That speaks volumes. To truly trust something, we need some form of standard for validation testing. We don't just believe or accept anything. Hence peer-reviewed health journal articles. These articles are published with the upmost sense of being objective. No evidence, weakens a claim. In a courtroom, overlooked.
Likewise, you can ignore everything on the entire forum thread if you choose to. 
Pharma is a VERY LUCRATIVE industry in the U.S....
Mother on at least 8 deadly meds - "doctor prescribed"...from what I can see, it's killing her.
Same story. No talking her out of taking them - she "trusts" her "doctor".
Industry of Evil, as far as I'm concerned.
Actos - is a diabetes drug that is known to cause cancer, in some cases in less than 2 years of taking it...it is still being prescribed in the U.S.
It's banned in France, I believe.
Same story - can't talk my aunt out of taking Actos. She "trusts" her "doctor". 6 months ago, her white blood cells is registered to have gone haywire...
Is this because you don't have a national health service, the doctors essentially just hand out what the patient pays for, do you think? I remember being pretty shocked at the drugs Michael Jackson's doctor 'prescribed' him and seemed to get away with. That would never be allowed in this country. Doctors are very easily struck off for any slight deviation from the GMC regulations.
To further reinforce post #55, see post#48.
The USA is something else altogether, truly a master piece on how you gain control of the masses to do as you please. But with every nation, every culture, different opinions on different issues, these are the subtle notions that influence the governing of each nations health care.
For, but only for reasonably necessary products and medical benefits.
For, but only for reasonably necessary products and medical benefits.
Labaz, but how would you decide what is recognised as a "necessary product" ?
**Most if not all pharmaceutical companies will be reluctant to indulge themselves in finding cures or treatments for obscure minority illnesses. The orphan drug funds that governments set aside for particular research wouldn't be enough to fund companies in drug discovery for degenerative disease (as an example). The time and 'profit' needs to be justified.
Pharma is a VERY LUCRATIVE industry in the U.S....
Mother on at least 8 deadly meds - "doctor prescribed"...from what I can see, it's killing her.
Same story. No talking her out of taking them - she "trusts" her "doctor".
Industry of Evil, as far as I'm concerned.
Actos - is a diabetes drug that is known to cause cancer, in some cases in less than 2 years of taking it...it is still being prescribed in the U.S.
It's banned in France, I believe.
Same story - can't talk my aunt out of taking Actos. She "trusts" her "doctor". 6 months ago, her white blood cells is registered to have gone haywire...
Is this because you don't have a national health service, the doctors essentially just hand out what the patient pays for, do you think? I remember being pretty shocked at the drugs Michael Jackson's doctor 'prescribed' him and seemed to get away with. That would never be allowed in this country. Doctors are very easily struck off for any slight deviation from the GMC regulations.
Lots of things I can't stomach about the "healthcare" industry here...
I don't know that it can be attributed to a lack of national health service....I think it is more in the lack of care and conscientiousness in the "healthcare professionals"...who just can't wait to pen those prescriptions to get their patient out of their office (after they take a quick look at the charts their medical assistants hand them)...
The more patients they process, the more money they make.
koyannisqaatsi
sadistic acts on our fellow species and for what gain
very against testing on animals
emotive reasons less scientific
Dying is all fine and dandy, when the time comes just do it.
It's the living while dying or already dead that people could try to avoid...hooked up to machines, wearing diapers, shitting and pissing their pants cuz they no longer control their bodies, walking on six legs instead of two, hacking phlegm more often than breathing, walking round like a zombies because they no longer remember their names or even if they are living or dead...
Be dead or be alive...it's the in between the two state thing that sure is an awful sight to see and a damn burden for relatives/society.
Animals are here to serve and feed us. Just saying.
Q: Is the same true for the opposite ? Humans are here to serve and feed other animals?
Sharks have to eat too.
Why not?
ARE YOU FOR OR AGAINST ANIMAL TESTING?
Background
A History of Animals and Chess
Animal themes can make popular board games, especially for people who are not normally gamers. Modern releases like Takenoko, where players care for a panda, and Hive, an abstract battle between insects, have found many fans. Arimaa, another modern abstract, uses a chess set but all pieces represent animals.
But using animals as a theme for board games isn't a modern idea. Traditional board games, starting thousands of years ago, have used animals as their theme. A number of broad subcategories have come into existence over the intervening years that reflect the natures of animals and their relationship to humans.
The oldest animal themes, like the oldest games, treat animals as racing teams. Egyptian racing games, like dogs & jackals, used animal shapes as an alternative to simply colouring the pieces, and this was often done with some other race games like senet. Later games used horses as race animals, though in teams as opposed to the modern all-against-all nature of the sport. In nyout the pieces are called horses, and an early mediaeval Chinese game (confusingly called xiang qi, but not Chinese chess) had teams of horses racing against one another.
After this came chess, which includes war animals in its armies. The modern knights were originally cavalry, and the bishops of our game were the war elephants of earlier cultures. Some expanded chess games included camels as war mounts, too. Japanese chess variants went further with the animal theme, but these were more abstract.
The use of animals in such board games can only generate the idea that they were respected, feared, adored and in some cases worshipped. So there is a clear link between chess and animals, which got me thinking about animal testing. We can already see the depiction and the 'use of animals' in board games to have been very beneficial to humans, but how about the real life application?
Animal Testing
Animal rights are widely known and accepted in many cultures across the globe to varying extents but despite this there are topics and events which happen every year that often cause much debate and controversy in the public and media news outlets, journals and forums.
From high profile support from celebrities, outspoken models from the fashion world and animal campaigners, animal rights is an issue that has sparked outrage and even government debate.
Animal Testing can be narrowed down to a simple explanation of "using animals to experiment on" with the understanding of the usage, safety, toxicity and effectiveness of drugs, chemicals, pesticides, cosmetics, household products and understanding human biochemistry & anatomy. It also includes exploring new fabric trends or taxidermy sculptures (art of stuffing or filling skins of animals) to observational (behavioural) studies and so forth. So anything which permits or renders the use of animals for prerequisite studies.
The Discussion
Arguments are powered by both moral and scientific reasons, logical and rational ideas to justify an action response, its important to question the necessity and justification of a wide range of issues regarding contemporary affairs.
Feel free to share your views regarding animal testing, on whether it is an issue, how it effects research and its commercial application, the morals and ethics behind the intentions, the current techniques, how you plan to combat it or rather improve the current models etc.
ARE YOU FOR OR AGAINST ANIMAL TESTING?
References & Further Reading
[1]A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation, Medical Research Modernization Committee, Christopher Anderegg et al, 2006
link: (http://www.mrmcmed.org/critical_look.pdf)
[2]Animal Testing: Pro's and Cons, About Animal Testing
link: (http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.html)
[3] Advice and Welfare of Animals, Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
link: (http://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/laboratory/areanimalexperimentsnecessary)
[4] Game Themes from History, Cyningstan Traditional Board Games Blog, 2006
link: (http://www.cyningstan.com/news/492/latest-news)
[5] Takenoko Board Game, Antoine Buaza, 2011
link: (http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/70919/takenoko)
It's a weretrich! been a while since one crept up on me.
"I will not tolerate nonsense posts."
Then you go ahead and post that.
kaynight wrote:
Animals are here to serve and feed us. Just saying.
No, they are not.
Typical British Royalist!
They'd revolt just like the colonies did if they could.
Knowlege from the depths of the universe needs no peer-review , kiwi.
It is entirely your prerogative to chuck everything I say in the garbage, though
.