Pro-Test: Standing Up For Science
Home > Blogs 

Last comments

In response to: Guardian - Singer backs primate research

timbird [Member]
This story is misrepresentative, I'm afraid. Singer wrote a letter to the Times on this point, making two important qualifications:

1. He was not sufficiently familiar with the experiments in question to form a full judgement based on all the facts; rather, he would agree that the experiments were justified if what was said about their benefits was accurate (thus your unqualified headline "Singer backs primate research" is totally inaccurate);

2. Professor Aziz should declare whether such experiments would be justifiable if conducted on a human being of like mental capacity, such as one with irreversible brain damage. If not, the corresponding animal experiment could not be justified. As far as I am aware, Aziz has not done so.

Singer’s letter is available here:

PermalinkPermalink 18/02/07 @ 01:54

In response to: Pro-Test in BB2 Documentary - Monday 27th, 9Pm

kittykitty [Member]
Firstly may I just say what a breath of fresh air that documentary was. For years we have only been being given one side of the story... the side that they media likes. I hope that the program has high lighted the facts and shown that Animal Testing is a nessesary thing.
I can understand the Last persons comment but I myself have many medical problems (although nothing on the same scale as those of the young lad in the program)and if it weren't for those animals and the people that do the research I would have died on four occasions to date. I therefore cannot be anything other than Pro-testing. I watching that program with extreme interest. For too long have I been berated by Animal Rights groups for basically, being ill. Its interesting that tat people think that paediphiles etc should be used as the proverbial 'guinea pigs'... So animals have rights not to be tested on but humans dont? For the record I am in NO WAY supporting paedophiles!
Why not concentrate your energies on fighting third world poverty or the incidence of Aids in South Africa?
Animals in my opinion cannot have 'rights'. They should - just like a human have the right to live and die in the most humane way possible. So long as the animals are not being used for cosmetic testing (and by cosmetic I refere to the testing of beauty products)then I am all for the testing to continue. I am a true animal lover and keep and breed exotic rodents. I love my animals a but this does not change my views on testing.

Good work guys!!
PermalinkPermalink 07/12/06 @ 10:46

In response to: Guardian - Singer backs primate research

cip_rochnaug [Member]
It's great that people are trying to bring this side of the arguement to light. I'm applying for a degree that may almost certainly involve animal testing in the third year for cures to genetic diseases. If experimenting on rats can bring an end to cystic fibrosis and downs syndrom surely it's worth it!
PermalinkPermalink 05/12/06 @ 14:25

In response to: Pro-Test in BB2 Documentary - Monday 27th, 9Pm

bms26 [Member]
I watched this programme last night and was sickened by what I saw. I cannot believe that people can do this to another living being. I am a Senior Biomedical Scientist and have been for almost 10 years. I felt ashamed to call myself a scientist after watching that.
I understand and agree that testing needs to take place, but to use a being, such as an animal to discover if say, a drug acts in a certain manner is madness.
Animals are not entirely the same as humans
and so should not be used as a model. What gives us the right to inflict such crude experiments on another animal? They have rights too. Just because they do not talk does not mean we have the right to carry out such invasive and cruel acts without the permission of the animal. If such acts were carried out on a person who was unable to talk or communicate with another person, their human rights would be infringed. What makes an animal any different? There are alternatives, such as other human beings to test on. There are so many cruel and evil people in the world, such as for example, Paedophiles. Why can't you carry out the tests that are required on these individuals? They do not deserve the same rights as you or I and the cost of transport, food, shelter etc is already being paid for by the taxpayer so no extra cost will be incurred. At least they are of the same species. I do not agree with some of SPEAK's actions but I do agree that animal testing is unecessary and an infrigement of their rights. Animal testing should STOP, NOW.
PermalinkPermalink 28/11/06 @ 23:01

In response to: Guardian - Singer backs primate research

mike niddrie [Member]
I think it's good that someone who is in
support of animal testing is finally
allowing themselves to see the other
side of the story. In the documentary
(which was an eye opener by the way)
they just shouted and even ripped up
that pro testing poster. Hopefully the
fact that the founder of animal
liberation will lead to more
peaceful/quiet protests. Violent mobs
cannot make much of a difference these
days in countries like this one. I can
see this and I haven't even done my
GCSEs yet. Why can't the protesters see

PermalinkPermalink 28/11/06 @ 19:03

In response to: New blogging software!

7faa1ba24cf8a6a3d6041d9e11f88478 [Visitor] ·
PermalinkPermalink 02/11/06 @ 01:55

In response to: New blogging software!

richard [Member]
it looks lovely!
PermalinkPermalink 21/10/06 @ 18:37

Information and Media

August 2020
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
<< <     
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30



XML Feeds

What is RSS?

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 16
Home | About | Facts | Blogs | Action | Get Involved | Contact | Links | Donate | Site Map Pro-Test 2006 (some rights reserved)

powered by