Europe bans Canadian seal products

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Suzles

How many commercials are seen on US television asking for people to come forward (or for the family of the deceased) as a result of death or serious illness after taking FDA approved drugs? These drugs were all approved for use in humans as a result of testing on animals.

Yeah, and someone died in a car accident today. Should we stop testing vehicles for safety?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Sowa

this thread amuses me...

In what way? That seems like a weird way to enter into a thread.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Suzles

Quote The original animal tests by Chemie Grünenthal did not show indications of this unexpected and serious side-effect. (10) Furthermore, in several European countries, including England and Sweden, the licensees of thalidomide carried out their own animal tests, independently from the German firm, and came to the same results as Chemie Grünenthal. (11) If the tests had predicted peripheral neuritis and if the firms acted upon the results in a responsible manner, the drug would not have been released in the first place and a major disaster would have been avoided.

Where does it say pregnant rats?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Suzles

How many commercials are seen on US television asking for people to come forward (or for the family of the deceased) as a result of death or serious illness after taking FDA approved drugs? These drugs were all approved for use in humans as a result of testing on animals.

That proves what exactly? That class action mass tort lawyers are masters of saturation advertisement? Beyond that I don't see much.

[Suzles]

"In fact when the link between human foetal abnormalities and thalidomide was established (through clinical observation), the world-wide explosion of animal testing, using a large range of species, proved very difficult to duplicate the abnormalities. (16) Writing in his book Drugs as Teratogens, J.L. Schardein observes: "In approximately 10 strains of rats, 15 strains of mice, eleven breeds of rabbit, two breeds of dogs, three strains of hamsters, eight species of primates and in other such varied species as cats, armadillos, guinea pigs, swine and ferrets in which thalidomide has been tested teratogenic effects have been induced only occasionally." (17) Eventually after administrating high doses of thalidomide to certain species of rabbit (New Zealand White) and primates could similar abnormalities be found. However researchers pointed out that malformations, like cancer, could occur when practically any substance, including sugar and salt, be given in excessive doses. (16)
All this just reaffirms what many doctors and scientists have been warning for a number of decades-animal experimentation misleads science and any similarity to the human situation is merely a coincidence and cannot be verified until the experiment is repeated on humans. Experimenting on animals is like playing roulette. (18)
The massively increased use of test animals following the thalidomide tragedy only served to dupe the public, encouraging it to keep consuming animal tested drugs. Consequently malformations are increasing. Over twenty years later, on July 19, 1983, a headline in the New York Times revealed: "Physical and Mental Disabilities in Newborns Doubled in 25 Years". More recently, the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation, an organisation responsible for monitoring birth defects, reveals that every year more than a quarter million babies (1 in 12) are born with birth defects in the United States.
In West Germany's authoritative medical journal Münchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, 1969, Dr W.Chr. Müller of the nation's First Gynaecological University Clinic reported that an extensive survey by German doctors had revealed that "for 61% of all malformed children born alive and 88% of all stillborn children the intake of various drugs had to be held responsible." (19)
While drug companies continue to be allowed releasing their products on the basis of phoney, alibi animal experiments is there any wonder why humanity continues to suffer drug-induced problems of such magnitude. "



I suppose what is worse is that they found it difficult to reporoduce the abnormalities in the animals even when they knew it occurred in humans. That is the problem - animals are different to us - so we can react differently no matter how stringent the testing on animals is.

[CaptainCrunch]

Just as an add on, after Thalidomide was pulled off of the market it was retested on several strains of pregnant animals and shown to cause birth defects in class a mice, Hamsters, Marmoset, Baboons and rats.

D. A. Blake, G. B. Gordon, & S.P. Spielberg, 'The role of metabolic activation in thalidomide teratogenesis', Teratology 25: 2 (1982), pp. 28A-29A.
J. A. DiPaolo, 'Congenital Malformation in Strain A Mice: Its Experimental Production by Thalidomide', Journal of the American Medical Association, 183 (1963), pp.139-141.
F. Homburger, S. Chaube, M. Eppenberger, P. D. Bogdonoff & and C.W. Nixon, 'Susceptibility of Certain Inbred Strains of Hamsters to Teratogenic Effects of Thalidomide', Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 7:5 (1965), pp. 686-69.
W. J. Hamilton & D. E. Poswillo, 'Limb Reduction Anomalies Induced in the Marmoset by Thalidomide', Journal of Anatomy 11 (1972), pp. 505-50.
A. G. Hendrick, L. R. Axelrod & L. D. Clayborn, 'Thalidomide Syndrome in Baboons', Nature, 210 (1966), pp. 958-95.
C. T. G. King CTG & F. J. Kendrick, 'Teratogenic Effects of Thalidomide in the Sprague Dawley Rat', The Lancet vol. ii (1962), p. 1116.
S. V. Rajkumar, 'Thalidomide: Tragic Past and Promising Future' Mayo Clinic Procedures 79:7 (2004).

Animal testing failed in this case because of failed methods.

[Suzles]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Yeah, and someone died in a car accident today. Should we stop testing vehicles for safety?

Huh? I thought they used computer models (test dummies) not animals when testing for vehicle safety. Don't tell me there is something else I have to get mad about?

[Suzles]

I suppose that that is where the internet is not always a useful tool. I am sure you could prove two opposing opinions by accessing any number of web sites (eg crazy bishop proved the holocaust never happened)!

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by Suzles

How many commercials are seen on US television asking for people to come forward (or for the family of the deceased) as a result of death or serious illness after taking FDA approved drugs? These drugs were all approved for use in humans as a result of testing on animals.

you do realize that testing on animals is just the preliminary steps right? they dont just say oh it worked on the rats lets start selling it to people. Things still go wrong after human trials too. They go thru 100's of different tests to come up with anything that has the chance to work on humans before testing that one drug. I'd rather have the 6 rats tested on first (1/2 of which are the control group and nothing bad happens to them) rather than pick 6 humans to give a drug they have absolutly no idea what will happen to them. we would kill of the entire prison population in no time, then what do you do?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by mmanzz

What is your "real job"?

I am an exotic pet breeder/distributer. Mainly reptiles, amphibians, and arachnids. I love my job.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Suzles

Huh? I thought they used computer models (test dummies) not animals when testing for vehicle safety. Don't tell me there is something else I have to get mad about?

Not what I was getting at. Any kind of testing is not going to be perfect, it doesn't invalidate the effort.

Vehicles are tested and engineered to keep passengers safe. Sometimes they fail. And we try harder.

Animal testing is intended to keep people safe. Sometimes it fails. So you think we should quit trying?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Swarly

you do realize that testing on animals is just the preliminary steps right? they dont just say oh it worked on the rats lets start selling it to people. Things still go wrong after human trials too. They go thru 100's of different tests to come up with anything that has the chance to work on humans before testing that one drug. I'd rather have the 6 rats tested on first (1/2 of which are the control group and nothing bad happens to them) rather than pick 6 humans to give a drug they have absolutly no idea what will happen to them. we would kill of the entire prison population in no time, then what do you do?

That's where the people who honk their horns on the red mile come in

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Swarly

we would kill of the entire prison population in no time, then what do you do?

rejoice? Seriously, there is just as many lifers in prison I will bet as animals in research labs.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

rejoice? Seriously, there is just as many lifers in prison I will bet as animals in research labs.

Why don't we just exterminate all inmates!

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Not what I was getting at. Any kind of testing is not going to be perfect, it doesn't invalidate the effort.

Vehicles are tested and engineered to keep passengers safe. Sometimes they fail. And we try harder.

Animal testing is intended to keep people safe. Sometimes it fails. So you think we should quit trying?

Animals don't suffer and die in vehicle testing.

[transplant99]

Animal testing has brought an innumerable number of advances to medicine. Several aesthetic products and advances in neurophysiologyhave come from vivisections. The treatment of rabies and anthrax can be traced back to animals. Other medical advancements include the treatment of arthritis, whooping cough, leprosy, diphtheria, rubella, and measles.

The medical field has been greatly impacted by the use of animals. Experimentation withthe use of animals has been dubbed as vivisections. One such famous vivisection was conducted by F. G. Banting and J.J R. Macleod. The two Canadian physiologists took diabetic dogs and removed their pancreases. Then they discovered a cure for diabetes through the use of insulin. This experiment won them a Nobel Prize in 1923. This also led to further experiments of the same type. Scientists would purposely produce diabetes in rabbits so as to create laser treatments for certain retinal disease that diabetes induces.

Just a small sample of the good things that have happened through animal testing. Certainly there have been failures of which Thalidomide was one and a biggie and the most famous. there are others including Clioquinol.

But nobody can claim that the bad outweighs the good in these cases. Not only has that testing helped medical advances in humans occur...it has also helped in the medical treatment of animals!!

[Suzles]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Not what I was getting at. Any kind of testing is not going to be perfect, it doesn't invalidate the effort.

Vehicles are tested and engineered to keep passengers safe. Sometimes they fail. And we try harder.

Animal testing is intended to keep people safe. Sometimes it fails. So you think we should quit trying?

I'd say its not the vehicle but the dope driving it most of the time - speed, alcohol, drugs, no seatbelt, etc or all of the above or hitting an innocent bystander. You can't engineer for stupidity.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Why don't we just exterminate all inmates!

Not all inmates, lifers, prisoners who will never get out, they just sit in a cell and suck tax payers money away. Tell me, what good is it doing to house a murderer serving life with no parole?

[Gozer]

So...many...strawmen....

Can't....keep.....going....

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Why don't we just exterminate all inmates!

fata I played the DESS card already!