Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Animal Testing

135

Comments

  • #62
    Padraig Mor
    Registered Users Posts: 9,531 ✭✭✭Padraig Mor


    Against
    danielle_door wrote: »
    In Ireland, experiments, including painful ones, are allowed under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, administered by the Department of Health. Most animal experiments are done without anaesthetic. In Ireland and some other countries, the law requires that, in experiments involving surgery the animal must be anaesthetised but in most of these cases the animal is allowed to recover for observation, and there can be severe suffering at this stage.

    Completely untrue. As is most of the crap spouted by the 'animal rights' crowd.

    In Ireland, you need to receive special permission if you are NOT going to anaesthetise an animal for an experiment. You also need separate permission AGAIN if you going to let the animal wake up from anaesthesia after a procedure (i.e. not euthanase it while it's still asleep).


  • #63
    MOH
    Registered Users Posts: 6,464 ✭✭✭MOH


    What we need is zombies. Zombie testing FTW


  • #64
    ambro25
    Registered Users Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Against
    MOH, won't be long until you incur the wrath of HAFU for that post ;):D


  • #65
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Like eating animals its not 100% ethically correct but its practical and benefits humanity. If there were another efficient way I'd be for it.


  • #66
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Brilliant! Admins, a Zombie forum if you please!


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,082 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    Like eating animals its not 100% ethically correct but its practical and benefits humanity. If there were another efficient way I'd be for it.

    How is it practical and benficial to humanity?
    It is actually a hugely wasteful process. Much moreso than a society that doesn't need mass slaughterhouses to survive. I am much hapopier eating my fake meat and being vegetarian.
    I can also get cheaper health insurance for being a vegetarian now. There si a discount given in some companies. :-)


  • #68
    Nature Boy
    Registered Users Posts: 801 ✭✭✭Nature Boy


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    I'm completely against it. I don't think we should abuse animals for whatever reason we want. If we're so intelligent, why do we rely on animals so heavily?
    I'm sure we could come up with more humane ways of testing, but we won't because using animals is a far easier option. Shame.


  • #69
    ambro25
    Registered Users Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Against
    Tar.Aldarion wrote:
    How is it practical and benficial to humanity?

    Were your partents vegetarians?
    Your grand-parents?
    Your great grand-parents?
    Etc, etc... ;)

    Slaughterhouses and the like (supply chain) have only evolved so that man could dedicate more time to harnessing eletricity, the atom, land on the Moon etc. Not much chance of those happening when you've got to go hunting for your daily meal :cool:
    Tar.Aldarion wrote:
    I can also get cheaper health insurance for being a vegetarian now. There si a discount given in some companies. :-)

    That'll be another "private pensions" scandal/fiasco in the offing, then :D


  • #70
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    I am much hapopier eating my fake meat and being vegetarian.
    Cue abuse from the non-PC "real men" of Boards... Well the ones who haven't been banned anyway...


  • #71
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    How is it practical and benficial to humanity?
    It is actually a hugely wasteful process. Much moreso than a society that doesn't need mass slaughterhouses to survive. I am much hapopier eating my fake meat and being vegetarian.
    I can also get cheaper health insurance for being a vegetarian now. There si a discount given in some companies. :-)

    In terms of developing new medicines and treatments for illnesses and understanding more about nature.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    ambro25
    Registered Users Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Against
    Nature Boy wrote:
    I'm sure we could come up with more humane ways of testing, but we won't because using animals is a far easier option. Shame.

    In the grand scheme of things, testing isn't concerned with "humane" - testing is concerned with cost and reliability of results. Least cost = least number of animals required, cheapest animal variety available for the purpose at hand.

    So long as animal testing is cheaper and/or the results thereof more reliable, then that's what is done.

    As and when someone invents appropriate non-animal testing methods for this-that-the other compound, which is at least as expensive and at least as reliable, then animal testing for that particular compound stops - because it's not that easy to handle, feed, house, experiment on, etc a live or anaestetized animal.

    Not being cynical for the sake of it, just common-sensical.

    Were I to be really cynical, then I'd say
    * stop catching & shipping monkeys, because of the carbon footprint
    * start using lifers/paedophiles/etc., human testing surely yields better results faster :evil smiley:


  • #73
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Actually that's a good point. Why doesn't Boards provide an evil smiley?


  • #74
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    Like eating animals its not 100% ethically correct but its practical and benefits humanity. If there were another efficient way I'd be for it.
    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    How is it practical and benficial to humanity?
    It is actually a hugely wasteful process. Much moreso than a society that doesn't need mass slaughterhouses to survive. I am much hapopier eating my fake meat and being vegetarian.
    I can also get cheaper health insurance for being a vegetarian now. There si a discount given in some companies. :-)

    is what way is eating meat unethical? I wouldnt call it unethical, but i would suggest that some of the practises for raising and slaughtering animals for consumption as unethical.


  • #75
    Eoin
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 21,238 CMod ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    How would you test pet food if it was banned?

    Anyhow, here's an article about transparant frogs being produced, so they don't have to be killed to look at their internal organs.


  • #76
    RandolphEsq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,296 ✭✭✭RandolphEsq


    Against
    2 things;
    -The reason people feel bad about animal testing is because they have this idea that it is a poor defenseless animal and it is unfair to put it through such ''abuse''. They think the animal thinks and feels the way we as humans do. It's human compassion.
    -Animal testing isn't done because scientists love hurting animals. It is done because it is more practical than using humans as animal lives are obviously not as highly regarded as human lives. However, if someone DOES take some sort of pleasure from watching an animal in pain, then there is something mentally wrong with that person and they shouldn't be allowed test on animals.


  • #77
    Nature Boy
    Registered Users Posts: 801 ✭✭✭Nature Boy


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    Say an alien race come to earth. They are far more intelligent than us, far more powerful and far more wealthy. They wish to test their perfumes, toilet cleaner, medice etc on us because it cost effective and our lives are "less regarded", would you accept your fate?


  • #78
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    Nature Boy wrote: »
    Say an alien race come to earth. They are far more intelligent than us, far more powerful and far more wealthy. They wish to test their perfumes, toilet cleaner, medice etc on us because it cost effective and our lives are "less regarded", would you accept your fate?

    Thats an unrealistic proposition.

    we hardly set off to Mars to find specimens to test the latest fragrance of lynx on now in fairness


  • #79
    Reku
    Registered Users Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    faceman wrote: »
    Thats an unrealistic proposition.

    we hardly set off to Mars to find specimens to test the latest fragrance of lynx on now in fairness

    But we're not exactly capable of intergalactic travel, as we became better able to travel we expanded out the animals we felt we had the right to hunt, kill, eat, trap, kidnap and shove into a zoo, etc... who's to say a well travelled intergalactic race would not also adopt a similar view on us inferior creatures?


  • #80
    MooseJam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    I for one welcome our new intergalactic overlords


  • #81
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Nature Boy wrote: »
    Say an alien race come to earth. They are far more intelligent than us, far more powerful and far more wealthy. They wish to test their perfumes, toilet cleaner, medice etc on us because it cost effective and our lives are "less regarded", would you accept your fate?

    no, but what would we able to do about it *shrug*
    I'm sure the rabbits and mice don't like their lot either, but that's the way the world is. In a cage, stuck with needles.. or eaten by a fox.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,681 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Nature Boy wrote: »
    Say an alien race come to earth. They are far more intelligent than us, far more powerful and far more wealthy. They wish to test their perfumes, toilet cleaner, medice etc on us because it cost effective and our lives are "less regarded", would you accept your fate?
    No way that would happen.
    At not until we've sold them all the peoples in the developing world.


  • #83
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    BrightEyes wrote: »
    The reason people feel bad about animal testing is because they have this idea that it is a poor defenseless animal and it is unfair to put it through such ''abuse''.
    And? Is that not true?
    They think the animal thinks and feels the way we as humans do.
    Animals feel pain and fear. They feel frustration and boredom from being locked in a tiny space all day every day. Some animals, like dogs and chimps, feel sadness.
    What is your point?


  • #84
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Against
    Dudess wrote: »
    And? Is that not true?

    Animals feel pain and fear. They feel frustration and boredom from being locked in a tiny space all day every day. Some animals, like dogs and chimps, feel sadness.
    What is your point?
    They're food.

    Are tigers bad for eating zebras?


  • #85
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    I don't get ya, Terry. This is about animal testing. BrightEyes was explaining the reasons why humans get upset by it as if these reasons are incorrect. I was just asking him how they could be incorrect.


  • #86
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Against
    I'm off the clock.
    You don't have to get me.


  • #87
    Scoobydoobydoo
    Registered Users Posts: 388 ✭✭Scoobydoobydoo


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    I am against animal testing, especially in situations where it's not vital, such as with cosmetics. Whatever about saving human lives, feeding rabbits lipstick in the name of vanity is abhorrent.


  • #88
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    faceman wrote: »
    is what way is eating meat unethical? I wouldnt call it unethical, but i would suggest that some of the practises for raising and slaughtering animals for consumption as unethical.

    Well, when you can eat vegetables why put a living creature through the experience of death and take its life against its will so you can enjoy eating it? Its not nice for the animal but its not a terrible crime, its, as I said, not perfectly ethical from our moral standpoint.


  • #89
    pretty-in-pink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭pretty-in-pink


    Only if its an Atari Jaguar being tested upon
    Againnst, there are to many differences between us, its cruel and wrong. Same goes for blood "sports". Gets my blood boiling


  • #90
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    Well, when you can eat vegetables why put a living creature through the experience of death and take its life against its will so you can enjoy eating it? Its not nice for the animal but its not a terrible crime, its, as I said, not perfectly ethical from our moral standpoint.

    You havent really explained why its unethical. is it because we are taking the life of another living creature for our own consumption.

    If thats the case, well you should eat anything vegetables included. The Jane Muslims can explain it better than me especially at this hour of night!!!


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Oh yeah, they're the dudes who wear masks to prevent them from breathing in and then "killing" air-borne micro-organisms. And they don't wash in case they harm or kill micro-organisms in the water. Isn't it "Jain"?
    Even I, Boards' very own "PC loon", think that's crazy... :)


Advertisement