The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Vivisection is an extremely controversial subject, and for this reason, I had to consider even writing this, but I feel strongly about the subject and would like to express my personal view. There are two arguments and I will try to include them both. I apologise if any parts are offensive.
A life where animal testing does not exist may sound wonderful to many people, where animals can run and live free, unafraid that they may be taken and used for scientific research, to see if a medicine or drug will be safe for human use.
Now imagine that a close relative uses one of these untested substances and they have since become terminally ill. This imaginary world doesn’t seem too great now does it?
The fact is that animals are probed, experimented on and operated on, causing large amounts of stress to them. These actions seem harsh but they are performed in order to help humans and feeling selfish as I write this, I partly agree with it. Now I say partly, as only a relatively small percentage (around 25%) of the predictions and discoveries found through experimentation are actually correct.
Many people are strongly against animal testing, and it is hardly difficult to understand why. Innocent creatures are operated on for the fact that they are less intelligent than the human race. Surely this does not give humans the right to destroy the lives of many creatures? These people against the experimentation fight and protest, but had their wish been granted and the testing was banned, how would medicines and drugs be made safe? Realistically, very few people (if any) would volunteer to go through these frightening procedures. Quite understandable!
The scientists who perform on animals do go through many courses and exams to be allowed to do the job, so as few mistakes as possible are made, resulting in as few animals dying as possible. The scientists take a course about animal ethics, surgical techniques, and the law and until these are passed, they may not take part in procedures.
So what actually happens to the animals in these laboratories? Some readers may be somewhat offended by this section, as it consists of the actions made against a number of animals, so do feel free to move on to the next section...
Many fatal injections are often used which are known for causing distress, blindness and premature death to the animals. Chemicals, dangerous acids and medicines are also used which harm and even kill on occasions. Animals are cut into, and some had human body parts grown on them. Some animals have their eyeballs surgically removed. While most procedures are necessary, few are not. The animals are tested with cosmetics and drugs. I feel that testing drugs on animals is far more acceptable, as this may save human lives. Cosmetics do not.
What is the outcome of these tests?
As I said, only 25% of predictions made actually work, but when they are correct, some great things become possible, and human health has improved. For example, after experiments on mice, a young child suffering from cystic fibrosis was saved. Now if the tests did not take place, the child may not have survived. So obviously, vivisection produces some amazing breakthroughs.
I was once completely against the idea of testing various products on animals, and being quite stubborn, I refused to listen to the reasons for why it should and does exist. I believe that once you know and understand both arguments, it is difficult to make a decision, as both sides contain valied points. Even if you detest the experimentation, you have to respect other views and even the scientists who perform the tests, as they do these procedures in order to help us and maybe one day even save us. Many of the people who do these tests and even their families are often targeted and tormented for their job. Letter bombs are used and large protests. I think this is disgusting.
If you find absolutely no problems with the tests, it is difficult to not feel even slightly bad for the animals. Whatever side of the argument you take, most people want some improvements. Maybe some experiments can be performed on human tissue or other genetic material. Dietary tests could be made and many other new procedures. These would certainly improve health, with a fewer amount of animals being harmed.
Note: Once again, I apologise for any offensive parts and would appreciate any comments you may have. Thank you for reading.
A life where animal testing does not exist may sound wonderful to many people, where animals can run and live free, unafraid that they may be taken and used for scientific research, to see if a medicine or drug will be safe for human use.
Now imagine that a close relative uses one of these untested substances and they have since become terminally ill. This imaginary world doesn’t seem too great now does it?
The fact is that animals are probed, experimented on and operated on, causing large amounts of stress to them. These actions seem harsh but they are performed in order to help humans and feeling selfish as I write this, I partly agree with it. Now I say partly, as only a relatively small percentage (around 25%) of the predictions and discoveries found through experimentation are actually correct.
Many people are strongly against animal testing, and it is hardly difficult to understand why. Innocent creatures are operated on for the fact that they are less intelligent than the human race. Surely this does not give humans the right to destroy the lives of many creatures? These people against the experimentation fight and protest, but had their wish been granted and the testing was banned, how would medicines and drugs be made safe? Realistically, very few people (if any) would volunteer to go through these frightening procedures. Quite understandable!
The scientists who perform on animals do go through many courses and exams to be allowed to do the job, so as few mistakes as possible are made, resulting in as few animals dying as possible. The scientists take a course about animal ethics, surgical techniques, and the law and until these are passed, they may not take part in procedures.
So what actually happens to the animals in these laboratories? Some readers may be somewhat offended by this section, as it consists of the actions made against a number of animals, so do feel free to move on to the next section...
Many fatal injections are often used which are known for causing distress, blindness and premature death to the animals. Chemicals, dangerous acids and medicines are also used which harm and even kill on occasions. Animals are cut into, and some had human body parts grown on them. Some animals have their eyeballs surgically removed. While most procedures are necessary, few are not. The animals are tested with cosmetics and drugs. I feel that testing drugs on animals is far more acceptable, as this may save human lives. Cosmetics do not.
What is the outcome of these tests?
As I said, only 25% of predictions made actually work, but when they are correct, some great things become possible, and human health has improved. For example, after experiments on mice, a young child suffering from cystic fibrosis was saved. Now if the tests did not take place, the child may not have survived. So obviously, vivisection produces some amazing breakthroughs.
I was once completely against the idea of testing various products on animals, and being quite stubborn, I refused to listen to the reasons for why it should and does exist. I believe that once you know and understand both arguments, it is difficult to make a decision, as both sides contain valied points. Even if you detest the experimentation, you have to respect other views and even the scientists who perform the tests, as they do these procedures in order to help us and maybe one day even save us. Many of the people who do these tests and even their families are often targeted and tormented for their job. Letter bombs are used and large protests. I think this is disgusting.
If you find absolutely no problems with the tests, it is difficult to not feel even slightly bad for the animals. Whatever side of the argument you take, most people want some improvements. Maybe some experiments can be performed on human tissue or other genetic material. Dietary tests could be made and many other new procedures. These would certainly improve health, with a fewer amount of animals being harmed.
Note: Once again, I apologise for any offensive parts and would appreciate any comments you may have. Thank you for reading.
Exactly! So many unnecessary tests are performed on animals to find out if a product such as lipstick or shampoo is dangerous and that really isn't fair. These aren't unimportant...they're just not worth wasting lives for. It's unacceptable.
Testing drugs and medicines on animals is somewhat more acceptable in my opinion. This could save lives! Maybe one animal could help to save a thousand human lives so vivisection cannot be all bad.
I just think its disgusting how the scientists and their families are terrorised. The scientists are doing a job to help us and their families shouldn't receive any threats at all.
Testing drugs and medicines on animals is somewhat more acceptable in my opinion. This could save lives! Maybe one animal could help to save a thousand human lives so vivisection cannot be all bad.
I just think its disgusting how the scientists and their families are terrorised. The scientists are doing a job to help us and their families shouldn't receive any threats at all.
Ah vivisection.. another controversial issue I wanted to bring up discussion on.
Firstly.. what do I believe. I agree with vivisection to an extent but also disagree to another extent. I know many people are thoroughly against vivisection (testing on animals) as my friend did work experience is Smithkline Beachem where the company was harrassed by members of the public who were opposed to it. I at first have been a bit annoyed about vivisection as I feel there are other methods of testing and the fact that we are hurting animals just to make life better for ourselves. BUT what I didn't realise what that some of the alternative tests are not 100% positive. It can be dangerous to use certain tests as in the end the products end up being used by us and do more harm then good. Medical research is where I feel vivisection is appropriate. It can assure us that a product will help us as it shows the effects on a living thing that we can observe. For example in Chemistry if you do an experiment, the results of the experiment will conclude your suspicions you cannot rely on knowledge alone. That is why we do investigations in science to prove something.. to make sure. Vivisection is exactly the same here as we are making sure that a product does do what we want it to. I think vivisection can play an important role in research. I'm a scientist who plans to do A-levels in Chemistry and Physics and hopefully go on to university and because of this I can see the good things that can come out of vivisection.. cures for diseases which on the long term save more lives and for what? Several deaths of animals.
However there is a darker side to vivisection. This is cosmetic testing and this is the stuff I absolutely deteste and would like to see an end to. Rabbits are fed loads of lipstick to check how much lipstick it takes to kill it so that we have an idea of how safe humans are by putting it on their lips and they do this again and again just to make sure. Is lipstick saving lives? No. What use it is then? Just to make people look better.... For women to wear to make themselves more glamarous. It really is out of order. So next time to see some lipstick tested on animals frown that that persons smile signals the unecessary deaths of many animals.
So.. it can be good in some cases but absolutely terrible in others.. it depends the situation.
Firstly.. what do I believe. I agree with vivisection to an extent but also disagree to another extent. I know many people are thoroughly against vivisection (testing on animals) as my friend did work experience is Smithkline Beachem where the company was harrassed by members of the public who were opposed to it. I at first have been a bit annoyed about vivisection as I feel there are other methods of testing and the fact that we are hurting animals just to make life better for ourselves. BUT what I didn't realise what that some of the alternative tests are not 100% positive. It can be dangerous to use certain tests as in the end the products end up being used by us and do more harm then good. Medical research is where I feel vivisection is appropriate. It can assure us that a product will help us as it shows the effects on a living thing that we can observe. For example in Chemistry if you do an experiment, the results of the experiment will conclude your suspicions you cannot rely on knowledge alone. That is why we do investigations in science to prove something.. to make sure. Vivisection is exactly the same here as we are making sure that a product does do what we want it to. I think vivisection can play an important role in research. I'm a scientist who plans to do A-levels in Chemistry and Physics and hopefully go on to university and because of this I can see the good things that can come out of vivisection.. cures for diseases which on the long term save more lives and for what? Several deaths of animals.
However there is a darker side to vivisection. This is cosmetic testing and this is the stuff I absolutely deteste and would like to see an end to. Rabbits are fed loads of lipstick to check how much lipstick it takes to kill it so that we have an idea of how safe humans are by putting it on their lips and they do this again and again just to make sure. Is lipstick saving lives? No. What use it is then? Just to make people look better.... For women to wear to make themselves more glamarous. It really is out of order. So next time to see some lipstick tested on animals frown that that persons smile signals the unecessary deaths of many animals.
So.. it can be good in some cases but absolutely terrible in others.. it depends the situation.
Vivisection is an extremely controversial subject, and for this reason, I had to consider even writing this, but I feel strongly about the subject and would like to express my personal view. There are two arguments and I will try to include them both. I apologise if any parts are offensive.
A life where animal testing does not exist may sound wonderful to many people, where animals can run and live free, unafraid that they may be taken and used for scientific research, to see if a medicine or drug will be safe for human use.
Now imagine that a close relative uses one of these untested substances and they have since become terminally ill. This imaginary world doesn’t seem too great now does it?
The fact is that animals are probed, experimented on and operated on, causing large amounts of stress to them. These actions seem harsh but they are performed in order to help humans and feeling selfish as I write this, I partly agree with it. Now I say partly, as only a relatively small percentage (around 25%) of the predictions and discoveries found through experimentation are actually correct.
Many people are strongly against animal testing, and it is hardly difficult to understand why. Innocent creatures are operated on for the fact that they are less intelligent than the human race. Surely this does not give humans the right to destroy the lives of many creatures? These people against the experimentation fight and protest, but had their wish been granted and the testing was banned, how would medicines and drugs be made safe? Realistically, very few people (if any) would volunteer to go through these frightening procedures. Quite understandable!
The scientists who perform on animals do go through many courses and exams to be allowed to do the job, so as few mistakes as possible are made, resulting in as few animals dying as possible. The scientists take a course about animal ethics, surgical techniques, and the law and until these are passed, they may not take part in procedures.
So what actually happens to the animals in these laboratories? Some readers may be somewhat offended by this section, as it consists of the actions made against a number of animals, so do feel free to move on to the next section...
Many fatal injections are often used which are known for causing distress, blindness and premature death to the animals. Chemicals, dangerous acids and medicines are also used which harm and even kill on occasions. Animals are cut into, and some had human body parts grown on them. Some animals have their eyeballs surgically removed. While most procedures are necessary, few are not. The animals are tested with cosmetics and drugs. I feel that testing drugs on animals is far more acceptable, as this may save human lives. Cosmetics do not.
What is the outcome of these tests?
As I said, only 25% of predictions made actually work, but when they are correct, some great things become possible, and human health has improved. For example, after experiments on mice, a young child suffering from cystic fibrosis was saved. Now if the tests did not take place, the child may not have survived. So obviously, vivisection produces some amazing breakthroughs.
I was once completely against the idea of testing various products on animals, and being quite stubborn, I refused to listen to the reasons for why it should and does exist. I believe that once you know and understand both arguments, it is difficult to make a decision, as both sides contain valied points. Even if you detest the experimentation, you have to respect other views and even the scientists who perform the tests, as they do these procedures in order to help us and maybe one day even save us. Many of the people who do these tests and even their families are often targeted and tormented for their job. Letter bombs are used and large protests. I think this is disgusting.
If you find absolutely no problems with the tests, it is difficult to not feel even slightly bad for the animals. Whatever side of the argument you take, most people want some improvements. Maybe some experiments can be performed on human tissue or other genetic material. Dietary tests could be made and many other new procedures. These would certainly improve health, with a fewer amount of animals being harmed.
Note: Once again, I apologise for any offensive parts and would appreciate any comments you may have. Thank you for reading.
A life where animal testing does not exist may sound wonderful to many people, where animals can run and live free, unafraid that they may be taken and used for scientific research, to see if a medicine or drug will be safe for human use.
Now imagine that a close relative uses one of these untested substances and they have since become terminally ill. This imaginary world doesn’t seem too great now does it?
The fact is that animals are probed, experimented on and operated on, causing large amounts of stress to them. These actions seem harsh but they are performed in order to help humans and feeling selfish as I write this, I partly agree with it. Now I say partly, as only a relatively small percentage (around 25%) of the predictions and discoveries found through experimentation are actually correct.
Many people are strongly against animal testing, and it is hardly difficult to understand why. Innocent creatures are operated on for the fact that they are less intelligent than the human race. Surely this does not give humans the right to destroy the lives of many creatures? These people against the experimentation fight and protest, but had their wish been granted and the testing was banned, how would medicines and drugs be made safe? Realistically, very few people (if any) would volunteer to go through these frightening procedures. Quite understandable!
The scientists who perform on animals do go through many courses and exams to be allowed to do the job, so as few mistakes as possible are made, resulting in as few animals dying as possible. The scientists take a course about animal ethics, surgical techniques, and the law and until these are passed, they may not take part in procedures.
So what actually happens to the animals in these laboratories? Some readers may be somewhat offended by this section, as it consists of the actions made against a number of animals, so do feel free to move on to the next section...
Many fatal injections are often used which are known for causing distress, blindness and premature death to the animals. Chemicals, dangerous acids and medicines are also used which harm and even kill on occasions. Animals are cut into, and some had human body parts grown on them. Some animals have their eyeballs surgically removed. While most procedures are necessary, few are not. The animals are tested with cosmetics and drugs. I feel that testing drugs on animals is far more acceptable, as this may save human lives. Cosmetics do not.
What is the outcome of these tests?
As I said, only 25% of predictions made actually work, but when they are correct, some great things become possible, and human health has improved. For example, after experiments on mice, a young child suffering from cystic fibrosis was saved. Now if the tests did not take place, the child may not have survived. So obviously, vivisection produces some amazing breakthroughs.
I was once completely against the idea of testing various products on animals, and being quite stubborn, I refused to listen to the reasons for why it should and does exist. I believe that once you know and understand both arguments, it is difficult to make a decision, as both sides contain valied points. Even if you detest the experimentation, you have to respect other views and even the scientists who perform the tests, as they do these procedures in order to help us and maybe one day even save us. Many of the people who do these tests and even their families are often targeted and tormented for their job. Letter bombs are used and large protests. I think this is disgusting.
If you find absolutely no problems with the tests, it is difficult to not feel even slightly bad for the animals. Whatever side of the argument you take, most people want some improvements. Maybe some experiments can be performed on human tissue or other genetic material. Dietary tests could be made and many other new procedures. These would certainly improve health, with a fewer amount of animals being harmed.
Note: Once again, I apologise for any offensive parts and would appreciate any comments you may have. Thank you for reading.