Cucumber Dildo

[Autumnlicious]

No, there aren't. And speaking out of you ass isn't going to make them anymore more viable.

Yes there are and being obnoxious doesn't make you any more right.

No, but the number of arguments made as well as the content do lend more credence to me being "right". Not to mention that I pointed out the fields of study, research done that would allow for your fanciful modeling scenario to ever come about.

I see a lot of "you think" and not a shred of evidence. No stats about waste, consumption. No well reasoned arguments as to why animals merit equal consideration from organisms like us. Nothing.

There is work being done to understand further and allow for potential models to be constructed, but to think at this time it is viable to completely ignore an entire branch of testing is plain and utter madness, the type of madness expected from an ideologue.

You do realise that the whole world isn't going to stop animal testing instantly don't you? I do nothing to hinder animal testing but I choose to financially support alternatives to it so that in future there will be more alternatives. If you want to support animal testing charities then go right ahead, I never suggested that anyone should do otherwise, I merely voiced my own opinion.

No, you just bleat mindlessly about computer simulations. Something that entire areas of research are devoted to, something that is incredibly complex to even scratch the surface (with regards to protein folding and interactions). A very, very difficult something, that becomes quite complex and requires even massive computing arrays (like Folding@Home) to make possible.

I see this huge, incredibly complex genre of work, and then I see your statements pertaining to replacing animal tests with computer simulations.

Now tell me, who is the crazy one here? What I have noted is a very complex and emergent area of research, while you are already planning on tossing out the bathwater, baby or not, metaphorically speaking. You're suggesting an application of a rather vast and recently established field of research (biophysics, bioinformatics et al). That's pretty visionary, some might even call it a pipe dream.

I call it insane.

There are alternatives to animal testing BTW, perhaps if you read the Dr. Hadwen Trust website you could learn about some of them. Here, I'll make it easy for you.

What are the alternatives to animal experiments?

There is a range of different methods that can be used to replace animal experiments. These include cell and tissue cultures, analytical technology, molecular research, post mortem studies, computer modelling, epidemiology (population studies), ethical clinical research with volunteer patients and healthy subjects, and the use of microbes such as bacteria.

Ok, so fucking what? I still see little argument as to why replace and merely note that the above advocates swapping out what some people consider one tool for a collection of tools. I ask, why not use animal testing and the above mentioned techniques in tandem?

Make a good argument against that.

Can alternatives actually replace animal experiments or are they used alongside?

Alternative methods are regularly replacing animal experiments and have already saved the lives of millions of animals worldwide. For example, cell cultures have replaced the use of monkeys in polio vaccine production; pregnancy tests are now conducted in test-tubes instead of in rabbits; batches of insulin are analysed chemically and not by tests in mice; and cell culture methods have replaced the use of thousands of live mice, sheep, rabbits, goats and pigs in the production of monoclonal antibodies. Alternative techniques have the potential to replace more animal experiments and offer more humane and better quality research.

Ok, once again, so fucking what? I see examples where established procedures were improved. Good. When you think about it, maintaining a cell culture and a vat of chemicals is easier than maintaining an entire critter, especially if you're doing tests that are not dependent on certain factors. That is excellent work.

However, I still don't see a rationale as to explain abandoning animal testing.

In medical research and testing the ‘whole organism’ of interest is the human body. Increasingly, safe and ethical studies of healthy and patient volunteers can be conducted using techniques such as neuroimaging, iontophoresis, ultrasound, stable isotope methods, microdosing, microdialysis, and genetic and other analyses of tissue samples.

Um, so? All that means is that for certain drugs and certain scenarios, using humans incurs minimal risk and also completes the human test component for certification for release to the public. Talk about two birds with one stone.

The system (as the body is referred to) may be ‘de-constructed’ into its component parts, studied at the molecular, cellular or tissue levels, and then ‘re-constructed’.

Only to a degree can the body be deconstructed, and that is dependent on how much we know of existing systems to deconstruct. Lacking knowledge of how certain systems interact, one can deconstruct out entire interactions without even knowing it. As always in modeling, there are limits and approximations that are made.

So we have something bragging about computer modeling. Big whoop.

Try make an objective case for animal freedom and I might pay you some attention, but otherwise you'll get no such response.

I'm a vegan and I've not commanded you to do anything, nor have I tried to persuade you to do anything. If anything it's the other way around, I've merely responded to questions regarding my view points whereas others have tried to convince me that I'm somehow wrong to want to reduce suffering.

Nice phrasing yourself as the victim. All we've done is call you out on unsupported claims, been unconvinced by your reasoning and been, frankly, surprised by the double-think that is going on.

But nah, we're really trying to convince you that minimizing suffering is wrong, despite asking for arguments as to how and why your efforts are devoted where they are.

Yep, that sure is it.