Animal cruelty - lack of support on threads

[theyhavenovoice]

so am posting here because I’ve tried on other threads ( keep getting moved). In light of the last few days and what we’re learning. Testing on animals/ Beagles in the UK. I’m feeling heartbroken and have been so unaware. Anyone else?

This is a really interesting tangent. You're right of course - the reason doctors know how to perform these surgeries is because they have been trained on animals. It's an unpleasant fact... really unpleasant but it is true.

It got me thinking about AI, machine learning, robotics etc

I suppose if one day many many years from now we had robotic surgeons performing these operations we might one day completely remove the need for humans to learn and practice using animals - because we can just transfer the knowledge to a new model, programme the new piece of kit with the code/softeare etc... and that might be one of those positive outcomes of all this tech advancement....

This is Issac Asimov vibes and I probably need to call it a day but it is an interesting futuristic thought

Josef Mengele was intellectually curious. Being intellectually curious alone is no justification for the utter disdain and disregard for life, including animal life and suffering, and I think a person has to be very poorly developed as a human to believe it does.

And quite frankly, it strikes me that the ‘accumulated knowledge’ in science is often pretty much disregarded in pursuit of pointless, meaningless tests and experiments on animals just to suit the ‘intellectually curious’, because those people have bigger egos than hearts, or because for all their supposed scientific credentials they have forgotten to ask a few basic questions such as “is this really necessary?” “What value will this really bring, if anything at all?”

”Lindl et al. examined 51 animal experiments from the years 1991-1993 with regard to their relevance to humans 10 years on. They found that only 0.3% of the studies they examined showed a direct correlation between animal experimental findings and the results found in humans. But even in those the hypotheses confirmed by animal experiments could not be implemented in clinical therapies for humans. Either no therapeutic effect was detectable or the findings in humans even contradicted the results of the animal experiments (59). For lack of a “better” study, the German Primate Center in Göttingen even used the review article by Lindl et al. on its website until 2016 to justify basic research with monkeys. Thus, a 99.7% error rate was considered acceptable for the lottery that animal experiments are. ”

”In recent years, animal experiments in so-called basic research has increased continuously. In Germany in 1991, they amounted to 13%, whereas today almost 60% of animal experiments are conducted in basic research (54). One main reason for this increase is genetic engineering.
Basic research focuses on the curiosity-driven acquisition of knowledge. By definition, the primary goal is not a specific benefit, e.g. discovering a drug or therapy. Because of this, no limits are set to researchers’ ingenuity and there are many examples of frivolous experiments.”

https://www.aerzte-gegen-tierversuche.de/en/basic-infos/arguments/scientific-arguments#jumpheading-7

Not in the UK. You can debate whether they should, as this article does, but right now they do not.

https://publishing.rcseng.ac.uk/doi/pdf/10.1308/rcsbull.2021.9

It is an interesting tangent though, and I think occasional surgery on animals (who are anaesthetised) is ethically less dubious than testing - eg - new laxatives on live and awake ones.

ETA robotic surgery is increasingly common int.livhospital.com/robotic-surgery-the-incredible-global-stats/

Mammalian physiology is very similar across species, because the hearts and lungs are not very different whether you are a deer or a dog. The arrangement of the physiology may differ, but all omnivorous mammals have stomachs and intestines, and they are more similar than different. Nature is efficient like that. Ruminants are different, having four "stomachs" with which to process grass, which is why scientists use dogs and rats for research.

@FrizzyFrizbee , I don't think you and I can ever agree. I definitely think careful use of less intelligent species is justified.

The physiology is different, and effects of pharmaceuticals in one species are not necessarily replicable in another. I suggest you have a good read of this website Doctors Against Animal Experiments. Thank you for opportunity to post lots of links to it.

https://www.aerzte-gegen-tierversuche.de/en/

Just to plop the cat among the pigeons here..

Animal testing also benefits... animals. Those drugs and treatments and life saving surgeries that your pets benefit from. Guess where they were tested.

Eek. I guess this is what the robot world will eventually say to justify the use of humans for whatever gain they choose.

Thanks, but no. I spent several months considering this situation in the 1990s. The science has not changed much since then, and I formed my opinion based on what I learned. I remain firmly in the camp of the people who think that medical (not cosmetic) research on animals is absolutely legitimate provided the animal subjects are humanely treated.

I don't know enough about robotics and AI to have that conversation, except that if the bots have taken over, then why would they bother about all the messiness that humans seem to like. Easier to automate it all.

@Papyrophile
That’s 30 years ago, but fine, keep your opinions. I hope one day, humans will use their “intellectual curiosity” to develop and use methods of testing that really are genuinely valuable and that don’t cause suffering to other beings. Thankfully there are people working on that.

Yes you are right that we are not going to agree on this subject. Good night.

You're right - there are other routes than WLI to tackle obesity. So why are you blaming the food, alcohol, and pharmaceutical companies? Isn't the consumer to blame?

Exactly.
And to answer a pp who asked why we're continuing to develop more flea treatments when we already have flea treatments - because resistance.
I have cats and in the UK always used Frontline. I now live in Normandy and Frontline doesn't work, because French fleas and ticks have developed resistance to the active ingredient in Frontline. So new flea and tick treatments will always be needed.

I think there’s a shared responsibility. All the money spent on advertising, making foods and alcohol as consumable and accessible as possible, unnecessary calories and UPFs. Yeah of course we all have responsibility for ourselves but capitalism needs us to buy things, and it finds ways to manipulate us.