2019-CREDO-ad-banner-150K.jpg

Talk:Animal testing

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search

Assertion

This page has some serious issues, a lot of the links are to animal rights groups in places where they should be to say medical or scientific journals.Scotty 07:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Response

As pointed out in the article, product or toxicity testing is worse than useless. (The LD 50 standard toxicity test is statistically inferior to a coin toss.) It serves no purpose other than to perpetuate a steady flow of chemicals and drugs onto the market, along with profits for "new and improved", previously tested and retested ingredients in various combinations. As also pointed out in the article, 92 out of every 100 drugs which pass animal testing, fail human trials, according to the FDA. ADR's are a leading cause of death in the U.S. and the world. It is unfortunate that orthodox medicine has such close tied with the drug industry these days, or this important issue might receive better coverage in their journals.

The value of what is considered to be "medical research", is also questionable; as pointed out in the article. Many projects involve redundant studies, duplication, addiction studies, psychological and physical torture. Academic "studies" are duplicated extensively; particularly in the current "publish or perish" atmosphere. Vivisection has proved to be a blind alley and even a detriment in disease research as well, as pointed out in the article. Other experiments are examined in ten worst laboratories, NPRC and companies in the animal testing category. Most academic "research" is funded by the NIH, at taxpayer expense.

Profitable industries do not self police as a rule. Another under/ non reported aspect of vivisection is general animal suffering, abuse, injuries, needless death, diseases and filth (leading to human health and safety issues as well). Groups like PETA have exposed animal abuse in numerous laboratories, leading to canceled funding, closure and hundreds of USDA charges. They include Proctor & Gamble, Huntingdon Life Sciences, Covance Laboratories, Sinclair Research Center, Carolina Biological Supply Company, Oregon National Primate Research Center, Columbia University and University of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill. [1]

The important issue of medical psychopathy is not covered in this article. However, there are numerous examples in the Humane Movement and ten worst laboratories. Far from always being an "objective source", the medical and scientific community suffers from numerous conflicts of interests, a disturbing lack of empathy and in some cases, sadism. This tragedy is exacerbated by an extensive network of legal protections and subsidizing. See also USDA, NIH and U.S. Government's War on Animals. What would land the average citizen in jail or shut down an animal shelter permanently, is rewarded and subsidized by corporations and government agencies. It is virtually never held accountable for needless animal suffering; to say nothing of the criminal poisoning of humans due to unsafe drugs and chemicals.

As pointed out in the article, the vivisection industry actually receives very little vetting from the media. SW generally covers and vets corporations, groups, people and issues which are ignored and /or censored by mainstream media.

Lisa L. 3/24