It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

vivisection/research self funded multi bil$ conspiracy?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   
I appreciate your honesty and considered opinion. I agree good things have come from early experiments, but now in the 21st century we should surely be looking for a better way.
Its a huge issue with much to be said on both sides, I hope the thread keeps going, I want to hear more from people about this and hear some new ideas. Thanks for your input freind.




posted on Dec, 13 2004 @ 08:34 AM
link   
This whole thing kind of reminds me of a Larry Niven story about a future where organ transplants had become so easy they used prisoners on death row for the organs. Long story short a guy was being tried of a crime punishable by death and at the end you learn he ran to many red lights.



posted on Dec, 13 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Niven is excellent - Ringworld stuff rules - go Louis Wu....

Even in the 21st cen, we still have to do it and I'll cite some examples that are pretty relevant. HIV - yes we can test on specific tissues, but to get a picture of what happens when treatments are applied you end up having to look at the entire body and all tissues and the effects. Sure, you could have a drug that deals with the virus and receptor sites, but what if takes out the liver at the same time or kills off the bone marrow - not good. Unfortunately only way to know is to cut a critter up a see.

Cancer research is far from over as well and the same needs arise - you have to test the effects across the whole body and in many cases, a critter is going to do this before any human trials occur.

There is also continuing work on antibiotics, since each new drug invariably gets made less effective as bacteria mutate - so new ones come out and they have to test - critters first then us. Yes they do it in a petri dish first but the effect has to be corroborated in a wholel system e.g. critter and to have no ill side effects before it gets to a human study....

Even homeopathic remedies had to be tested at one point and yes critters and humans died to find out. Lot's of natural cures that can kill or poison in the wrong dosage and much of our current stuff could be said to be homeopathic in origin, just produced in quantity in modern pharma plants but their source was found in a plant or other species in the wild. Just easier to make it in a lab than to harvest it in the wild e.g. penicillin is a good example and there are many others....



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Hi I'm new to the forum. I think that harming another species for our benefit is just wrong! whats more scientists always seem like really intelligent people, so why do something so cruel, when the knowledge they gain brings no practical info about the human body anyway?

Then I started to ask, why did all this cruelty in science start with the enlightenment period? this was meant to be an age of knowledge and reason but instead science just became cruel. Then I saw that enlightenment literally means to bring light, and who is the bringer of light??? LUCIFER!

Also, so much bad stuff happens in the world yet nobody wants wars to happen. Its obvious to me that these scientists are part of the illuminati.




top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join