Animal cruelty - lack of support on threads

Most veterinary medicine is based on medication developed for humans, and the dosages are adapted by body weight.

I adore my doggo, but when I went to the out of hours post surgical clinic and told the doctor that I had borrowed two leftover veterinary co-amoxiclav tablets from the dog to treat a raging infection, he laughed like an idiot -- and prescribed me the exact same tablet, with a smooth coating.

Happy to be corrected but I don’t believe that’s standard practise for surgical students in England any longer.

By dissection on subjects that had died via natural causes.

My post wasn’t clear, I have long refused personal care and cosmetics tested on animals, fortunately testing cosmetics on animals is now banned in the UK, but it didn’t used to be.

As regards pharmaceuticals, I’m lucky, as the only thing I have ever needed in my life is paracetamol and antibiotics - rarely.

However, I can’t do anything about pharmaceuticals that have long been tested. That doesn’t make it right, and quite frankly, it’s a waste of time and animal life, because physiology is different

“A British team of researchers examined the results of animal experiments that had been conducted in order to assess the risk of deformities in unborn children. It turned out that nearly half of the substances known to cause deformities in humans had previously been classified as harmless in animal studies. Conversely, nearly half of the drugs that women can take during pregnancy without problems were also considered unsafe in animal studies (22).”

https://www.aerzte-gegen-tierversuche.de/en/basic-infos/arguments/scientific-arguments#jumpheading-0

No, frankly, I completely disagree.

I agree that we need to minimise the use of animals in testing, and to eradicate it for trivial purposes, but how else is a young surgeon in training going to learn the subtle skills that might save your life? I interviewed a heart transplant surgeon almost 30 years ago and for his surgical training he disected five or six mouse hearts every day for several months. Becoming expert enough to be competent to cut open and rebuild a human heart requires practice. Small rodents have similar mammalian heart structures and the size teaches the necessary precision.

As others have stated, much testing is done for ZERO benefit at all, but simply to satisfy curiosity, even when satisfying that curiosity leads to no benefit at all to anyone or anything. I suggest you have a good look into it a little more deeply https://www.aerzte-gegen-tierversuche.de/en/basic-infos/arguments/scientific-arguments#jumpheading-7

https://www.aerzte-gegen-tierversuche.de/en/basic-infos/arguments/scientific-arguments#jumpheading-0

Of course they’re not, and nowhere did I say they were.

Are you really that desperate for personal recognition that you can’t read nuance? Here’s your little medal. 🥉

wombat1a · Today 15:42
I think many many people will be amazed at have 'few' animals are used in bringing a potential drug from the test-tube to be accepted by a regulatory authority so you can inject something never given to a human being before for the 1st time. It is suprisingly few animals

Out of interest @wombat1a how many is it, exactly, for testing medicines (even though its value is limited in reality). I note 110 million animals are tested on in all kinds of ways for a variety of reasons https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimentation-factsheets/animal-experiments-overview/#:~:text=Each%20year%2C%20more%20than%20110%20million%20animals—including,burned%20off%20or%20their%20spinal%20cords%20crushed.

Just as well isn’t it, because outcomes on animals are unreliable indicators of what would happen in the human body. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/who-we-are/our-members/doctors-against-animal-experiments#:~:text=Doctors%20Against%20Animal%20Experiments%20believe,Lab%20Animals

Not that this excuses the treatment of the beagles in the testing of a flea treatment.

And with this comment you show how little you know about pharmaceutical development. New products are not simply a rehash of the same active ingredients.

But excuse me while I go and join a call with the FDA about a novel product I have been working on which has already had a global impact on many hundreds of thousands of lives.

Gosh how original 🥱

The sort of prisoners I am thinking of wouldn't have people defending their actions unless they were equally heinous.

Only if you’re happy for someone who doesn’t like your actions to decide you’re no longer worthy of rights.

I don’t ’not think there should be new laxatives’, I think a new laxative that requires an animal suffering is not worth it.

Have you really tried all the hundreds of products and natural alternatives and found. none to your liking? If so, I don’t think a ‘new’ laxative would improve your quality of life, since they are all based on the same active ingredients.

How would you decide what ones are worth it?

clearly you don’t think there should be new laxatives. I can tell you that a new laxative would potentially greatly improve my life.

this is my understanding. Thank you for explaining.

Maybe not but what a shame.

And that’s not what I said.

Do we need to know every single biological or molecular pathway, if the cost is the suffering of sentient beings? That’s the question for me. Is it worth it? And for some things, that’s arguably yes and for some very obviously no.

And it doesn’t matter how much your lab friends are animal lovers. The men who work on death row are usually nice to those waiting to die. It doesn’t make the objective suffering any less, and in the case of lab animals they haven’t even done anything worthy of punishment.

And for lifesaving and serious quality of life improving drugs I do accept the need for some animal testing, while we work to eradicate the need for it. I just think the scope of what qualifies is quite narrow and I don’t see the need for repeated iterations of drugs just to serve the market.

For example, the explosion in GLPs which is (largely, though with some exceptions) no longer about life saving treatment for diabetics, and is now about increasing fat loss while preserving muscle mass. Totally accept that obesity is dangerous, and can result in diabetes, CVD and liver disease, but also there are other routes to fixing that. But they’d involve denting the profits of food, alcohol and pharmaceuticals companies, so we’ll just carrying on using monkeys. It’s just not right. And saying so isn’t denigrating people who use particular drugs, it’s about the process.

Newer products have different, and often more targeted modes of action. They do not have the same toxicity profile as older ones. We are still way off knowing about every single biological and molecular pathway to be fully confident that new actives do not have off target effects. The variability in toxicity and efficacy between different groups of people means that we will always need more options.
It is not as simple as saying "we have a blood pressure medication, we don't need any more".

Ah right - maybe I misunderstood. I do know they probably wouldn’t work for me specifically, and certainly right now (WLIs I mean). I was talking hypothetically.

I Mean if there was a new chemo that was easier to tolerate, or a new arthritis drug, or some amazing new painkiller, if it had to be tested on animals, as I understand is the current law, then I’d happily have it. I’d volunteer to be a tester for it (I’ve already taken part in one clinical trial so I do put my money where my mouth is, as it were).

Oh no you did, I didn’t reply clearly I think. I meant when I replied the first time on WLIs I had in mind that steroid weight gain would be unlikely to reversed by GLPs.

I did think I’d already said about the steroids - sorry if I hadn’t.

Yes, I was thinking about the steroids in particular as AD weight gain can be intake related.

Given so many unknowns you might be better off being ineligible for WLIs anyway.

That’s a horrible set of circumstances, I hope you have some support.

The physical stuff is easier to deal with than the mental but thank you.