BAN ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS IN EU - VOTE NOW !

[Android Bishop]

What animals do you work with Android?

If I'm working with animals, its mostly rats and mice. Most common lab animals used in research. I also work with microbes and plants too. Some of these things all work together (like using a microbe to infect a plant with a DNA vector that makes an experimental antibody or protein that we then test on rats to see if it works). Lots of tissue cultures too. Mostly tissue cultures, actually. Dont really work on animals until we have nailed the vector technology and gotten everything else in line, otherwise we'd end up wasting a bunch of time and energy. Working with animals is a pain in the butt, we dont start with the animal studies until we are ready. Hopefully down the line I'll get to work with stem cells or marine biotech, because that's gonna be huuuuge.

I'm not in big enough leagues yet to work on big, several year long experiments with big animals like the cow experiments I talked about earlier. Also bear in mind that monkeys are pretty much only used in trails that are about to go to human trials next or experiments designed to learn something that may be applied to humans down the line. That's pretty late in the trials phases, most research never gets that far due to several factors (one of which being that the medical industry is like the recording industry: they like to focus their resources into one hit wonders and everything else falls by the wayside). Nobody just up and uses monkeys for all their research, its extremely cost prohibitive, inefficient, and totally unnecessary given the needs of most experiments.

[Android Bishop]

And BTW - animal testing is not the only way to learn about animals or their cells, otherwise we would never have known about humans.

Additions to that of course include culturing, computer models, clinical trials, etc...

A) Yeah and we use tissue cultures for most of our experiments in the first place. however, its an isolated system, and biological organisms are extremely complex arrays of large number of cells that all work with and communicate with each other using hundreds of thousands of different proteins and molecules and whatnot. If we want to find out what something does in the grand scheme of things, we have to use the whole animal

B) Computer models are just that, models. They arent even very good ones, because no computer can "model" the complexities of a living system. All they are good for is MAYBE helping us narrow down the list of possibilities to save us time doing the ACTUAL research. So instead of having to test 200 compounds on rats we'll narrow it down to 20 instead. They are no substitute for hard data. You can't publish research results with "well the computer told me it might work like this" and end it there, that doesnt tell anyone anything and you haven't proven shit.

C) Clinical trials are mostly horseshit (not all, but mostly). They are a usually a game of statistics and not hard data. It might as well be some crap coming out of the humanities/social "sciences" departments.

[Homebelly]

C) Clinical trials are mostly horseshit (not all, but mostly). They are a usually a game of statistics and not hard data. It might as well be some crap coming out of the humanities/social "sciences" departments.

Great way to earn money though, when your poor and on the dole in London.
Hella fun too, if you are not the placebo.
Ahh..
Those where the days

[Kodama]

Also bear in mind that monkeys are pretty much only used in trails that are about to go to human trials next or experiments designed to learn something that may be applied to humans down the line. That's pretty late in the trials phases, most research never gets that far due to several factors (one of which being that the medical industry is like the recording industry: they like to focus their resources into one hit wonders and everything else falls by the wayside). Nobody just up and uses monkeys for all their research, its extremely cost prohibitive, inefficient, and totally unnecessary given the needs of most experiments.

Not always true, I live by a primate research center that seeks out funding from the NIH on various "what if?" type of experiments, many of which are just zany on the face of their premise. They have over 4k primates on hand, and so are always seeking funding, and often get funding.

Hey, the same institution even found out about gayness in sheep by dissecting their brains!

Wonder what they were trying to cure there?

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/2421

[ThrowAway]

I guess they let you walk in and filled you in on all the projects they had going right?

[Machinesworking]

there are many aspects to this discussion. it's based around animals but there's obvious corruption without having to resort to hyperbole.

Because it's not hyperbole. Sorry man, but I'm not anti animal testing. I'm anti the 'business' of animal testing. I don't really care about personalities on the interwebs and attacking their shortcomings that way. I care about what I consider the only problem with animal testing as it stands, that funding is based on grants, whether those come from private or government sources. If you've been around any business that operates from that standpoint, you know that it's not at all about the validity of the research at that level, but keeping a facility running, and your workers employed.

There's little or no real room for argument on this. To believe that facilities that operate on grants don't squeeze every last drop out of a study is to not be exposed to these types of organizations at all IMO. Personally I know about five people who work in animal research, and my relatives work in psychology at a research institute. All I'm saying is a real watchdog organization, and not PETA or some scientist who relies on the money, or any other biased group, should be in place to prevent needless waste, that's all.

[Chang]

This forum is so PC it can make one sick.


No cure for cancer STOP! A mouse might get hurt.


Ridiculous PC run a muck by people without cancer obviously.

If anyones mothers were shooting blood out of eyes blind and a mere mouse might help cure/solve the problem I'm sure you would allow and be singing a different tune.

[scott nathaniel]

If anyones mothers were shooting blood out of eyes blind and a mere mouse might help cure/solve the problem I'm sure you would allow and be singing a different tune.

Actually, my mother died from colon cancer. She was 36 and I was 15. Her shit was diverted to a colostomy bag that was permanently attached to her body. And I'll tell you, no fucking mouse saved her life, nor the doctors. What the doctors did do was to fill her body with so many chemicals that it's pretty friggin' difficult to determine what actually killed her: cancer or chemo. Now, I ain't fishin' for pity cause we all die, but I get sick of the ol" if you had a daughter. mother, daddy, grampy shit ---everyone has someone who's gonna bite it.

[Chang]

If anyones mothers were shooting blood out of eyes blind and a mere mouse might help cure/solve the problem I'm sure you would allow and be singing a different tune.

Actually, my mother died from colon cancer. She was 36 and I was 15. Her shit was diverted to a colostomy bag that was permanently attached to her body. And I'll tell you, no fucking mouse saved her life, nor the doctors. What the doctors did do was to fill her body with so many chemicals that it's pretty friggin' difficult to determine what actually killed her: cancer or chemo. Now, I ain't fishin' for pity cause we all die, but I get sick of the ol" if you had a daughter. mother, daddy, grampy shit ---everyone has someone who's gonna bite it.

So what are you saying? There has been a cure for cancer for 50 years imo. But no one will implement it because it will bring the medical community down to their knee. No one in medical/pharmaceutical community wants a cure for cancer. That would mean profit loss in the Billions.

They just want to keep you alive long enough to make the money.

[Mr-Bit]

I had colon cancer 10 yrs ago had surgery did the treatment still typing.So there's a possibility you would not be reading this if those animals were not tested on, cheers my furry friends I owe you one.
I think theres far more important issues for eco activists to devote their time and effort to than banning animal experiments.

[Android Bishop]

So what are you saying? There has been a cure for cancer for 50 years imo. But no one will implement it because it will bring the medical community down to their knee. No one in medical/pharmaceutical community wants a cure for cancer. That would mean profit loss in the Billions.

They just want to keep you alive long enough to make the money.

That's a load of crap. There is an unbelievable amount of effort and resources devoted to finding the causes, treatments, and possible cures for cancer all over the world. Yeah like every biochemist and cellular biologist in the world all got together for a secret meeting and all decided we would just pretend to be working on cancer treatments so we could somehow get more money. Give me a break.

The sad truth of the matter is that treating cancer is EXTREMELY difficult. Cancer isn't a foreign cell, its a culture of YOUR CELLS that merely went rouge. What makes them go rouge is a very complicated problem that differs from case to case, and its a problem we dont understand in full. And since its YOUR cells, its tough to develop treatments for them because anything that targets them is going to target good cells too. We have some promising new research with engineering custom antibodies to direct your immune system against the cells, and possible use of nano-scaffolds to hold chemo drugs that only bind to cancer cells, but this is difficult technology to implement and requires customization for each individual patient. There is no overnight fix for this problem. There wont be a magic drug. Its going to take complex treatments that require individual customization for the targeted cancer and bioengineering treatments specific to that particular cancer line.

[Tone Deft]

there are many aspects to this discussion. it's based around animals but there's obvious corruption without having to resort to hyperbole.

Because it's not hyperbole. Sorry man, but I'm not anti animal testing. I'm anti the 'business' of animal testing. I don't really care about personalities on the interwebs and attacking their shortcomings that way. I care about what I consider the only problem with animal testing as it stands, that funding is based on grants, whether those come from private or government sources. If you've been around any business that operates from that standpoint, you know that it's not at all about the validity of the research at that level, but keeping a facility running, and your workers employed.

There's little or no real room for argument on this. To believe that facilities that operate on grants don't squeeze every last drop out of a study is to not be exposed to these types of organizations at all IMO. Personally I know about five people who work in animal research, and my relatives work in psychology at a research institute. All I'm saying is a real watchdog organization, and not PETA or some scientist who relies on the money, or any other biased group, should be in place to prevent needless waste, that's all.

I'm f-ing beat tired but IMO this is more speculation and generalized Emissary-esque paranoia. I made a similar post earlier in the thread somewhere around page 42. Bishop is bringing some facts, the animals need more people to do the same, on the flip side.

Kodama has made some posts that put more meat to this part of the argument, pun intended.

more to the point, ask Bishop what he thinks, not me.

[stringtapper]

Guys, look after someone with a degenerative nuerological disease until their point of ultimate departure...and get back to me about animal tests, I'll hear you out if you've spoon-fed someone (maybe your young mother) and cleaned their ass for years and you still object to scientifically experimenting with animals in the name of a treatment (if not cure), and above all else a greater understanding of neurological systems for future generations.

Now this is a position I can respect. It says, "I don't want my loved one to suffer (and therefore I don't want to suffer from seeing them suffer), so I support 'X'" It comes from a state of emotion, true, but it imposes no moral will on anyone else. It merely presents a want or need that exists within the individual who is stating it. It says, "I think this would be good for me," without presupposing or making judgements on what might be good for anyone or anything else.

I guess you missed this bit:
and above all else a greater understanding of neurological systems for future generations.

Let's test some slugs to cure your retardation, all in favour say Aiiiii!


*edited to make sure 'above all else' reaaaaallllllly stood out, he is severely retarded after all*

You're right, I was ignoring that part.

Enjoy your remote schoolyard fun, pussy boy. It's easy when there's no one to lift on you when you talk shit.

[b0unce]

*smokes cigarette*

[Machinesworking]

I'm f-ing beat tired but IMO this is more speculation and generalized Emissary-esque paranoia. I made a similar post earlier in the thread somewhere around page 42. Bishop is bringing some facts, the animals need more people to do the same, on the flip side.

Kodama has made some posts that put more meat to this part of the argument, pun intended.

more to the point, ask Bishop what he thinks, not me.

No it's first hand experience I'm talking, I have friends currently doing studies on monkeys that aren't successful, and seem to be continuing to ensure funding coming in more than anything else, but I'm more of a impartial observer in this thread. I agree there is a point to animal testing, but I also agree that the business of animal testing lends itself to conducting tests that prove nothing, Bishop already stated that he thinks that's OK, (since proving nothing over and over again is scientifically valid), so there's really nothing to argue about.

Time for a derail, 16th st. & Mission is hipster central now. I have to admit that was disappointing. I wonder how far out the hispanic population will be driven in another 20 years?