OMG 🤭 I needed your sense of humor so bad this morning. I was in a real pit and your wit has started something positive. I just want you to know how much I appreciated it. 🙏
There are also many effective alternatives to animal testing in the case of vivisection for medical and pharmaceutical purposes. This is good news, since animals have been proven time and again to be poor models for the study of human injury and disease. But if this is the case, you might ask, why are animals still used in medical and pharmaceutical research at all? One reason is momentum. The tradition of vivisection is deeply ingrained in this research such that status quo bias is a powerful factor in perpetuating it. Another reason is money. Researchers receive grant money based on the number of papers they publish in scientific literature, and it is both easier and faster to use animals as test subjects than it is to undertake human-based research. Finally, while the FDA has often failed to show that the results of animal tests can be extrapolated to humans, companies still use animals in testing in order to protect themselves in the case of a lawsuit. This means that unreliable animal tests are giving rise to unreliable medical and pharmaceutical results, which result in unreliable treatments and medications that are themselves excused by the legal system because of the unreliable animal tests underpinning them. It is altogether a vicious circle that could be eliminated with a more sensible approach to medical and pharmaceutical research that does not involve animals at all.
Only resource i found on page that actually talk about alternative, work (dr. hadwen trust site dead, vivisectioninformation blog from 2012 and almost all linked site dead), and not video is https://aavs.org/
Alternative such as:
Use part of slaughterhouse animal (shift animal burden onto flesh farm industry) (BCOP, ICE)
Use method that still use animal testing but less (3T3, NHK, UDP, in vitro pyrogenicity)
Use in vitro (lab grown) cell membrane from human cell (Corrositex, EPISKINTM, EpiDermTM) only for skin test
Use different animal (TER, LLNA)
Use bacteria (Ames)
Original text make seem like animal test not necessary, but cited source say nothing of that. Only Ames even vegan (if you not consider bacteria animal too).
If post thing without understand, false information spread way faster because expect poster do due diligence.
Ok, straight to human testing then.
OMG 🤭 I needed your sense of humor so bad this morning. I was in a real pit and your wit has started something positive. I just want you to know how much I appreciated it. 🙏
Glad to help.
There are also many effective alternatives to animal testing in the case of vivisection for medical and pharmaceutical purposes. This is good news, since animals have been proven time and again to be poor models for the study of human injury and disease. But if this is the case, you might ask, why are animals still used in medical and pharmaceutical research at all? One reason is momentum. The tradition of vivisection is deeply ingrained in this research such that status quo bias is a powerful factor in perpetuating it. Another reason is money. Researchers receive grant money based on the number of papers they publish in scientific literature, and it is both easier and faster to use animals as test subjects than it is to undertake human-based research. Finally, while the FDA has often failed to show that the results of animal tests can be extrapolated to humans, companies still use animals in testing in order to protect themselves in the case of a lawsuit. This means that unreliable animal tests are giving rise to unreliable medical and pharmaceutical results, which result in unreliable treatments and medications that are themselves excused by the legal system because of the unreliable animal tests underpinning them. It is altogether a vicious circle that could be eliminated with a more sensible approach to medical and pharmaceutical research that does not involve animals at all.
https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/we-need-to-test-on-animals
Such as?
There are resources on that page. That is an area I know nothing about sadly.
Only resource i found on page that actually talk about alternative, work (dr. hadwen trust site dead, vivisectioninformation blog from 2012 and almost all linked site dead), and not video is https://aavs.org/
Alternative such as:
Original text make seem like animal test not necessary, but cited source say nothing of that. Only Ames even vegan (if you not consider bacteria animal too).
If post thing without understand, false information spread way faster because expect poster do due diligence.