FUCK YEAH POOR VEGANS!

FUCK YEAH POOR VEGANS! This blog's mission is to dispel the myth that veganism is something only privileged middle-/upper-class people do, as well as discussing issues of poverty and veganism in general. For more info about this blog and the righteous babe who made it, click the "About Me" link.

There is a reason why Wikipedia lists “Plant perception” under the paranormal and not with actual sciences.

Reblogged from soycrates

Worrisome new Canadian food regulation could prevent some veggie meats (simulated meat products) from being sold

Reblogged from soycrates

soycrates:

The regulation states that “No person shall sell a simulated meat product that resembles cooked sausage, meat loaf, meat by-product loaf, meat roll, meat lunch, or luncheon meat” unless that product meets certain “protein content” percentages. While most vegan meat analogues will pass the protein content requirement, having this regulation in place might jeopardize foods that meet these requirements but come under scrutiny by food and drug regulators with a strong bias against plant-based simulated food products. It also erroneously suggests that the primary reason for vegan meat analogues is protein instead of taste. While meat analogues can be good sources of protein, unlike our meat eating counterparts they’re not usually our main source of protein.

Meanwhile, gelatin can contain ash and sulphur, “mechanically tenderized” meat products are totally okay, fish don’t count as an animal ingredient, there are no protein requirements on regular meat products or other vitamin requirements except for “special varieties” and dehydrated meat, and meat sausages with filler (“product extender”) are actually allowed to HAVE LESS PROTEIN than vegetarian and vegan meats on the market (9 percent as opposed to 11 percent) while also being allowed to have more fat than vegan meats. 

Let me repeat: they know that the average fast food hot dog/sausage made with filler has less protein than similarly shaped/flavoured vegan foods. So they have lower protein requirements for them.

Texas Official Is Freaking Out About School 'Meatless Monday'

 By this guy’s logic (and the school district’s health motivations), would he fight for the rights of children to freely eat chocolate if the school district banned it? Or potato chips? Or whatever other unhealthy thing the school might decide to ban for just one day out of the week?

Freedom" my ass. 

"Vegan zombies crave red wine!"

I just stumbled across a movie called Attack of the Vegan Zombies (2010; trailer here), and since I don’t have anything better to do with my time, I’m going to do a stream of consciousness type movie review. I should probably apologize in advance, because I’m sure this movie will be really fucking awful.

It’s about a couple of white people (Dionne and Joe) who, in an effort to follow the American dream of getting people inebriated for profit, start their own vineyard and then promptly fail at it. In desperation, within the first five minutes of the film they make the entirely plausible and not at all absurd decision to beg Dionne’s witchy mother to cast a spell on the crops or something to make all their problems go away, even though her mother is still butthurt over the fact that Dionne never became an uber-witch like she was supposed to, and they would surely face financial ruin if it all failed. 

After much protest, the mother agrees, but requests human blood for the spell (of course). We then get a scene that suggests sex is about to happen. We then get a scene implying pretty rough sex just happened, as Joe is asleep and his wife is collecting blood from the scratch marks on his chest. I guess squeezing her tampon into the witch’s brew wasn’t good enough; she had to secretly steal this ingredient without her husband’s consent.

 It works. 

Cue two young blonde college girls heading out to the vineyard as hired help for the weekend. 
Girl 1: “They’re probably going to put us up in some migrant labor shack or something.”
Girl 2: “Don’t be silly! We’re white!”

Cue car full of overly excitable nerd-boy stereotypes and their professor also heading to the vineyard. 
Boy 1: *high pitched nerd voice* “You mean we get to drink the wine too?!?”
Boy 2: *insert cliche chess club joke here*

The boys make it to the farm first, and hear about the two “athletes” also coming to help.
Nerd-boys: “Oh, no! Jocks!”
But as the boys see that these “jocks” are actually hot cheerleaders, they try not to instantly spray their pants as they try to impress the girls with their vast knowledge of… umm…. dirt.
Girl 2: “Ugh… nerds.”
Nerd-boy 1: “I know Klingon.”
Girls: “UUUGGGGGGHHHHH….”
And this is pretty much how they interact with each other for the rest of their lives

As the professor and nerds start running random tests on things around the farm (which wasn’t even in their job description), they start to notice strange levels on their science machines. It was refreshing to hear the term “meddling kids” outside of Scooby Doo. However, it was fucking annoying to see yet another scene where a pervy old professor hits on his young students, complete with ejaculating sunscreen bottle. 

After some grape vines chase down a neighbor and attack the professor, the witch-mother finally drops the crucial info that the grape vines might want to kill everyone, and they all retreat to the farm house. 

I’m halfway through the movie, and I still have no clue why it has anything to do with veganism. 

Okay, the girls decide to steal a bottle of wine and start drinking now. Oh, the nerd-boys are plotting how to take advantage of the situation for sex. Cool. Totally original. Ah! Obligatory girl-on-girl scene! This movie is really barreling down the list of top 10 horror movie cliches! 

Now that the movie is 2/3 over, we finally have our first zombie after one of the girls is attacked by the bouquet next to the bed which just happened to have a grape vine in it. She promptly wanders into the wine cellar and drinks a whole tank of wine. So, apparently these are alcoholic zombies. Maybe the wine is vegan? Maybe she was vegan before she turned? Still, no one suspects anything.

They find the zombified neighbor wandering around the fields and unceremoniously behead him. Now the jig is up and everyone knows some serious shit is going down.
Witch-mother: “These zombies are vegan!”
Nerd-boy 2: “Nuh, uh! I saw some movies!”
Witch-mom: “It’s true! And they only crave one thing….”
Me: “The total abolition of animal exploitation and speciesism????????”
Witch-mom: “……….red, red wine.
Vegans everywhere, probably: image

Dear, sweet Seitan, should I even go on?

It turns out the plant-zombies want to drink their blood, since they consumed some of the wine earlier in the film. This puts them squarely in the category of not fucking vegan in the slightest

Cartwheeling cheerleader zombies.

Okay, I’m sorry. This is the worst shit ever. I can’t go on. No actual vegans. Literally everyone was white. Gratuitous college girl “sexual experimentation.” I’m done.

If you’ve read this far, I again apologize, but know that it wasn’t even half as bad as actually having to watch this shit. 

WOAH! WOAH! WOAH! HOLD UP! WHGAT?!??!?!??

Reblogged from fuckyeahveganlife

WOAH! WOAH! WOAH! HOLD UP! WHGAT?!??!?!??

give-a-fuck-about-nature:


give-a-fuck-about-nature:

50 DEADLY CONSEQUENCES OF LAB ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS From US Doctors Group Americans for Medical Advancement
1.Smoking was thought non-carcinogenic because smoking-related cancer is difficult to reproduce in lab animals. Many continued to smoke and to die from cancer.[2] 2.Benzene was not withdrawn from use as an industrial chemical despite clinical and epidemiological evidence that exposure caused leukemia in humans, because manufacturer-supported tests failed to reproduce leukemia in mice.[1]3.Animal experiments on rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, mice, monkeys, and baboons revealed no link between glass fibers and cancer. Not until 1991, due to human studies, did OSHA label it carcinogenic.[3][4][5]4.Though arsenic was a known human carcinogen for decades, scientists still found little evidence in animals to support the conclusion as late as 1977.[6] This was the accepted view until it was produced in lab animals.[7][8][9]5.Many continued to be exposed to asbestos and die because scientists could not reproduce the cancer in lab animals. 6.Pacemakers and heart valves were delayed in development because of physiological differences between animals they were designed on and humans. 7.Animal models of heart disease failed to show that a high cholesterol/high fat diet increases the risk of coronary artery disease. Instead of changing their eating habits to prevent the disease, people continued their lifestyles with a false sense of security. 8.Patients received medications that were harmful and/or ineffective due to animal models of stroke. 9.Animal studies predicted that beta-blockers would not lower blood pressure. This withheld their development. [10][11][12] Even animal experimenters admitted the failure of animal models of hypertension in this regard, but in the meantime, there were thousands more stroke victims. 10.Surgeons thought they had perfected radial keratotomy, surgery performed to enable better vision without glasses, on rabbits, but the procedure blinded the first human patients. The rabbit cornea is able to regenerate on the underside, whereas the human cornea can only regenerate on the surface. Surgery is now performed only on the surface.11.Combined heart lung transplants were also “perfected” on animals, but the first 3 patients all died within 23 days.[13] Of 28 patients operated on between 1981 and 1985, 8 died perioperatively, and 10 developed obliterative bronchiolitis, a lung complication that the experimental dogs did not get. Of those 10, 4 died and 3 never breathed again without the aid of a respirator. Obliterative bronchiolitis turned out to be the most important risk of the operation.[14]12.Cyclosporin A inhibits organ rejection, and its development was watershed in the success of transplant operations. Had human evidence not overwhelmed unpromising evidence from animals, it would never have been released.[15]13.Animal experiments failed to predict the kidney toxicity of the general anesthetic methoxyflurane. Many people lost all kidney function. 14.Animal experiments delayed the use of muscle relaxants during general anesthesia. 15.Research on animals failed to reveal bacteria as a cause of ulcers and delayed treating ulcers with antibiotics. 16.More than half of the 198 new medications released between 1976 and 1985 were either withdrawn or relabeled secondary to severe unpredicted side effects.[16] These side effects included complications like lethal dysrhythmias, heart attacks, kidney failure, seizures, respiratory arrest, liver failure, and stroke, among others. 17.Flosint, an arthritis medication, was tested on rats, monkeys and dogs; all tolerated the medication well. In humans, however it caused deaths. 18.Zelmid, an antidepressant, was tested on rats and dogs without incident. It caused severe neurological problems in humans. 
19. Nomifensine, another antidepressant, was linked to kidney and liver failure, anemia, and death in humans. Animal testing had given it a clean, side effect-free bill of health. 20. Amrinone, a medication used for heart failure, was tested on numerous animals and was released without trepidation. Humans developed thrombocytopenia, a lack of the type of blood cells that are needed for clotting. 21. Fialuridine, an antiviral medication, caused liver damage in 7 out of 15 people. 5 eventually died and 2 more needed liver transplants.[17] It worked well in woodchucks.[18][19]22.Clioquinol, an antidiarrheal, passed tests in rats, cats, dogs and rabbits. It was pulled off the shelves all over the world in 1982 after it was found to cause blindness and paralysis in humans.23. Eraldin, a medication for heart disease, caused 23 deaths despite the fact that no untoward effects could be shown in animals. When introduced, scientists said it noted for the thoroughness of the toxicity studies on animals. It caused blindness and deaths in humans. Afterwards, scientists were unable to reproduce these results in animals.[20]24. Opren, an arthritis medication, killed 61 people. Over 3500 cases of severe reactions have been documented. Opren had been tested on monkeys and other animals without problems.25. Zomax, another arthritis drug, killed 14 people and caused many more to suffer. 26. The dose of isoproterenol, a medication used to treat asthma, was worked out in animals. Unfortunately, it was much too toxic for humans. 3500 asthmatics died in Great Britain alone due to overdose. It is still difficult to reproduce these results in animals.[21][22][23][24][25][26] 27. Methysergide, a medication used to treat headaches, led to retroperitoneal fibrosis, or severe scarring of the heart, kidneys, and blood vessels in the abdomen.[27] Scientists have been unable to reproduce this in animals.[28]28. Suprofen, an arthritis drug, was withdrawn from the market when patients suffered kidney toxicity. Prior to its release researchers had this to say about the animal tests:[29][30] “…excellent safety profile. No …cardiac, renal, or CNS [central nervous system] effects in any species.” 29. Surgam, another arthritis drug, was designed to have a stomach protection factor that would prevent stomach ulcers, a common side effect of many arthritis drugs. Although promising in lab animal tests, ulcers occurred in human trials.[31][32]30. Selacryn, a diuretic, was thoroughly tested on animals. It was withdrawn in 1979 after 24 people died from drug induced liver failure.[33][34]31. Perhexiline, a heart medication, was withdrawn when it produced liver failure that had not been predicted by animal studies. Even when they knew they were looking for a particular type of liver failure, they could not induce it in animals.[35]32. Domperidone, designed as a treatment for nausea and vomiting, made human hearts beat irregularly and had to be withdrawn. Scientists were unable to reproduce this in dogs even with 70 times the normal dose.[36][37]33. Mitoxantrone, a treatment for cancer produced heart failure in humans. It was extensively tested on dogs, which did not manifest this effect.[38][39]34. Carbenoxalone was supposed to prevent formation of gastric ulcers but caused people to retain water to the point of heart failure. After scientists knew what it did to humans they tested it on rats, mice, monkeys, rabbits, without reproducing this effect. [40][41]35. Clindamycin, an antibiotic, causes a bowel condition called pseudomembranous colitis. It was tested in rats and dogs every day for one year. They tolerate doses 10 times greater than humans.[42][43][44]36. Animal experiments did not support the efficacy of valium-type drugs during development or after.[45][46]37. Pharmacia & Upjohn discontinued clinical tests of its Linomide (roquinimex) tablets for the treatment of multiple sclerosis after several patients suffered heart attacks. Of 1,200 patients, 8 suffered heart attacks as a result of taking the medication. Animal experiments had not predicted this. 38. Cylert (pemoline), a medication used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder, caused liver failure in 13 children. Eleven either died or needed a liver transplant. 39. Eldepryl (selegiline), a medication used to treat Parkinson’s disease, was found to induce very high blood pressure. This side effect has not been seen in animals, where it is used to treat senile dementia and endocrine disorders. 40. The diet drug combination of fenfluramine and dexfenfluramine was linked to heart valve abnormalities and taken off the market although animal studies had never revealed heart abnormalities.”[47]41. The diabetes medication troglitazone, better known as Rezulin, was tested on animals without significant problems, but caused liver damage in humans. The company admitted that at least one patient had died and another had to undergo a liver transplant as a result.[48]42. The plant digitalis has been used for centuries to treat heart disorders. However, clinical trials of the digitalis-derived drug were delayed because it caused high blood pressure in animals. Human evidence overrode. As a result, digoxin, an analogue of digitalis, has saved countless lives. Many more could it have survived had digitalis been released sooner.[49][50][51][52]43. FK 506, now called Tacrolimus, is an anti-rejection agent that was almost shelved before proceeding to clinical trials due to severe toxicity in animals.[53][54] Animal studies suggested that the combination of FK 506 with cyclosporin might prove more useful.[55]  In fact, just the opposite proved true in humans.[56]44. Animal experiments suggested that corticosteroids would help septic shock, a severe bacterial infection of the blood.[57][58]  Unfortunately, humans reacted differently. This treatment increased  the death rate in cases of septic shock.[59] 45. Despite the ineffectiveness of penicillin in his rabbits, Alexander Fleming used the antibiotic on a very sick patient since he had nothing else to try. Luckily, Fleming’s initial tests were not on guinea pigs or hamsters, it kills them. Howard Florey, the Nobel Prize winner credited with co-discovering and manufacturing penicillin, stated: “How fortunate we didn’t have these animal tests in the 1940s, for penicillin would probably never been granted a license, and possibly the whole field of antibiotics might never have been realized.”46. Fluoride was withheld as a cavity preventative initially because it caused cancer in rats.[60][61][62]47. The notoriously dangerous drugs thalidomide and DES were tested in animals and released. Tens of thousands suffered and died as a result. 48. Animal experiments misinformed researchers about how rapidly HIV replicates. Based on this false information, patients did not receive prompt therapies and their lives were shortened.49. Animal-based research delayed the development of the polio vaccine, according to Dr. Albert Sabin, its inventor. The first rabies and polio vaccines worked well on animals but crippled or killed the people who tried them.50. Researchers who work with animals have succumbed to illness and death due to exposure to diseases that though harmless to the animal host (such as Hepatitis B) but kill humans. Time, money, and resources devoted to these experiments could have gone to human-based research. Clinical studies, in vitro research, autopsies, post-marketing drug surveillance, computer modeling, epidemiology, and genetic research pose no hazard to humans and provide accurate results. Importantly, animal experiments have exhausted resources that could have been dedicated to educating the public about health hazards and health maintenance, therein diminishing the incidence of disease that require treatment. ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION DOES NOT MAKE SENSEHUMAN-BASED SCIENCE PREVENTS DISEASE AND CREATES VALID THERAPIES
Americans for Medical AdvancementREFERENCES:[1]Sax, N. Cancer-causing Chemicals Van Nostrand 1981 [2]Lancet, June 25, 1977 p1348-9 [3]The Guardian, July 20, 1991 [4]Occupational Lung Disorders, Butterworth 1982 [5]Toxicology & Industrial Health, 1990, vol.6, p293-307 [6] J Nat Cancer Inst 1969, vol.42, 1045-52 [7] Br J Cancer, 1947, vol.1, p 192-251 [8]Advances in Modern Toxicology, vol.2, Wiley, 1977 [9]H Nat Cancer Inst, 1962, vol.5, p 459 [10]Fitzgerald, D. The development of new cardiovascular drugs in Recent Developments in Cardiovascular Drugs eds. Coltart and Jewitt, Churchill Livingstone 1981 [11]Perspectives in Biology & Medicine, 1980 Part 2, S9-S24 [12]Pharmacy International Feb. 1986; p33-37 [13]Lancet, i, p 130-2, 1983 [14]Lancet, 1, no. 8480 p 517-9, March 8, 1996 [15]Annals of Internal Medicine 1984, vol.101, 667-682 [16]GAO/PEMD-90-15 FDA Drug Review: Postapproval Risks 1976-1985 [17]NEJM 333;1099-1105, 1995 [18]J NIH Res, 1993, 5, 33-35 [19]Nature, 1993, July 22, p 275 [20]Nature, 1982, April 1, p 387-90 and Br Med J, 1983, Jan 15, p 199-202 and Drug Monitoring, 1977 and Pharmacologist, 1964, vol. 6, p 12-26 and Pharmacology: Drug Actions and Reac and Advances in Pharm, 1963, vol. 2, 1-112 and Nature, 1982, April 1, p 387-390 [21]Pharmacologist, 1971, vol.18, p 272 [22]Br J of Pharm 1969Vol. 36; p35-45 [23]Inman, W. H. Monitoring for Drug Safety, MTP Press, 1980 [24]Am Rev Resp Diseases, 1972, vol.105, p883-890 [25]Lancet, 1979, Oct.27, p 896 [26]Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 1965, vol. 7; p1-8 [27]Animal Toxicity Studies: Their Relevance for Man, Quay Pub. 1990 [28]Br Med J, 1974, May 18, p 365-366 [29]Drug Withdrawl from Sale PJB Publications, 1988 [30]Pharmacology, 1983, vol.27(suppl 1), 87-94 and FDA Drug Review: [31]Postapproval Risks 1976-1985 (US GAO April 1990 [32]Gut, 1987, vol.28, 515-518 [33]Lancet, Jan 10, 1987, 113-114 [34]Toxicolo Letters, 1991, vol.55, p 287-93 [35]Drug Withdrawl from Sale, PJB1988 [36]Reg Tox & Pharm,1990,vol.11,288-307 and Postgraduate Med J, 1973, vol.49, April Suppl., 125-129 and 130 [37]Drugs, 1982, vol.24, p 360-400 [38]Animal Toxicity Studies Quay, 1990 [39]Lancet, 1984, July 28, p 219-220 [40]Matindale: The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 29th edition, Pharmaceutical Press, 1989) [41]Br Nat Form, no.26, 1993 [42]Reg Tox & Pharm, 1990, vol.11, p 288-307 [43]Br Med J, 1983, Jan 15, p 199-202 [44]Br Nat Form, no.26, 1993 [45]Tox & Appl Pharm, 1972, vol. 21, p 516-531 [46]The Benzodiazepines MTP Press1978 [47]Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin,1989, vol.27, p 28 as quoted in Activate For Animals Oct. 1997 The American Antivivisection Society [48]Parke-Davis letter dated Oct. 31, 1996 [49]Sneader, W. Drug Discovery: The Evolution of Modern Medicine Wiley,  1985 [50]Lewis, T. Clinical Science Shaw & Sons Ltd. 1934 [51]Federation Proceedings 1967, vol.26, 1125-30 [52]Toxicology In Vitro 1992, vol.6, 47-52 [53]JAMA, 1990, April 4, p1766 [54]Lancet,1989, July 22, p 227 [55]Lancet, 1989, Oct 28, p1000-1004[56]Hepatology,1991, vol.13, 1259-1260 [57]Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin, 1990, vol.28, p 74-75 [58]Anesthesiology: Proceedings of the VI World Congress of [59]Anesthesiology, Mexico City 1977 [60]NEJM, 1987, Sep. 10, p 653-658 [61]The Causes of Cancer, 1981, Oxford Press [62]J NIH Res, 1991, vol.3, p46 [63]Nature, 1991, Feb 28, p732

I like how none of these studies are from the 21st century. Animal testing is necessary for some research. Easier to have a control using animals than case studies, harder to find the exact problem with human case studies.Also can’t do certain things to humans for testing. Can’t jump straight to human testing without some sort of background and it can’t be just theoretical. People could get hurt with medicine that wasn’t tested properly. Shit happens, there’s a need to perfect it but humans aren’t perfect. There’s always going to be trial and error.

I understand where you want to get, the thing is Animal Testing most of the time unsuccessful. There is no need to test on animals when we are in 2014: So, since you’re hesitating about this, here are some more facts:
Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never affect animals.
According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree “5%-25% of the time.”
Among the hundreds of techniques available instead of animal experiments, cell culture toxicology methods give accuracy rates of 80-85%
92% of drugs passed by animal tests immediately fail when first tried on humans because they’re useless, dangerous or both.
The two most common illnesses in the Western world are lung cancer from smoking and heart disease. Neither can be reproduced in lab animals.
A 2004 survey of doctors in the UK showed that 83% wanted a independent scientific evaluation of whether animal experiments had relevance to human patients. Less than 1 in 4 (21%) had more confidence in animal tests than in non-animal methods.
Rats are 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans – less use than guessing. The experimenters said: “we would have been better off to have tossed a coin.”
Rodents are the animals almost always used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (eg lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connective tissue. The two are completely different.
The results from animal tests are routinely altered radically by diet, light, noise, temperature, lab staff and bedding. Bedding differences caused cancer rates of over 90% and almost zero in the same strain of mice at different labs.
Sex differences among lab animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.
75% of side effects identified in animals never occur.
Over half of side effects cannot be detected in lab animals.
Vioxx was shown to protect the heart of mice, dogs, monkeys and other lab animals. It was linked to heart attacks and strokes in up to 139,000 humans.
Genetically modified animals are not like humans. The mdx mouse is supposed to have muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate with no treatment.
Genetically Modified (GM) animal, the CF- mouse, never gets fluid infections in the lungs – the cause of death for 95% of human cystic fibrosis patients.
In America, 106,000 deaths a year are attributed to reactions to medical drugs.
Each year 2.1 million Americans are hospitalized by medical treatment.
In the UK an estimated 70,000 people are killed or severely disabled every year by unexpected reactions to drugs. All these drugs have passed animal tests.
In the UKs House Of Lords questions have been asked regarding why unexpected reactions to drugs (which passed animal tests) kill more people than cancer.
A German doctors’ congress concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.
According to a thorough study, 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which passed animal tests.
61% of birth defects were found to have the same cause.
70% of drugs which cause human birth defects are safe in pregnant monkeys.
78% of fetus-damaging chemicals can be detected by one non-animal test.
Thousands of safe products cause birth defects in lab animals – including water, several vitamins, vegetable oils, oxygen and drinking waters. Of more than 1000 substances dangerous in lab animals, over 97% are safe in humans.
One of the most common life saving operations (for ectopic pregnancies) was delayed 40 years by vivisection.
Blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies.
The polio vaccine was delayed 40 years by monkey tests.
30 HIV vaccines, 33 spinal cord damage drugs, and over 700 treatments for stroke have been developed in animals. None work in humans.
The Director of Research Defence Society, (which serves only to defend vivisection) was asked if medical progress could have been achieved without animal use. His written reply was “I am sure it could be.”
What You Can Do
Buy only cruelty-free cosmetics and household products. Many are found in dollar stores!
Organize a protest at a school or university….we can help!
Serious animal rights groups protest important issues with strong actions and sustained campaigns. 
Become vegan. If people stop using and eating animal, others stop killing animals for profit. Period.
Be aware of non-animal alternatives because most researchers will lie saying there aren’t any for what they do.
REFERENCES
Page, Dr T, “Vivisection Unveiled”, John Carpenter, 1997, p6
‘Animal Toxicity Studies:Their relevance to man Lumley & Walker (ed) pp57-67, Quay, 1989
Clemedson C, McFarlane-Abdulla E, Andersson M, et al. MEIC Evaluation of Acute Systemic Toxicity. ATLA 1996;24:273-311, http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/in_vitro_tests.html
Nature Biotechnology 1998; 16:1294
Heart disease: Gross, D, Animal Models in Cardiovascular Research, Martinus Nijhoff Pub 1985. Smoking: New York Times, December 6 1993
GP survey (2004) commissioned by patient safety group Europeans for Medical Progress *www.safermedicines.net*
F J Di Carlo, Drug Metabolism reviews15, p409-13
R Peto, World Medicine Vol 79, 1979
D.Spani, M. Arras, B. Konig and T. Rulicke, ‘Higher heart rate of laboratory mice housed individually vs in pairs’, Laboratory Animal Welfare, Vol. 37, No. 1, Jan 2003, Science Magazine http://www.sciencemag.org Volume 298, Number 5602, Issue of 20 Dec 2002, p. 2321
EJ Calabrese, ‘Toxic Susceptability: Male/female differences, quoted in Page “Viv Unv.”, p41
AP Fletcher in Proc R Soc med, 1978;71, 693
Clin Pharmacol Ther 1962; pp665-672
Current Opinions in Lipidology, BMJ 2005;330:212
Fletcher, AP et al, 1976 Stroke, vol 7, pp135-142
Collins,PS. Wilson,JM. 1992. Nature. vol 358. p708 9) Barinaga,M. 1992. Science. vol 257. p1047. Snouwaert,J N. Brigham,KK et al. 1992. Science. vol 257. pp1083-1088. Snouwaert,J N. Brigham,KK et al. 1992. Science. vol 257. pp1083-1088
Journal of the American Medical Association 14/4/98
Journal of the American Medical Association 14/4/98
Nature Medicine 2000; 6:502-503
Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, Lords Hansard report 2/12/98
Professor Hoff, Congress of clinical medicine, Wiesbaden, 1976
Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34 1969 quoted in Hans Reusch “Slaughter of the Innocent”, p365
Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34 1969 quoted in Hans Reusch “Slaughter of the Innocent”, p365
Developmental Toxicology: Mechanisms and Risk JA McLachlan, RM Pratt, C L Markert (Eds) 1987 p313
Biogenic Amines (Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 97–145 (2005)
Lewis, R. J., Sr. (1989). Sax’s Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 7th edn. John Wiley, New York. Turbow, M. M., Clark, W. H. and Dipaolo, J. A. (1971). Embryonic abnormalities in hamsters following intrauterine injection of 6-aminonicotinamide, Teratology 4 (4), 427–431 Beall, J. R. and Klein,M. F. (1977). Enhancement of aspirin-induced teratogenicity by food restriction in rats,Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 39, 489–495. Klein, K. L., Scott, W. J. and Wilson, J. G. (1981). Aspirin-induced teratogenesis: a unique pattern of cell death and subsequent polydactyly in the rat, J. Exper. Zool. 216, 107–112. Slone, D., Siskind, V., Heinonen, O. P., Monson, R. R., Kaufman, D. W. and Shapiro, S. (1976). Aspirin and congenital malformations, Lancet 1, 1373–1375. Werler, M. M., Mitchell, A. A. and Shapiro, S. (1989). The relation of aspirin use during the first trimester of pregnancy to congenital cardiac defects, New Engl. J. Med. 321, 1639–1642. Wilson, J. G. (1977). Current status of teratology. General principles and mechanisms derived from animal studies, in: Handbook of Teratology, pp. 1–47. Plenum Press, New York.
Birmingham Daily Post, 4/10/1892
K. Walker, The Story of Medicine, Hutchinson, 1954. R. McGrew, Encyclopedia of Medical History, MacMillan Press, 1985. A. Gastiglioni, A History of Medicine, (1947 edition translated by E.B. Krumbhaer) Ryerson Press, 1941
Paul, JR, 1971 ‘A History of Poliomyelitis’. Yale University Press, p385
Spinal cord: Journal of the American Paralegic Society11;23-25, 1988Stroke: Nature Medicine 2002; 8 (1):5 Future of neuroprotective drugs in doubt, also Stroke 1990 21: 1-3. HIV: Poignard P, Sabbe R, Picchio GR, et al. (April 1999). “Neutralizing antibodies have limited effects on the control of established HIV-1 infection in vivo”. Immunity 10 (4): 431–8. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80043-6. ISSN 1074-7613. PMID 10229186.
Berman PW, Gregory TJ, Riddle L, et al. (June 1990). “Protection of chimpanzees from infection by HIV-1 after vaccination with recombinant glycoprotein gp120 but not gp160″. Nature 345 (6276): 622–5. doi:10.1038/345622a0. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 2190095.
Connor RI, Korber BT, Graham BS, et al. (February 1998). “Immunological and virological analyses of persons infected by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 while participating in trials of recombinant gp120 subunit vaccines”. Journal of virology 72 (2): 1552–76. ISSN 0022-538X. PMID 9445059. PMC 124637.
http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=9445059.
Morgan C, Marthas M, Miller C, et al. (August 2008). “The use of nonhuman primate models in HIV vaccine development”. PLoS Med. 5(8): e173. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050173. ISSN 1549-1277.PMID 18700814. PMC 2504486.http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050173.
Written reply to enquiry by member of the public quoted in “Viv. Unv.”, p101
Please note I took the time to expose almost 80 facts with their proper sources. People always say, “but heey, we need to test otherwise we can’t fight some diseases”..and a long etc. Please take the time to read and analyze the information. You’ll find that animal testing as I said before is torture in the name on science. 

Reblogged from give-a-fuck-about-nature

give-a-fuck-about-nature:

give-a-fuck-about-nature:

50 DEADLY CONSEQUENCES OF LAB ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS 
From US Doctors Group Americans for Medical Advancement


1.Smoking was thought non-carcinogenic because smoking-related cancer is difficult to reproduce in lab animals. Many continued to smoke and to die from cancer.[2] 

2.Benzene was not withdrawn from use as an industrial chemical despite clinical and epidemiological evidence that exposure caused leukemia in humans, because manufacturer-supported tests failed to reproduce leukemia in mice.[1]

3.Animal experiments on rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, mice, monkeys, and baboons revealed no link between glass fibers and cancer. Not until 1991, due to human studies, did OSHA label it carcinogenic.[3][4][5]

4.Though arsenic was a known human carcinogen for decades, scientists still found little evidence in animals to support the conclusion as late as 1977.[6] This was the accepted view until it was produced in lab animals.[7][8][9]

5.Many continued to be exposed to asbestos and die because scientists could not reproduce the cancer in lab animals. 

6.Pacemakers and heart valves were delayed in development because of physiological differences between animals they were designed on and humans. 

7.Animal models of heart disease failed to show that a high cholesterol/high fat diet increases the risk of coronary artery disease. Instead of changing their eating habits to prevent the disease, people continued their lifestyles with a false sense of security. 

8.Patients received medications that were harmful and/or ineffective due to animal models of stroke. 

9.Animal studies predicted that beta-blockers would not lower blood pressure. This withheld their development. [10][11][12] Even animal experimenters admitted the failure of animal models of hypertension in this regard, but in the meantime, there were thousands more stroke victims. 

10.Surgeons thought they had perfected radial keratotomy, surgery performed to enable better vision without glasses, on rabbits, but the procedure blinded the first human patients. The rabbit cornea is able to regenerate on the underside, whereas the human cornea can only regenerate on the surface. Surgery is now performed only on the surface.

11.Combined heart lung transplants were also “perfected” on animals, but the first 3 patients all died within 23 days.[13] Of 28 patients operated on between 1981 and 1985, 8 died perioperatively, and 10 developed obliterative bronchiolitis, a lung complication that the experimental dogs did not get. Of those 10, 4 died and 3 never breathed again without the aid of a respirator. Obliterative bronchiolitis turned out to be the most important risk of the 
operation.[14]

12.Cyclosporin A inhibits organ rejection, and its development was watershed in the success of transplant operations. Had human evidence not overwhelmed unpromising evidence from animals, it would never have been released.[15]

13.Animal experiments failed to predict the kidney toxicity of the general anesthetic methoxyflurane. Many people lost all kidney function. 

14.Animal experiments delayed the use of muscle relaxants during general anesthesia. 

15.Research on animals failed to reveal bacteria as a cause of ulcers and delayed treating ulcers with antibiotics. 

16.More than half of the 198 new medications released between 1976 and 1985 were either withdrawn or relabeled secondary to severe unpredicted side effects.[16] These side effects included complications like lethal dysrhythmias, heart attacks, kidney failure, seizures, respiratory arrest, liver failure, and stroke, among others. 

17.Flosint, an arthritis medication, was tested on rats, monkeys and dogs; all tolerated the medication well. In humans, however it caused deaths. 

18.Zelmid, an antidepressant, was tested on rats and dogs without incident. It caused severe neurological problems in humans. 

19. Nomifensine, another antidepressant, was linked to kidney and liver failure, anemia, and death in humans. Animal testing had given it a clean, side effect-free bill of health. 

20. Amrinone, a medication used for heart failure, was tested on numerous animals and was released without trepidation. Humans developed thrombocytopenia, a lack of the type of blood cells that are needed for clotting. 

21. Fialuridine, an antiviral medication, caused liver damage in 7 out of 15 people. 5 eventually died and 2 more needed liver transplants.[17] It worked well in woodchucks.[18][19]

22.Clioquinol, an antidiarrheal, passed tests in rats, cats, dogs and rabbits. It was pulled off the shelves all over the world in 1982 after it was found to cause blindness and paralysis in humans.

23. Eraldin, a medication for heart disease, caused 23 deaths despite the fact that no untoward effects could be shown in animals. When introduced, scientists said it noted for the thoroughness of the toxicity studies on animals. It caused blindness and deaths in humans. Afterwards, scientists were unable to reproduce these results in animals.[20]

24. Opren, an arthritis medication, killed 61 people. Over 3500 cases of severe reactions have been documented. Opren had been tested on monkeys and other animals without problems.

25. Zomax, another arthritis drug, killed 14 people and caused many more to suffer. 

26. The dose of isoproterenol, a medication used to treat asthma, was worked out in animals. Unfortunately, it was much too toxic for humans. 3500 asthmatics died in Great Britain alone due to overdose. It is still difficult to reproduce these results in animals.[21][22]
[23][24][25][26] 

27. Methysergide, a medication used to treat headaches, led to retroperitoneal fibrosis, or severe scarring of the heart, kidneys, and blood vessels in the abdomen.[27] Scientists have been unable to reproduce this in animals.[28]

28. Suprofen, an arthritis drug, was withdrawn from the market when patients suffered kidney toxicity. Prior to its release researchers had this to say about the animal tests:[29][30] “…excellent safety profile. No …cardiac, renal, or CNS [central nervous system] effects in any species.” 

29. Surgam, another arthritis drug, was designed to have a stomach protection factor that would prevent stomach ulcers, a common side effect of many arthritis drugs. Although promising in lab animal tests, ulcers occurred in human trials.[31][32]

30. Selacryn, a diuretic, was thoroughly tested on animals. It was withdrawn in 1979 after 24 people died from drug induced liver failure.[33][34]

31. Perhexiline, a heart medication, was withdrawn when it produced liver failure that had not been predicted by animal studies. Even when they knew they were looking for a particular type of liver failure, they could not induce it in animals.[35]

32. Domperidone, designed as a treatment for nausea and vomiting, made human hearts beat irregularly and had to be withdrawn. Scientists were unable to reproduce this in dogs even with 70 times the normal dose.[36][37]

33. Mitoxantrone, a treatment for cancer produced heart failure in humans. It was extensively tested on dogs, which did not manifest this effect.[38][39]

34. Carbenoxalone was supposed to prevent formation of gastric ulcers but caused people to retain water to the point of heart failure. After scientists knew what it did to humans they tested it on rats, mice, monkeys, rabbits, without reproducing this effect. [40][41]

35. Clindamycin, an antibiotic, causes a bowel condition called pseudomembranous colitis. It was tested in rats and dogs every day for one year. They tolerate doses 10 times greater than humans.[42][43][44]

36. Animal experiments did not support the efficacy of valium-type drugs during development or after.[45][46]

37. Pharmacia & Upjohn discontinued clinical tests of its Linomide (roquinimex) tablets for the treatment of multiple sclerosis after several patients suffered heart attacks. Of 1,200 patients, 8 suffered heart attacks as a result of taking the medication. Animal experiments had not predicted this. 

38. Cylert (pemoline), a medication used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder, caused liver failure in 13 children. Eleven either died or needed a liver transplant. 

39. Eldepryl (selegiline), a medication used to treat Parkinson’s disease, was found to induce very high blood pressure. This side effect has not been seen in animals, where it is used to treat senile dementia and endocrine disorders. 

40. The diet drug combination of fenfluramine and dexfenfluramine was linked to heart valve abnormalities and taken off the market although animal studies had never revealed heart abnormalities.”[47]

41. The diabetes medication troglitazone, better known as Rezulin, was tested on animals without significant problems, but caused liver damage in humans. The company admitted that at least one patient had died and another had to undergo a liver transplant as a result.[48]

42. The plant digitalis has been used for centuries to treat heart disorders. However, clinical trials of the digitalis-derived drug were delayed because it caused high blood pressure in animals. Human evidence overrode. As a result, digoxin, an analogue of digitalis, has saved countless lives. Many more could it have survived had digitalis been released sooner.[49][50][51][52]

43. FK 506, now called Tacrolimus, is an anti-rejection agent that was almost shelved before proceeding to clinical trials due to severe toxicity in animals.[53][54] Animal studies suggested that the combination of FK 506 with cyclosporin might prove more useful.[55]  In fact, just the opposite proved true in humans.[56]

44. Animal experiments suggested that corticosteroids would help septic shock, a severe bacterial infection of the blood.[57][58]  Unfortunately, humans reacted differently. This treatment increased  the death rate in cases of septic shock.[59] 

45. Despite the ineffectiveness of penicillin in his rabbits, Alexander Fleming used the antibiotic on a very sick patient since he had nothing else to try. Luckily, Fleming’s initial tests were not on guinea pigs or hamsters, it kills them. Howard Florey, the Nobel Prize winner credited with co-discovering and manufacturing penicillin, stated: “How fortunate we didn’t have these animal tests in the 1940s, for penicillin would probably never been granted a license, and possibly the whole field of antibiotics might never have been realized.”

46. Fluoride was withheld as a cavity preventative initially because it caused cancer in rats.[60][61][62]

47. The notoriously dangerous drugs thalidomide and DES were tested in animals and released. Tens of thousands suffered and died as a result. 

48. Animal experiments misinformed researchers about how rapidly HIV replicates. Based on this false information, patients did not receive prompt therapies and their lives were shortened.

49. Animal-based research delayed the development of the polio vaccine, according to Dr. Albert Sabin, its inventor. The first rabies and polio vaccines worked well on animals but crippled or killed the people who tried them.

50. Researchers who work with animals have succumbed to illness and death due to exposure to diseases that though harmless to the animal host (such as Hepatitis B) but kill humans. 

Time, money, and resources devoted to these experiments could have gone to human-based research. Clinical studies, in vitro research, autopsies, post-marketing drug surveillance, computer modeling, epidemiology, and genetic research pose no hazard to humans and provide accurate results. Importantly, animal experiments have exhausted resources that could have been dedicated to educating the public about health hazards and health maintenance, therein diminishing the incidence of disease that require treatment. 

ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION DOES NOT MAKE SENSE

HUMAN-BASED SCIENCE PREVENTS DISEASE AND CREATES VALID THERAPIES

Americans for Medical Advancement

REFERENCES:

[1]Sax, N. Cancer-causing Chemicals Van Nostrand 1981 
[2]Lancet, June 25, 1977 p1348-9 
[3]The Guardian, July 20, 1991 
[4]Occupational Lung Disorders, Butterworth 1982 
[5]Toxicology & Industrial Health, 1990, vol.6, p293-307 
[6] J Nat Cancer Inst 1969, vol.42, 1045-52 
[7] Br J Cancer, 1947, vol.1, p 192-251 
[8]Advances in Modern Toxicology, vol.2, Wiley, 1977 
[9]H Nat Cancer Inst, 1962, vol.5, p 459 
[10]Fitzgerald, D. The development of new cardiovascular drugs in Recent Developments in Cardiovascular Drugs eds. Coltart and Jewitt, Churchill Livingstone 1981 
[11]Perspectives in Biology & Medicine, 1980 Part 2, S9-S24 
[12]Pharmacy International Feb. 1986; p33-37 
[13]Lancet, i, p 130-2, 1983 
[14]Lancet, 1, no. 8480 p 517-9, March 8, 1996 
[15]Annals of Internal Medicine 1984, vol.101, 667-682 
[16]GAO/PEMD-90-15 FDA Drug Review: Postapproval Risks 1976-1985 
[17]NEJM 333;1099-1105, 1995 
[18]J NIH Res, 1993, 5, 33-35 
[19]Nature, 1993, July 22, p 275 
[20]Nature, 1982, April 1, p 387-90 and Br Med J, 1983, Jan 15, p 199-202 and Drug Monitoring, 1977 and Pharmacologist, 1964, vol. 6, p 12-26 and Pharmacology: Drug Actions and Reac and Advances in Pharm, 1963, 
vol. 2, 1-112 and Nature, 1982, April 1, p 387-390 
[21]Pharmacologist, 1971, vol.18, p 272 
[22]Br J of Pharm 1969Vol. 36; p35-45 
[23]Inman, W. H. Monitoring for Drug Safety, MTP Press, 1980 
[24]Am Rev Resp Diseases, 1972, vol.105, p883-890 
[25]Lancet, 1979, Oct.27, p 896 
[26]Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 1965, vol. 7; p1-8 
[27]Animal Toxicity Studies: Their Relevance for Man, Quay Pub. 1990 
[28]Br Med J, 1974, May 18, p 365-366 
[29]Drug Withdrawl from Sale PJB Publications, 1988 
[30]Pharmacology, 1983, vol.27(suppl 1), 87-94 and FDA Drug Review: 
[31]Postapproval Risks 1976-1985 (US GAO April 1990 
[32]Gut, 1987, vol.28, 515-518 
[33]Lancet, Jan 10, 1987, 113-114 
[34]Toxicolo Letters, 1991, vol.55, p 287-93 
[35]Drug Withdrawl from Sale, PJB1988 
[36]Reg Tox & Pharm,1990,vol.11,288-307 and Postgraduate Med J, 1973, vol.49, April Suppl., 125-129 and 130 
[37]Drugs, 1982, vol.24, p 360-400 
[38]Animal Toxicity Studies Quay, 1990 
[39]Lancet, 1984, July 28, p 219-220 
[40]Matindale: The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 29th edition, Pharmaceutical Press, 1989) 
[41]Br Nat Form, no.26, 1993 
[42]Reg Tox & Pharm, 1990, vol.11, p 288-307 
[43]Br Med J, 1983, Jan 15, p 199-202 
[44]Br Nat Form, no.26, 1993 
[45]Tox & Appl Pharm, 1972, vol. 21, p 516-531 
[46]The Benzodiazepines MTP Press1978 
[47]Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin,1989, vol.27, p 28 as quoted in Activate For Animals Oct. 1997 The American 
Antivivisection Society 
[48]Parke-Davis letter dated Oct. 31, 1996 
[49]Sneader, W. Drug Discovery: The Evolution of Modern Medicine Wiley,  1985 
[50]Lewis, T. Clinical Science Shaw & Sons Ltd. 1934 
[51]Federation Proceedings 1967, vol.26, 1125-30 
[52]Toxicology In Vitro 1992, vol.6, 47-52 
[53]JAMA, 1990, April 4, p1766 
[54]Lancet,1989, July 22, p 227 
[55]Lancet, 1989, Oct 28, p1000-1004[56]Hepatology,1991, vol.13, 1259-1260 
[57]Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin, 1990, vol.28, p 74-75 
[58]Anesthesiology: Proceedings of the VI World Congress of 
[59]Anesthesiology, Mexico City 1977 
[60]NEJM, 1987, Sep. 10, p 653-658 
[61]The Causes of Cancer, 1981, Oxford Press 
[62]J NIH Res, 1991, vol.3, p46 
[63]Nature, 1991, Feb 28, p732

I like how none of these studies are from the 21st century.

Animal testing is necessary for some research. Easier to have a control using animals than case studies, harder to find the exact problem with human case studies.

Also can’t do certain things to humans for testing.

Can’t jump straight to human testing without some sort of background and it can’t be just theoretical.

People could get hurt with medicine that wasn’t tested properly. Shit happens, there’s a need to perfect it but humans aren’t perfect. There’s always going to be trial and error.

I understand where you want to get, the thing is Animal Testing most of the time unsuccessful. There is no need to test on animals when we are in 2014: So, since you’re hesitating about this, here are some more facts:

  1. Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never affect animals.
  2. According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree “5%-25% of the time.”
  3. Among the hundreds of techniques available instead of animal experiments, cell culture toxicology methods give accuracy rates of 80-85%
  4. 92% of drugs passed by animal tests immediately fail when first tried on humans because they’re useless, dangerous or both.
  5. The two most common illnesses in the Western world are lung cancer from smoking and heart disease. Neither can be reproduced in lab animals.
  6. A 2004 survey of doctors in the UK showed that 83% wanted a independent scientific evaluation of whether animal experiments had relevance to human patients. Less than 1 in 4 (21%) had more confidence in animal tests than in non-animal methods.
  7. Rats are 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans – less use than guessing. The experimenters said: “we would have been better off to have tossed a coin.”
  8. Rodents are the animals almost always used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (eg lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connective tissue. The two are completely different.
  9. The results from animal tests are routinely altered radically by diet, light, noise, temperature, lab staff and bedding. Bedding differences caused cancer rates of over 90% and almost zero in the same strain of mice at different labs.
  10. Sex differences among lab animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.
  11. 75% of side effects identified in animals never occur.
  12. Over half of side effects cannot be detected in lab animals.
  13. Vioxx was shown to protect the heart of mice, dogs, monkeys and other lab animals. It was linked to heart attacks and strokes in up to 139,000 humans.
  14. Genetically modified animals are not like humans. The mdx mouse is supposed to have muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate with no treatment.
  15. Genetically Modified (GM) animal, the CF- mouse, never gets fluid infections in the lungs – the cause of death for 95% of human cystic fibrosis patients.
  16. In America, 106,000 deaths a year are attributed to reactions to medical drugs.
  17. Each year 2.1 million Americans are hospitalized by medical treatment.
  18. In the UK an estimated 70,000 people are killed or severely disabled every year by unexpected reactions to drugs. All these drugs have passed animal tests.
  19. In the UKs House Of Lords questions have been asked regarding why unexpected reactions to drugs (which passed animal tests) kill more people than cancer.
  20. A German doctors’ congress concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.
  21. According to a thorough study, 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which passed animal tests.
  22. 61% of birth defects were found to have the same cause.
  23. 70% of drugs which cause human birth defects are safe in pregnant monkeys.
  24. 78% of fetus-damaging chemicals can be detected by one non-animal test.
  25. Thousands of safe products cause birth defects in lab animals – including water, several vitamins, vegetable oils, oxygen and drinking waters. Of more than 1000 substances dangerous in lab animals, over 97% are safe in humans.
  26. One of the most common life saving operations (for ectopic pregnancies) was delayed 40 years by vivisection.
  27. Blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies.
  28. The polio vaccine was delayed 40 years by monkey tests.
  29. 30 HIV vaccines, 33 spinal cord damage drugs, and over 700 treatments for stroke have been developed in animals. None work in humans.
  30. The Director of Research Defence Society, (which serves only to defend vivisection) was asked if medical progress could have been achieved without animal use. His written reply was “I am sure it could be.”

What You Can Do

  • Buy only cruelty-free cosmetics and household products. Many are found in dollar stores!
  • Organize a protest at a school or university….we can help!
  • Serious animal rights groups protest important issues with strong actions and sustained campaigns. 
  • Become vegan. If people stop using and eating animal, others stop killing animals for profit. Period.
  • Be aware of non-animal alternatives because most researchers will lie saying there aren’t any for what they do.

REFERENCES

  • Page, Dr T, “Vivisection Unveiled”, John Carpenter, 1997, p6
  • ‘Animal Toxicity Studies:Their relevance to man Lumley & Walker (ed) pp57-67, Quay, 1989
  • Clemedson C, McFarlane-Abdulla E, Andersson M, et al. MEIC Evaluation of Acute Systemic Toxicity. ATLA 1996;24:273-311, http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/in_vitro_tests.html
  • Nature Biotechnology 1998; 16:1294
  • Heart disease: Gross, D, Animal Models in Cardiovascular Research, Martinus Nijhoff Pub 1985. Smoking: New York Times, December 6 1993
  • GP survey (2004) commissioned by patient safety group Europeans for Medical Progress *www.safermedicines.net*
  • F J Di Carlo, Drug Metabolism reviews15, p409-13
  • R Peto, World Medicine Vol 79, 1979
  • D.Spani, M. Arras, B. Konig and T. Rulicke, ‘Higher heart rate of laboratory mice housed individually vs in pairs’, Laboratory Animal Welfare, Vol. 37, No. 1, Jan 2003, Science Magazine http://www.sciencemag.org Volume 298, Number 5602, Issue of 20 Dec 2002, p. 2321
  • EJ Calabrese, ‘Toxic Susceptability: Male/female differences, quoted in Page “Viv Unv.”, p41
  • AP Fletcher in Proc R Soc med, 1978;71, 693
  • Clin Pharmacol Ther 1962; pp665-672
  • Current Opinions in Lipidology, BMJ 2005;330:212
  • Fletcher, AP et al, 1976 Stroke, vol 7, pp135-142
  • Collins,PS. Wilson,JM. 1992. Nature. vol 358. p708 9) Barinaga,M. 1992. Science. vol 257. p1047. Snouwaert,J N. Brigham,KK et al. 1992. Science. vol 257. pp1083-1088. Snouwaert,J N. Brigham,KK et al. 1992. Science. vol 257. pp1083-1088
  • Journal of the American Medical Association 14/4/98
  • Journal of the American Medical Association 14/4/98
  • Nature Medicine 2000; 6:502-503
  • Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, Lords Hansard report 2/12/98
  • Professor Hoff, Congress of clinical medicine, Wiesbaden, 1976
  • Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34 1969 quoted in Hans Reusch “Slaughter of the Innocent”, p365
  • Munchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, no 34 1969 quoted in Hans Reusch “Slaughter of the Innocent”, p365
  • Developmental Toxicology: Mechanisms and Risk JA McLachlan, RM Pratt, C L Markert (Eds) 1987 p313
  • Biogenic Amines (Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 97–145 (2005)
  • Lewis, R. J., Sr. (1989). Sax’s Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 7th edn. John Wiley, New York. Turbow, M. M., Clark, W. H. and Dipaolo, J. A. (1971). Embryonic abnormalities in hamsters following intrauterine injection of 6-aminonicotinamide, Teratology 4 (4), 427–431 Beall, J. R. and Klein,M. F. (1977). Enhancement of aspirin-induced teratogenicity by food restriction in rats,Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 39, 489–495. Klein, K. L., Scott, W. J. and Wilson, J. G. (1981). Aspirin-induced teratogenesis: a unique pattern of cell death and subsequent polydactyly in the rat, J. Exper. Zool. 216, 107–112. Slone, D., Siskind, V., Heinonen, O. P., Monson, R. R., Kaufman, D. W. and Shapiro, S. (1976). Aspirin and congenital malformations, Lancet 1, 1373–1375. Werler, M. M., Mitchell, A. A. and Shapiro, S. (1989). The relation of aspirin use during the first trimester of pregnancy to congenital cardiac defects, New Engl. J. Med. 321, 1639–1642. Wilson, J. G. (1977). Current status of teratology. General principles and mechanisms derived from animal studies, in: Handbook of Teratology, pp. 1–47. Plenum Press, New York.
  • Birmingham Daily Post, 4/10/1892
  • K. Walker, The Story of Medicine, Hutchinson, 1954. R. McGrew, Encyclopedia of Medical History, MacMillan Press, 1985. A. Gastiglioni, A History of Medicine, (1947 edition translated by E.B. Krumbhaer) Ryerson Press, 1941
  • Paul, JR, 1971 ‘A History of Poliomyelitis’. Yale University Press, p385
  • Spinal cord: Journal of the American Paralegic Society11;23-25, 1988Stroke: Nature Medicine 2002; 8 (1):5 Future of neuroprotective drugs in doubt, also Stroke 1990 21: 1-3. HIV: Poignard P, Sabbe R, Picchio GR, et al. (April 1999). “Neutralizing antibodies have limited effects on the control of established HIV-1 infection in vivo”. Immunity 10 (4): 431–8. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80043-6. ISSN 1074-7613. PMID 10229186.
  • Berman PW, Gregory TJ, Riddle L, et al. (June 1990). “Protection of chimpanzees from infection by HIV-1 after vaccination with recombinant glycoprotein gp120 but not gp160″. Nature 345 (6276): 622–5. doi:10.1038/345622a0. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 2190095.
  • Connor RI, Korber BT, Graham BS, et al. (February 1998). “Immunological and virological analyses of persons infected by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 while participating in trials of recombinant gp120 subunit vaccines”. Journal of virology 72 (2): 1552–76. ISSN 0022-538X. PMID 9445059. PMC 124637.
  • http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=9445059.
  • Morgan C, Marthas M, Miller C, et al. (August 2008). “The use of nonhuman primate models in HIV vaccine development”. PLoS Med. 5(8): e173. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050173. ISSN 1549-1277.PMID 18700814. PMC 2504486.http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050173.
  • Written reply to enquiry by member of the public quoted in “Viv. Unv.”, p101

Please note I took the time to expose almost 80 facts with their proper sources. People always say, “but heey, we need to test otherwise we can’t fight some diseases”..and a long etc. Please take the time to read and analyze the information. You’ll find that animal testing as I said before is torture in the name on science. 

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

  • Men: Not all men.
  • Tumblr: Bullshit!
  • Cops: Not all cops.
  • Tumblr: Fuck you.
  • Carnists: Not all farms.
  • Tumblr: THIS. Stupid vegans.

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

(Source: animals-are-other-nations)

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

soycrates:

Very Vegan Star Trek Quotes!

Reblog this if you KNOW that you can’t be an animal lover and still consume animal products.

Reblogged from theveganabolitionist

(Source: thatvegancosplayer)

adviceforvegans:

Just entered my piece. Have you entered yours yet? If so, submit your articles to the blog as I’d love to read what you all have to say! Cannot believe the amazing list of prizes, it’s never ending. Take a look here. 

Reblogged from adviceforvegans

adviceforvegans:

Just entered my piece. Have you entered yours yet? If so, submit your articles to the blog as I’d love to read what you all have to say! Cannot believe the amazing list of prizes, it’s never ending. Take a look here

liartownusa:

Have You Seen Your Cat? flyer

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

liartownusa:

Have You Seen Your Cat? flyer

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

dontbreakveg:

baijara:

alltsar:

corporatevagina:

pipedreamexplosion:

emmatavasci:

fucktheflagandfuckyou:

fucktheflagandfuckyou:

Say those three words and I’m yours

I hate capitalism

Fuck the police

Abolish wage slavery

Smash the patriarchy

Communism will win

Fight White Supremacy

Go fucking vegan.

Reblogged from iacknowledgebuttholesexist

the-uncensored-she:

harboua:

This country is such a fucking joke. Did you know that if we were to divide the income in this country fairly it would be about 300,000 per person. That’s annually. You could give each person in this country 100,000 and still have enough to invest in infrastructure and research. Instead we have people who don’t have water, don’t have their basic human rights fulfilled, because they don’t have enough to pay a bill. 

Capitalism is inhumane.

Reblogged from fightingforanimals

alloftheveganfood:

Vegan Sausage Round Up

Simple Italian Sausages

Vegan Sausage Hot Dog with Slaw & Beetroot Chutney

Homemade Sundried Tomato & Pine Nut Seitan Sausages with Soft Polenta & Pan Roasted Tomato Sauce

Sausage Rolls with a Trio of Dipping Sauces

Beetballs (GF/SF)

Carrot Potato Soup with Vegan Sausage

Homemade Vegan Sausage & Cheese Calzones

Oven Baked Fried Rice with Vegan Sausage

Spicy Vegan Sausage Jambalaya

Vegan Sausage French Toast Breakfast Sandwich (GF)