|
|
Post by Reef. on Oct 29, 2008 22:59:09 GMT
animal testing - where do you draw the line?
|
|
|
|
Post by `G.old on Oct 29, 2008 23:01:10 GMT
i dont beleive in it at all! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Reef. on Oct 29, 2008 23:08:28 GMT
same... althought there is a huge difference between medical and cosmetic testing
|
|
|
|
Post by `G.old on Oct 29, 2008 23:09:47 GMT
i agree
|
|
|
|
Post by mate on Oct 30, 2008 0:15:51 GMT
same... although there is a huge difference between medical and cosmetic testing
defentially....... |
|
|
|
Post by Reef. on Oct 30, 2008 12:43:00 GMT
personally i dont like medical testing either, but here comes my lack of loyalty to humanity again! lol
cosmetic testing is so pointless, all it does is feed vanity in people at the cost of animals lives and happiness
|
|
|
|
Post by Lawrence on Oct 30, 2008 20:41:29 GMT
im completely for medical testing and completely against cosmetic testing, if you guys want an essay on why etc lol i can provide you with one  but will take time to formulate |
|
|
|
Post by norsu on Nov 1, 2008 18:00:54 GMT
Hmmm...
I'm against most testing, though if there was an animal who had cancer and was in great pain and was going to be put down anyway, why not test out the newest cancer treatment that hasn't been proven to work yet? What's the worst that could happen? I don't understand cosmetic testing besides shampoos, conditioner, acne treatment, etc. How do you test eye shadow and lipstic on an animal?
|
|
|
|
Post by racechick on Nov 2, 2008 4:16:19 GMT
I hate animal testing it is cruel!!! Now I do agree that the medical testing is acceptable but the cosmatic in not right!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by norsu on Nov 2, 2008 13:23:41 GMT
I know! I hate in movies when they show animal testing rooms...all white and bright and plastic containers everywhere...ugh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reef. on Nov 2, 2008 16:10:07 GMT
i still have issues with the medical side, i dont think that human life is sacred or superior and it shows such a lack of respect for our fellow creatures to have it acceptable to sacrifice them for us. we've lived this long without the medical advancements, so we're not losing anything by not testing on animals
|
|
|
|
Post by norsu on Nov 2, 2008 16:12:04 GMT
I don't understand (I don't know if this is veering off topic or not) why we call things like houses and electronics and buildings and such not natural history. I mean, we are just as much animals as a bear and we call their dens that they dig natural history, houses are made by us dens are more or less usually made by bears! See what I mean? (now mate is going to prove me wrong, lol)
|
|
|
|
Post by Reef. on Nov 3, 2008 11:45:55 GMT
yea very true! i guess there's no such thing as "unnatural" because people are so anything we built is an extentsion of that
|
|
|
|
Post by norsu on Nov 30, 2008 17:18:52 GMT
Yup. And metals and stuff are elements or compounds, so a long time ago before they were mixed up by machines and stuff they were just a part of the Earth. The only things that I think are unnatural are all those gasses released into the atmosphere by factories and stuff. Waste.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reef. on Dec 22, 2008 14:51:29 GMT
even wastes are natural... think of the methane cows produce! lol i guess you could say the wastes humanity produces are like evolved farts
|
|
but will take time to formulate 
