 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / September 2007Help Stop Animal Testing
I copied this from another group, thought it was worth passing along... ========================================================= To: All European Citizens Who Want to Help Primates This is a critical time in Europe. The European Commission (EC) is currently revising the law - known as Directive 86/609 - that governs animal experiments across Europe. 86/609 is a hugely powerful Directive that has power of life and death over millions of animals across the continent - setting out minimum standards for how and whether animals can be used in experiments. A staggering ten million animals are used in outdated and wasteful experiments in European laboratories every year. The Directive is supposed to ensure "the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes" but the huge numbers show that it's just not doing that. There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban all primate tests as part of the revised law. Written Declaration 40/2007 urges the European Parliament to use the revision process of Directive 86/609/EC as an opportunity to establish a timetable for replacing the use of all primates in scientific experiments with alternatives. This is Urgent. The Declaration will fall on 7th September and the signatures of half the MEPs in the Parliament is needed by then. If you care about animals visit the following website to urge them to sign Written Declaration 40/2007. http://www.navs.org.uk/take_action/39/0/885/ If you want to do more:- Please write to the European Commission and ask them to ban primate tests. To help, a prepared letter can be found at http://www.eceae.org/saveprimates/en/action.html The address is:- Mr. Stavros Dimas Commissioner for Environment European Commission B-1049, Brussels, Belgium Please tell all your colleagues and friends in the UK and Europe about Written Declaration 40/2007. For information on Alternatives to Animal Testing and why they work visit the Dr Hadwen Trust http://www.drhadwentrust.org/ For further information:- http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2987 http://www.buav.org  SignatureHugs, CatNipped See all my masters here: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/ > I copied this from another group, thought it was worth passing along... > [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > See all my masters here:http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/ How good of you to pass this around. > > There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban all > > primate tests as part of the revised law. And from then on, in what will new possibilities for drugs be able to be tested? No, testing in bacteria, or similar systems, won't do it; the systems are not complex enough. Are you willing to take a drug that has only been tested in simple systems? Proper housing and food etc. for primates, and all animals: yes, of course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you willing for that to happen? Martha >> > There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban all >> > primate tests as part of the revised law. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Martha They could test on trolls ;) -bonbon > Proper housing and food etc. for primates, and all animals: yes, of > course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you > willing for that to happen? Not sure if you are aware of this, but all drugs get tested on humans before being approved for general use. SignatureVictor M. Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM) Send your spam here: uce@ftc.gov Email me here: pistorLITTER@BOXaustin.rr.com >> Proper housing and food etc. for primates, and all animals: yes, of >> course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you >> willing for that to happen? > > Not sure if you are aware of this, but all drugs get tested on humans > before being approved for general use. Yes, and aren't the drugs FOR us? It saddens me so much -- the attitude that animals are there for our needs and purposes. I don't believe the food chain is a license for the decisions that we make on how other animals will live and die for us. Rhonda > >> Proper housing and food etc. for primates, and all animals: yes, of > >> course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Rhonda I strongly agree . In my world I do believe it`s about ethics - I want no animal to suffer for my well-being. Bettina > I strongly agree . > In my world I do believe it`s about ethics - I want no animal to > suffer for my well-being. Agreed. SignatureVictor M. Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM) Send your spam here: uce@ftc.gov Email me here: pistorLITTER@BOXaustin.rr.com >> I strongly agree . >> In my world I do believe it`s about ethics - I want no animal to >> suffer for my well-being. > Agreed. If it's an issue of me doing without the livesaving drugs or the drugs being tested on humans instead of animals in the earliest, most dangerous stages, I'll go for animal testing. It's like the issue of using baby pigs for doctors to practice invasive emergency techniques on. This is done because the pigs are similar in size to newborn infants. I can't imagine any human mother subjecting her child to such practice for inexperienced personnel - or being real understanding if such practice were banned and when she brought her child to the ER following an accident, the ER doctor turned out to have never done the procedure on a living creature before. --- Cheryl > If it's an issue of me doing without the livesaving drugs or the drugs > being tested on humans instead of animals in the earliest, most dangerous > stages, I'll go for animal testing. I don't agree with that human-centric worldview. Heck, I shudder to think all the horrible experiments pet food manufacturers do, and those are for the benefit of my kids. SignatureVictor M. Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM) Send your spam here: uce@ftc.gov Email me here: pistorLITTER@BOXaustin.rr.com >>> I strongly agree . >>> In my world I do believe it`s about ethics - I want no animal to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > being tested on humans instead of animals in the earliest, most dangerous > stages, I'll go for animal testing. As I said in another post, with the technology we have today animal testing is not only cruel and unnecessary, but since animals have different genetic make-up than humans, animal testing gives us incorrect data. > It's like the issue of using baby pigs for doctors to practice invasive > emergency techniques on. This is done because the pigs are similar in size [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ER following an accident, the ER doctor turned out to have never done the > procedure on a living creature before. Most medical students "practice" on corpses of humans - cutting up baby pigs does not give them the "correct" physiological information. So, physically and emotionally (since cutting a pig would not give you the same trepidation as cutting a baby), there is not practical value to be had in doing so. As much as I would not like an inexperienced surgeon to operate on my baby, neither would I want one who had only operated on pigs! If there are no corpses available, I don't see why computer simulations could not suffice - we use them for teaching airplane pilots (who hold the lives of everyone aboard in their hands), why not design one for prospective pediatric surgeons. Hugs, CatNipped > --- > Cheryl Catnipped wrote: > As I said in another post, with the technology we have today animal testing > is not only cruel and unnecessary, but since animals have different genetic > make-up than humans, animal testing gives us incorrect data. and > If there are no corpses available, I don't see why computer simulations > could not suffice ... I wish I could agree with you, but I don't. The simulations and technology etc are just not good enough yet. And since chimps have 95-99.5% [estimates vary] the same DNA as us, they are the best animal to test on. And they give us the best possible data. Mind, I hope the simulations and technology improve so that such can be used! Martha > > Proper housing and food etc. for primates, and all animals: yes, of > > course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Send your spam here: u...@ftc.gov > Email me here: pistorLIT...@BOXaustin.rr.com This is true. My son was born @ 26/ 40 @ 2lb 6oz, & was fighting for his life in intensive care @ three weeks old with pneumonia, & a heart valve that wouldn't close. The dilemma was that he was too ill to take to theater to close the valve manually, but without it he had deoxygenated blood circling around his body. In the end, we agreed to sign a form from the home office, agreeing that we would take no action against the hospital if things didn't work out the way they hoped it would. We duly signed the form, because we were between a rock & a hard place, & we were loosing him fast!! 8hours after the injection, Jack turned a corner & 3 days later he was well enough to go into theater to have his leaky valve closed. Today, Jack is almost 14(tomorrow!), he is 5' 10" tall, & loves football, & anything that involves lots of stamina. so, yes, drugs are tested on humans, & we were only too pleased to have the option of trying out an untested drug @ that time, because Jack would have died without it. Sheelagh>"o"< >> > There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban >> > all [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > course. But if we don't test on animals, we test on us. Are you > willing for that to happen? We now have enough information on genetics, physiology, molecular science, etc. - along with enough computing technology - to successfully "test" new drugs with computer simulations. In fact, since most animals, even chimps, do not have the same molecular or genetic make-up as humans, testing on animals does not tell us anything about how those drugs will work on humans. Not only is animal testing unnecessary, it is meaningless as well. Hugs, CatNipped > Martha > We now have enough information on genetics, physiology, molecular science, > etc. - along with enough computing technology - to successfully "test" new > drugs with computer simulations. In fact, since most animals, even chimps, Exactly. Molecular simulation is a fascinating field. SignatureVictor M. Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM) Send your spam here: uce@ftc.gov Email me here: pistorLITTER@BOXaustin.rr.com
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.