With Animal Liberation in the news again, how far would you go to stop animals suffering at the hands of scientists?

A grave was dug up and the (human) remains stolen by an Animal Liberation group at a farm involved in breeding Guinea Pigs for research. The farm owners have now announced they will no longer breed animals for scientific testing. Is this kind of action justified, or does the end justify the means?

It's a tough one for those who love animals.

Now today scientists have voted strongly in favour of continuing to use animals for vivisection, so the violence and vandalism shows no sign of ending in the near future.

It is indeed a tough one to call. With strong evidence that the reseach provides definite benefits to medicine and surgical procedures, and helps to forward the protection against disease I would say - go ahead under strict controls.

Research into cosmetics and domestic products - well? That's another thing.

The sort of activities that caused the farmer to stop his breeding of Guinee Pigs - - well it was outright terrorism, and I suspect the worse incidents were more of a personal vendetta by a minority.

Pretty much the same statements were made about this minority (I don't condem it) (I Empathise with them) as were made about the suicide bombers in London.

I should think that the new powers against preaching hatred and agitating for violent acts, will apply in cases like this.

What gives anyone the right to try and change a persons way of life, or indeed his livelyhood, by intimidation or violence?

I think it is outrageous that a campaign of violent intimidation has succeeded in its aims. This 'success' will only bolster other single issue fanatics ('SIFs') to engage in similar activities. The law has clearly failed in this case. The weight of scientific opinion supports the view that humane experiments on animals are currently necessary in order to advance research into serious diseases affecting humans. The SIFs have every right to protest, but they have no right to break the law or to intimidate others.

A grave was dug up and the (human) remains stolen by an Animal Liberation group at a farm involved in breeding Guinea Pigs for research

even though a certain animal rights group have said they have them nothing has been confirmed and the group that appartly stole the remains may not be genuine, ime will tell.

You don't see many animal liberation terrorists volunteering to test drugs instead of the bunny rabbits though do you ?

but when the guy on tv were talking about people getting cancer and going to die because of not testing on anaimals why dont the government tell people more about how to eat properly! if people think eating chips cooked in beef dripping is going to be good for them :rolleyes:

And if one of these Animal liberation types or soap dodgers as most appear to be was in need of drugs to cure some life threatening disease, I bet they don’t think twice about taking them!

Animal testing for Medical research is fine, but testing cosmetics on animals is wrong!

I fail to see how a monkey doled up like Barbara Cartland aids research!

Originally posted by f_g
but when the guy on tv were talking about people getting cancer and going to die because of not testing on anaimals why dont the government tell people more about how to eat properly! if people think eating chips cooked in beef dripping is going to be good for them :rolleyes:

Eating chips cooked in dripping doesn't equal cancer btw.

Originally posted by mojoworking
A grave was dug up and the (human) remains stolen by an Animal Liberation group at a farm involved in breeding Guinea Pigs for research.
This is quite an old story now. Has it only just reached Australia?

Is there anything new happening in the world of vivisection?

i didnt say it equals cancer i said the government doesnt tell me simple things.

Originally posted by Tony
This is quite an old story now. Has it only just reached Australia?

Is there anything new happening in the world of vivisection?

It can't be that old, it's all over BBC news today and Five Live are doing a phone-in about it as I write.

Sorry to ruin your big moment Tony ;)

Whatever views you hold on medical research on animals, nothing justifies violating a grave and stealing a body. These anti-vivisectionists also conducted a vendetta of hate against local villagers, targeting the publican and his family, and others. They are terrorists. Animal rights campaigners should completely disassociate themselves from such campaigns of hate and terror.

Originally posted by redrobbo
nothing justifies violating a grave and stealing a body. These anti-vivisectionists also conducted a vendetta of hate against local villagers, targeting the publican and his family, and others. They are terrorists. Animal rights campaigners should completely disassociate themselves from such campaigns of hate and terror.

The "peaceful" campaigner I heard commenting on the "Hate Campaigne" said he didn't condone it, but he could Empathise with them.
How about Naming them?? Like other terrorist organisations, Someone knows who they are! Knowing and not giving information is a criminal offence. I hope the authorities "Roll the lot of them up" in the investigation. The village concerned was virtually under siege, with threats to the livelyhood of many of the local businesses. I wonder if the businesses have a right to compensation for their long period of mindless thuggery and threats over several years.

Originally posted by mojoworking
It can't be that old, it's all over BBC news today and Five Live are doing a phone-in about it as I write.


Ah! I forgot that it's the summer silly season. No parliament, no wars, no news, just old stories dredged up like bodies from the past.

http://www.liberation-now.org/ is the only website i could find abd it llooks peacefull

Originally posted by Tony
Ah! I forgot that it's the summer silly season. No parliament, no wars, no news, just old stories dredged up like bodies from the past.

A very unfortunate comment - - - in the circumstances. Regarding one of the attrocities commited by these raving fanatics.

Originally posted by Tony
Ah! I forgot that it's the summer silly season. No parliament, no wars, no news, just old stories dredged up like bodies from the past.

The desecration of the grave happened in July, but the news only broke this week, with the family announcing they were to stop breeding animals for vivisection just yesterday.

There's a BBC documentary about the family in question on TV tonight.

Not so silly or so old, really. ;)

Now if I remember correctly the Grandmother was dug up last year sometime, and the body never found. It certainly wasn't this July, unless this is yet another farm and exhumation and we have crossed wires, or I have started predicting the future.

What I do see now is that the farm announced yesterday that they were closing, so I will give you that.

it was on crime watch a while ago when they said an animal rights group had called or wrote and told them if they shut the body will be given back, but they couldnt tell if it was real so i wounder if they have found any more information.

I’m disgusted, there is no place in civilised society for this kind of bullying…of the kind done to animals by people;)

I'm against animal testing but I don't support the small bunch of fanatics who are waging a war of terrorism on scientists and farms like the one in question. Any changes in the law regarding vivisection should be done democtatically, and I think these extreamists give the majority of animal lovers a bad name and stop the main issues of the debate (animal cruelty and treatment during testing) being properly considered.

Testing on animals for cosmetics and household products should be outlawed, and seious money/time should be ploughed into finding alternatives to testing on animals for medical science.

I thought the video they showed on the news this morning of happy animals playing in testing labs was interesting. I'm sure scenes of scientists stroaking rats and happy puppies playing with carboard tubes are not as common as they would like us to believe!

Originally posted by Tony
Now if I remember correctly the Grandmother was dug up last year sometime, and the body never found. It certainly wasn't this July, unless this is yet another farm and exhumation and we have crossed wires, or I have started predicting the future.

What I do see now is that the farm announced yesterday that they were closing, so I will give you that.

You're right, the grave robbing did happen last October, not July as I said.

But the story has been given new impetus with the latest developments (outlined earlier), plus the announcement today by a group of 500 scientists that they intended to continue to do animal testing.

In any case, the story about the guinea pig farm was the 3rd item on Sky News this lunchtime, so it's a little unfair of you to try and rubbish the entire thread :(

as soon as people stop demanding new drugs & cures for ailments, testing won't be required.
who's at fault?
i bet all of the liberation movement would not turn down life saving chemo or cancer drugs.

Originally posted by willman
as soon as people stop demanding new drugs & cures for ailments, testing won't be required.
who's at fault?
i bet all of the liberation movement would not turn down life saving chemo or cancer drugs.

This actually happened a few years ago I think. A woman animal rights activist who supposedly believed testing on animals is morally wrong got cancer and used drugs tested on animals to cure it.

a lot of the animal lib people are pure planctum. They have either been brainwashed and cannot back their actions up with any sort of justifiable arguments or just poeple looking to cause trouble and will use any excuse.

The above is the faction that take direct action.

I'm against cruelty to animals but like most people will still use products tested on animals.

What really gets my goat is companies such as the Body Shop who people will blindly use because they are told that they are animal friendly when they clearly aren't.

No bodyshop product is tested on animals. Most components of that product are.

I disagree with testing beauty products on animals completely.

however, when it comes to medical science I do believe that testing on animals is acceptable where necessary. I would be happy if an appropriate alternative could be found and would welcome it.

when it comes down to it though - if it was a choice between finding life saving medicines/conducting groundbreaking research or a member of my family dying because someone wanted to save a rabbit - i know which i would pick.

Originally posted by willman

i bet all of the liberation movement would not turn down life saving chemo or cancer drugs.

I didn't think the animal rights people were against using cancer drugs, I thought they were just against them being tested on animals.

I'm really torn about this. While I would never normally condone violence or act in the extreme way some of the animal lib people do, I get so angry when I see animals being mistreated that I lose all sense of proportion.

Seeing a defenceless animal being hurt is almost like watching someone hurt a child, I'm overcome by a desire to protect it.

Thankfully a sense of proportion kicks in fairly quickly and I just sit there quietly fuming instead of rushing out and vandalising a scientist's car ;)

Originally posted by Patchy
I didn't think the animal rights people were against using cancer drugs, I thought they were just against them being tested on animals.

Unless things have changed since I did my pharmacology (and it may well have done), a requirement of the drug licensing process is the LD50 test (an acute toxicity test where the dose required to kill 50% of a sample population is calculated), in which case all drugs will have some form of animal testing...

Originally posted by evildrneil
Unless things have changed since I did my pharmacology (and it may well have done), a requirement of the drug licensing process is the LD50 test (an acute toxicity test where the dose required to kill 50% of a sample population is calculated), in which case all drugs will have some form of animal testing...

I know that, but the drugs don't come into existence because of being tested on animals. I am against vivisection, but I don't refuse to use medicine just because people have decided to force animals to use them. The drugs would still be there even if they weren't tested on animals.

Going back to the original question, I would go as far as taking part in peaceful protests but I wouldn't go as far as injuring people.

I believe that if the people who dug up the family's relative are caught then they should be punished, although I can't bring myself to feel any sympathy for the family themselves as I strongly disagree with what they were doing for a living.

Originally posted by Patchy
I know that, but the drugs don't come into existence because of being tested on animals. I am against vivisection, but I don't refuse to use medicine just because people have decided to force animals to use them. The drugs would still be there even if they weren't tested on animals.

They don't come into existance because of testing on animals but they are allowed onto the market because of testing on animals so the drugs wouldn't be available if they weren't tested on animals.

There are some technologies in development that can aliviate some of the need for animal experimentation (computer modelling, tissue cultures etc.) but in the forseeable future if you want a drug with a reasonable level of safety then animal experimentation will be a part of the process...

Originally posted by f_g
i didnt say it equals cancer i said the government doesnt tell me simple things.

Why do you need the government to tell you how to eat properly? :loopy:

Originally posted by mojoworking
A grave was dug up and the (human) remains stolen by an Animal Liberation group at a farm involved in breeding Guinea Pigs for research. The farm owners have now announced they will no longer breed animals for scientific testing. Is this kind of action justified, or does the end justify the means?.

Genius.

Originally posted by Patchy
I didn't think the animal rights people were against using cancer drugs, I thought they were just against them being tested on animals.

This is the chicken and egg argument. You can't put drugs on the market until you have tested them. Just like a new car. You may put it through all sorts of tests but tntil you have exposed it to a living creature, you have no idea what it will do.

Thalidomide is a prime example of a drug not being tested fully. A drug might not have side effects on you but it might cause all sorts of things in your offspring. How do you test for that sort of thing without testing it on something which reproduces?

Originally posted by evildrneil
They don't come into existance because of testing on animals but they are allowed onto the market because of testing on animals so the drugs wouldn't be available if they weren't tested on animals.

There are some technologies in development that can aliviate some of the need for animal experimentation (computer modelling, tissue cultures etc.) but in the forseeable future if you want a drug with a reasonable level of safety then animal experimentation will be a part of the process...

agree 100%.

i was led to believe that some of the testing on makeup etc - which is driven by women- can be achieved by computer modelling because most of the ingrdients have been widely tested already.
drug companies are the big animal testers, although i'm an animal owner & lover, it's a case of rather them than me.

Why do you need the government to tell you how to eat properly?
they dont but they cover up certain things like whats wrong with drinking milk after your 8.

Originally posted by Cayenne
Thalidomide is a prime example of a drug not being tested fully. A drug might not have side effects on you but it might cause all sorts of things in your offspring. How do you test for that sort of thing without testing it on something which reproduces?

You can argue both ways though... there have been drugs which have had bad effects on animals and been withheld from humans, and then later on been found to be ok for humans.

Originally posted by willman
drug companies are the big animal testers, although i'm an animal owner & lover, it's a case of rather them than me.

My view is that it is wrong to cause animals to suffer in order to test drugs for humans. If we want medicines, we should be prepared to take the risk of using them without torturing animals to test them.

Originally posted by Patchy
You can argue both ways though... there have been drugs which have had bad effects on animals and been withheld from humans, and then later on been found to be ok for humans.

Such as?

I believe penicillin was one.

Originally posted by Patchy
I believe penicillin was one.

Not as far as I'm aware (?) it wasn't used for a number of years after Flemmings initial discovery but that was a technical problem (isolating the activive ingredient from the penecillium mould and growing it in a large enough quantity to run clinical trials) I've not heard of it bring delayed due to it having adverse effects in animals???

This'll not make me many friends but I find animal testing for medical purposes perfectly acceptable. If a couple of thousand animals are used in the successful pursuit of a cure for HIV, cancer and whatever unwholly diseases plague the human race then I can't see a problem at all.

What irritates me is the lengths that these activists go to, It's all very well parading placards with "Stop animal cruelty" but then going to desecrate a grave, set fire bombs, terrorise people in their homes and commit arson. It's just not on.

The activists who go to these lengths are just vermin pure and simple and need a bloody good shoeing.

I think what these people are doing is amazing. They are all heros in my eyes. And Swan_Vesta i think you are wrong. I would give up my life to save animals. I think it is wrong to use animals for entertainment, fashion, food, testing medicines on etc. Its all disgusting and I hope one day everybody who used a product tested on animals will be tested on them selves. see how they like it. I think what there doing is not enough. One day I will stop animal cruelty.

Originally posted by suga
I hope one day everybody who used a product tested on animals will be tested on them selves. see how they like it.
So, at the risk of being flamed, where on earth do you find products that haven't been tested on animals?

Although I'd reluctantly accept that animal testing for pioneering medical research is justified, I find it hard to believe that cosmetic testing does not make up a significant proportion (if not a majority) of all animal tests done.

Animals shouldn't have to die just so that middle-aged women can get a more effective anti-wrinkle cream. :(