Huntingdon Life Sciences

[Ono]

There is a lot of fuss going on at the moment about this place and the animal testing.

Personally I think that animal testing is a necessary evil which saves human lives.

Is it cruelty to animals? Yes it is. But then so is eating an animal. Both are things that we as the dominant species on earth have done for centuries.

If all animal testing had been banned in the past then we wouldn't be where we are today with cures for many diseases and ailments.

Of course you tree-hugging hippy students out there may disagree with me but the fact is that toothpaste you used this morning was developed through animal testing and so was that shampoo you wash your greasy hair with every month or so.

 

[Perplex]

Lay off the student crap, uneducated fartknocker.

I'm a student (albeit a mature one) and I frankly couldn't give a shit what they do to animals. Burn em, cut them up and feed them to larger animals...all the same to me.

Someone I know once dipped their hand in petrol, stroked a cat, and lit it. I pissed myself laughing

 

[Ono]

Originally posted by Perplex
uneducated fartknocker.

Already got my degree mate. Now I'm in the real world earning money.

But, anyway, apologies to those students like Perplex who aren't more worried about animals than they are about people.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by Perplex
Someone I know once dipped their hand in petrol, stroked a cat, and lit it. I pissed myself laughing

And if it had been my cat you wouldn't find it funny for very long. Typical stupid students who are both a waste of time and money.

Its required that most medcines etc are tested on animals before being tested and given to humans, this is a law.

I don't find the idea of animal testing very nice but if its going to help humans then so be it, its not like cosmetics that are just for looks etc and don't really need to be tested on animals. These are drugs that will help save HUMAN lives and give a better quality of life to many more people.

The ironic thing about this has to be that some of these Shac(Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty) members are willing to kill the scienists, managers, etc of HLS.

Even if they had managed to close HLS, the research would just move to other countries.

 

[xenon2000]

Originally posted by Perplex

Someone I know once dipped their hand in petrol, stroked a cat, and lit it. I pissed myself laughing

And you call yourself a "mature" student?

I think, so long as it saves peoples lives, then the animals should be used for testing. If hippies are against this, then they should be used instead.

 

[dazzl]

Yep, I wholly agree with the protesters being used instead.
Sounds good to me!

 

[Stazbumpa]

Tricky subject innit.

By and large I agree, but some of the testing they do is complete bollox and in that the protestors do have a point.

For example: Attaching electrodes to monkeys and frying them alive to test a theory about male impotence. (Heard that one in science at school)

Apart from that and the cosmetics testing, which ain't neccessary these days, fair enough.

However, setting fire to cats/dogs/anything apart from Perplex is not on.

 

[Perplex]

ehahehaehahehaehaheh!!!!!11111

 

[Perplex]

basically, medical researchs' use of animals is fine. The hippy twats that don't like it, should all be added to an NHS 'blacklist'...so when they get cancer, or aids, and they want some of the life-saving medicines (that were tested on animals) the people at the hospital give them the finger and direct them towards the nearest herbal remedy shop.

Cosmetic testing is not on.

 

[Perplex]

Originally posted by stazbumpa
For example: Attaching electrodes to monkeys and frying them alive to test a theory about male impotence. (Heard that one in science at school)

I'd be interested to hear/see the scientific medical reasoning as to why electrocuting monkeys would have any correlation whatsoever to male impotency.

Did your science teacher happen to wear big doc marten boots, and have her hair died 14 different colours?

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by Perplex
I'd be interested to hear/see the scientific medical reasoning as to why electrocuting monkeys would have any correlation whatsoever to male impotency.

I found it painful

 

[Perplex]

heh heh, it turned you into a spam=-monkey too by the looks of it

 

[Stazbumpa]

I don't remember the exact wording of the document we were looking at, coz it was over 8 years ago, but it was something like that and we were debating the whole animal testing ethics thing as part of our curriculum.

My point was that although animal testing for medical reasons is ok, there are still certain medical reasons that aren't neccesarily justifiable.

 

[Perplex]

Originally posted by stazbumpa
My point was that although animal testing for medical reasons is ok, there are still certain medical reasons that aren't neccesarily justifiable.

Nice, I'm sure all the people that have a totally destroyed sex life totally agree with you. I'm sure you'd say the exact same thing if your penis was permanently flacid. I'm sure your girlfriend/wife/spouse would also totally agree that some meaningless chimp somewhere should have a few extra banannas to eat, rather than you have a healthy sex life.

 

[*Kornholio*]

hmmmm... i can see this one getting ugly...

 

[Embattle]

We are all entitled to different views people.

 

[nothing]

The lesser of two evils.

 

[old.TUG]

I burnt a mouse once... but it was already dead, killed by my m8s cat... but we doused it in WD40 anyway and toasted it... kinda chopped it open afterwards and it seemed it was pregnant.

I fully regret that distasteful act of violence and I'll never do it again.

I was only 10 tho..

 

[old.MeanMrMustard]

Originally posted by Ono
Of course you tree-hugging hippy students out there may disagree with me but the fact is that toothpaste you used this morning was developed through animal testing and so was that shampoo you wash your greasy hair with every month or so.

LOL

 

[old.MeanMrMustard]

Originally posted by Perplex
Someone I know once dipped their hand in petrol, stroked a cat, and lit it. I pissed myself laughing

Ok i don't have a bother with rubbing shampoo in a rabbits eyes to see if it goes blind or what ever, but that is just fucking sick, you are either lying to get attention or a very sad bastard. You ever heard about that bloke who put a cat in the microwave and then strung it up by the feet? he told his freinds and his freinds beat the shit out of him.

Originally posted by Perplex
Cosmetic testing is not on.

and setting fire to cats is?

[Edited by MeanMrMustard on 21-01-01 at 01:07]

 

[Perplex]

did I set fire to the cat? no

am I gonna argue with some psycho nutty enough to set light to a cat? no

will you go away? no

 

[Stazbumpa]

Setting fire to cats is not nutty and does not make you a psycho.

Complete and utter sad bastard, yes.
But not a psycho, and certainly not dangerous.

Except to cats of course.

 

[bodhi]

Cats irritate me immensely. SO give yer m8 a pat on the back from me Iz .

This whole "cruelty to animals" thing never ceases to amuse me. The unemployed concerned citizens among us semmed to have decreed that animal cruelty is bad (they just do it to get on telly), but have they ever watched nature documentaries? Have they ever seen a Lion toying with its prey? And if they have where are the "Down with lions" banners? Food for thought imo.

Personally I've done most of it. Pulled legs off spiders, fried ants with a magnifying glass, chased cats out of my garden with a large stick and gone cow tipping. Call me old fashioned, but I have more things to worry about in life than whether the cow I am eating went through any pain when it was slaughtered.

 

[old.MeanMrMustard]

Originally posted by Bodhi
fried ants with a magnifying glass

Yes, that is pretty funny They go white then pop

 

[Perplex]

Mustard

I hearby accuse you of speciesism*

It's a deplorable act to torch a cat, yet buring ants alive is, and I quote,

Yes, that is pretty funny - They go white then pop

You are displaying manifestations of the RSPCA attitude from the mid 20th century in which the attitude was "Cats and dogs should be treated nicely, but all other animals are there for the use of humans".

Did the ants not suffer when you burnt them alive? Or is it only fluffy bunnies, purdy cats, and loyal dogs that are capable of feeling pain?

* spe·cies·ism (spsh-zzm, -s-)
n.
Human intolerance or discrimination on the basis of species, especially as manifested by cruelty to or exploitation of certain species of animals

Footnote: I am only playing devils advocate. I think you will notice that I have both defended, and attacked both viewpoints. This is in interest debating the validity of the canonisation of the Animal Lib Militia. In this manner only will we achieve a higher plateau of understanding. basically mustard, this footnote means: "Don't take this personally, I am only debating"...ok?

 

[old.MeanMrMustard]

speciesism

lol

 

[ReActor]

Oh yeah, poor Mr Flacid Cock is in so much distress. Trying putting yourself in the position of the monkey about to be fried instead - some old cunt who can't get it up may or may not benefit from your untimely death. That seem fair?

Vivisection may be a necessary evil in the field of medical research, but the main complaint is against the pointlessness of a great deal of the animal testing that goes on. Does it really matter if the oven cleaner you're using hasn't been squirted into 50 rabbits' eyes beforehand? Are you really going to be frightened of a shampoo that hasn't been poured down the neck of 200 unsuspecting mice?
There are plenty of perfectly safe products on the market that weren't tested in this way, and certainly no one I know examines every item they buy to find out if they were. I'm not going on the record as an ALF supporter but if the general attitude to products NOT tested on animals is indifference, why bother?

 

[Perplex]

Originally posted by ReActor
Trying putting yourself in the position of the monkey about to be fried instead - some old cunt who can't get it up may or may not benefit from your untimely death. That seem fair?

Errrrm, let's try and empathise with a monkey shall we?

"ehaheaheh...bananna!!...yummy...hehehe...pick my arse....hmmm...bananna!!...heheheheh...big hairless monkey coming towards me....bananna!!..hehehe"

*ZZZZZZAP*

"what the fuck was that?....bananna!..heheheheh"

etc...

 

[xenon2000]

hehe

 

[Stazbumpa]

Testing for medical gain: Fine
Testing for pointless medical gain: Not fine (arguably)
Testing for cosmetic gain: No fecking way
Killing for food: Yup (as long as I ain't gotta do it, if so then hello veggie burgers)
Killing for pleasure: See doorway marked "Sick Bastard"

Nuff sed from me.