sense of what's happening to them.


https://www.change.org/p/rt-hon-david-cameron-mp-reverse-the-government-s-decision-to-give-the-go-ahead-for-a-puppy-farm-in-hull-created-with-the-purpose-of-providing-beagle-puppies-to-laboratories-for-animal-testing/u/11571324?tk=4UYvlRhqAtwtxVuCGANxxhcsZFJr_qn-Bh0cuJcvWJM&utm_source=petition_update&utm_medium=email

Take a look and tell me it's not cruel!