# Should vivisection be banned?



## testmg80

Monday, October 13, 2008

HEADTOHEAD : Laura Broxson argues that vivisection is cruel, unnecessary and rooted in a refusal to see animals as our equals, while Veronica Campbell says a ban would end scientific advances in medicine and deprive patients of treatments for incurable conditions

YES

VIVISECTION IS the live experimentation on, and dissection of, animals. Thousands of animals such as mice, rats, guinea pigs, cats, dogs, rabbits and pigs, to name but a few, are killed this way in Ireland every year - in laboratories such as those in Trinity College Dublin.

The secrecy that surrounds these animal experiments indicates that the atrocities involved would be unacceptable to most people.

Some colleges claim that they only experiment on animals who are under anaesthetic. This can be an extremely misleading statement, as by this, a lot of researchers are actually referring to a process called "pithing".

Pithing is a procedure used to immobilise an animal, by inserting a needle up through the base of the skull (from the back) and then wiggling the needle around, scrambling the brain, and severing the spine. This allows for live dissection, and the observation of the animal's living physiology (as the animal is still actually alive). The animal may be unable to move, but who can say whether or not it is actually brain dead, and not just brain damaged, when forced to endure the experiment? If the scientists and students who conduct tests in Trinity College truly believe in what they are doing, and have no ethical qualms about it, we would challenge them to set up live webcams in their laboratories, so that anyone may tune in and watch what they are doing, at any given time.

Vivisection is not essential to medical progress. Animals do not need to suffer in order to find cures for human diseases. The fundamental flaw of animal-based research is referred to as "species difference".

This means that animal tests are basically unreliable as a way to predict effects in humans. Not only that, but as we have seen many times, positive results in animal studies can prove disastrous when applied to humans. In fact, animal research has been shown time and again to hold back medical progress for people.

Here are just a few examples: arthritis painkiller Vioxx, which was withdrawn in 2004, caused over 140,000 strokes and heart attacks (almost 60,000 fatal), even though it appeared safe when tested on animals.

In the 1980s, thousands of people were given HIV-contaminated blood, which was deemed safe as it did not affect chimpanzees (chimpanzees are essentially immune to HIV).

Blood transfusions were delayed by 200 years and corneal transplants delayed by 90 years as a result of animal studies.

Twenty-two drugs to treat spinal cord damage were developed on animals - all failed when applied to humans.

The notoriously dangerous drugs thalidomide and diethylstilbestrol (DES) were tested on animals and released for human use. Tens of thousands suffered and/or died as a result.

In 2006, TGN1412, a new drug for leukaemia, cancer, multiple sclerosis and arthritis, caused disastrous side effects in the first human volunteers - even though it had passed tests on monkeys who were given doses 500 times greater than those given to the volunteers.

Rats and mice are the animals primarily used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer which affects membranes (eg lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: the two cannot be compared.

Even a former director of Huntingdon Life Sciences (which is one of Europe's largest animal testing facilities) admitted that animal tests only correctly predict effects in humans between 5 and 25 per cent of the time. Compare that to the fact that human cell culture tests have proven to be 80 per cent accurate.

Today there is a wealth of sophisticated techniques available for use that offer a cruelty-free, reliable alternative to animal testing, including computer modelling, tissue cultures, epidemiological studies and clinical studies. DNA chips provide further valuable information. They allow researchers to see who will respond to a drug, who will not respond, and who may be harmed by it.

But more important than any scientific argument is the fact that there is absolutely no moral or ethical justification whatsoever in testing on animals - regardless of any benefit to humans it may result in.

If humans were the ones being experimented on against their will, would you agree with it? Of course not! So what makes people feel that it is acceptable to use animals in this way? Is it a trait inherent in humans, to take advantage of beings whom they deem "lesser"? To exploit the vulnerable, profit from suffering, or to deny a fellow species of this planet their fundamental right to life, to freedom? Animals are living, breathing, feeling, sentient beings who deserve to be treated as equals - and it's time people started to realise this.

We are calling upon the people of this country to help us stop the crimes inflicted against animals every day in Trinity College. Demand justice - demand a complete ban on vivisection in Ireland.

 Laura Broxson is an activist with the National Animal Rights Association

NO

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH is driven by the necessity to develop therapies for diseases that are currently incurable. The translation of new therapies from the laboratory into the clinic only arises following years of rigorously conducted research involving an array of experimental approaches, including computer modelling of drug-protein interactions, the investigation of cell function in a Petri dish and animal experimentation. The final stages in the development of a new drug or therapeutic strategy involves studies on healthy humans and eventually a clinical trial.

In Ireland, animals used by researchers, which are predominately rats and mice, are housed in designated high specification units and are monitored closely by a veterinarian and qualified animal care staff. Researchers can only commence a study involving animals if they provide adequate scientific and ethical justification for the use of animals, the choice of species and minimum numbers of animals being used in the study. Those criteria are subject to repeated scrutiny by international panels of experts, funding agencies, scientific journals and universities.

Yes, alternatives to animal experiments exist and those approaches can provide information of value and are always considered by researchers in the first instance. For example, they can inform how a new drug may influence the function of a particular cell type. However, the very nature of those in vitro experiments, usually performed in cultured cells grown on a Petri dish, only provides a small piece of the physiological jigsaw that forms the intact body. No emergent property of a complex living system (eg high blood pressure) can be studied exclusively in a dish and the consequence of disease and the efficacy of experimental therapies on a whole organism must be considered before any advances can translate into improvements in patient care.

A ban on animal experiments would halt advances in medicine and would deprive patients and their families of a treatment for many medical conditions that are incurable and surgical conditions that are inoperable.

<snip>

 Prof Veronica Campbell is Head of Physiology at the School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin

© 2008 The Irish Times

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times

Should vivisection be banned? - The Irish Times - Mon, Oct 13, 2008


----------



## lizzie444

Yes it needs to be banned ASAP, it is sick and one of the worse forms of animal cruelty.
I am still disturbed by a video I watched yesterday of it .

I want to help as much as possible to get it banned worldwide also believe that anyone who still does it will go to prison.


----------



## cassie01

yes. im already doing loads for it and i wont stop until it has gone!!!!!

its evil and cruel and comletly stupid. when i wash my hair with shampoo i want to wash it with people shampoo not rabbit shampoo!!!! i also dont want millions of animals to have died just for a bit of pain relief or even my life. why is my life worth more then anothers??? its not, so why is it worth more then the billions of animals that die suffering world wide every year for the sake of mediine that rarely works anyways!!!

isnt this what criminals should be for, they moan about overcrowding prisons s they let rapists and murders out when they could be used for medical testing. theres loads of criminals wasting away using tax payers money, we should make them useful, the results would be much more accurate!!!

grrrrr


----------



## testmg80

cassie01 said:


> yes. im already doing loads for it and i wont stop until it has gone!!!!!
> 
> its evil and cruel and comletly stupid. when i wash my hair with shampoo i want to wash it with people shampoo not rabbit shampoo!!!! i also dont want millions of animals to have died just for a bit of pain relief or even my life. why is my life worth more then anothers??? its not, so why is it worth more then the billions of animals that die suffering world wide every year for the sake of mediine that rarely works anyways!!!
> 
> isnt this what criminals should be for, they moan about overcrowding prisons s they let rapists and murders out when they could be used for medical testing. theres loads of criminals wasting away using tax payers money, we should make them useful, the results would be much more accurate!!!
> 
> grrrrr


My sentiments exactly, that's why research labs like Huntingdon Life Sciences in the UK and in New Jersery U.S. should be closed down by any means possible. The SHAC 7 went to prison for their stand against HLS and it's investors, how many more will it take? I have seen far too many pictures of cats being cut apart (See my Post titled "The Cat") to put up with it anymore.
We have to do something about it, but what? We have to make vivisection illegal, that's where protests, petitions, letters to members of the Gov't. etc. come in. That and maybe a few DoS attacks against the web site might help. Oh, btw, I have the info somewhere, but I need it again, the complete address for HLS in in the UK. If someone could email it to me. or maybe in a PM it would be appreciated; it's time to start writing letters.

Steve


----------



## cherrie_b

I disagree. I love animals to bits but there is and always will be a natural order. I am not wanting to cause an argument. Just putting my point across. My brother and other family members might not be here today if it weren't for medical techniques discovered and improved using animal testing and 
vivisection. 

I totally agree that there is no need to torture animals....in terms of make-up and other cosmetics...as they are luxuries, not needs. But where life or death of a human is concerned I see things differently. 

I imagine there are many people on here who will say that it should be banned...yet they are taking medication only available due to animal testing etc.


----------



## FREE SPIRIT

cherrie_b said:


> I disagree. I love animals to bits but there is and always will be a natural order. I am not wanting to cause an argument. Just putting my point across. My brother and other family members might not be here today if it weren't for medical techniques discovered and improved using animal testing and
> vivisection.
> 
> I totally agree that there is no need to torture animals....in terms of make-up and other cosmetics...as they are luxuries, not needs. But where life or death of a human is concerned I see things differently.
> 
> I imagine there are many people on here who will say that it should be banned...yet they are taking medication only available due to animal testing etc.


I totaly agree and well said.


----------



## noushka05

i think it should be banned even for medical research because its outdated & unreliable & there are now other alternatives so using animals is cruel because its unesessary

BUAV state using animals in experiments for medical purposes is deeply flawed and old fashioned and an impedient to real medical progress, such procedures are fundamentaly compromised by the phsyical differences between Human beings and other species of animal.



These are the findings of Dr Jarrod Bailey, Scientific Director, Europeans for Medical Progress.(MEP are NOT an animal rights organisation, they are an organisation based on HUMAN ethics & believe that animal experiments do not serve the best interests of the public & compromise Human safety!)........

He said that claims about the effectiveness of animal experiments are meaningless without supporting evidence from scientific literature. He took 'The Associate Parliamentary group for Animal Welfare' through numerous examples of medical research being hindered or
delayed by animal experiments including the case of Antibiotics being shelved for 10 years due to an adverse reaction in rabbits.

He stated that medical progress advances 'despite' of and not because of animal use and stated that research must remain in a Human context. 

He quoted many instances of dangerously ineffective & misleading animal research from Primate based Aids research into Multiple sclerosis to stroke research, incluing the recently withdrawn arthritis drug Vioxx which had cardioprotective effects in animals but caused as many as 140,000 fatal heart attacks & strokes in Humans.

He said that 82% of GP's are concerned that animal Data can be misleading when applied to Humans & that animal experiments have Never been formally evaluated and the Home Office has no plans to do so.


----------



## sequeena

cherrie_b said:


> I disagree. I love animals to bits but there is and always will be a natural order. I am not wanting to cause an argument. Just putting my point across. My brother and other family members might not be here today if it weren't for medical techniques discovered and improved using animal testing and
> vivisection.
> 
> I totally agree that there is no need to torture animals....in terms of make-up and other cosmetics...as they are luxuries, not needs. But where life or death of a human is concerned I see things differently.
> 
> I imagine there are many people on here who will say that it should be banned...yet they are taking medication only available due to animal testing etc.


Blimming well said


----------



## lizzie444

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/stop-dissection-of-live-animals

Please see the above link, it is very distressing ,it is not good to be seen near young people as it is very disturbing. This is stuff of nightmares and it goes on, there is NO excuse for this sort of thing and needs to be banned now.

People who say that they wouldnt have been here if it wasnt animal experiments, havent you thought that animals will have died for your recovery?

There are no excuses in this day and age to have to experiment on animals,NO excuse.


----------



## sequeena

lizzie444 said:


> http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/stop-dissection-of-live-animals
> 
> Please see the above link, it is very distressing ,it is not good to be seen near young people as it is very disturbing. This is stuff of nightmares and it goes on, there is NO excuse for this sort of thing and needs to be banned now.
> 
> People who say that they wouldnt have been here if it wasnt animal experiments, havent you thought that animals will have died for your recovery?
> 
> There are no excuses in this day and age to have to experiment on animals,NO excuse.


If you were dying would you refuse the medication? I know I wouldn't!


----------



## noushka05

sequeena said:


> If you were dying would you refuse the medication? I know I wouldn't!


i wouldnt either, but there are alternatives to vivisection & many think using animals is actually hindering medical research.


----------



## sequeena

noushka05 said:


> i wouldnt either, but there are alternatives to vivisection & many think using animals is actually hindering medical research.


I don't if there are any alternatives, if there are then that's brilliant! No-one here wants any animal to die needlessly but if that's our only option then I would take the medicine to live :yesnod:


----------



## noushka05

sequeena said:


> I don't if there are any alternatives, if there are then that's brilliant! No-one here wants any animal to die needlessly but if that's our only option then I would take the medicine to live :yesnod:


my 1st post from a completely unbiased source, even EMP are against it they believe that even a little difference in DNA can make a Huge & life-threatening difference in medical research.


----------



## cassie01

cherrie_b said:


> I disagree. I love animals to bits but there is and always will be a natural order. I am not wanting to cause an argument. Just putting my point across. My brother and other family members might not be here today if it weren't for medical techniques discovered and improved using animal testing and
> vivisection.
> 
> I totally agree that there is no need to torture animals....in terms of make-up and other cosmetics...as they are luxuries, not needs. But where life or death of a human is concerned I see things differently.
> 
> I imagine there are many people on here who will say that it should be banned...yet they are taking medication only available due to animal testing etc.


just want to say i have not taken any form of medication for about 8 years now. partly because i dont think my life is worth more then billions of animals and partly because taking medicines make you weak, id much rather fight it off myself and make my body stronger. so far iv fought of tonsillitis and an ear infection, fortunatly i dont get ill often anyway but even if i was dying i wouldnt take anything except a lethal injection if needed, when its time for me to go i want to go, i dont like interfearing with nature.

just wanted everyone to know that i am not a hypocrite and there are also many others who think the same. not everyone who says vivisection is wrong then goes on to use the products made by tourture.:001_tt2:


----------



## sequeena

cassie01 said:


> just want to say i have not taken any form of medication for about 8 years now. partly because i dont think my life is worth more then billions of animals and partly because taking medicines make you weak, id much rather fight it off myself and make my body stronger. so far iv fought of tonsillitis and an ear infection, fortunatly i dont get ill often anyway but even if i was dying i wouldnt take anything except a lethal injection if needed, when its time for me to go i want to go, i dont like interfearing with nature.
> 
> just wanted everyone to know that i am not a hypocrite and there are also many others who think the same. not everyone who says vivisection is wrong then goes on to use the products made by tourture.:001_tt2:


I would love to be able to do that however I have a low immune system along with asthma (which I HAVE to take medication for I'm even on steroids) and I suffer with severe rheumatoid arthritis and hypermobility. I couldn't live without my medication :yesnod:


----------



## cassie01

sequeena said:


> I would love to be able to do that however I have a low immune system along with asthma (which I HAVE to take medication for I'm even on steroids) and I suffer with severe rheumatoid arthritis and hypermobility. I couldn't live without my medication :yesnod:


sorry if i came acocross a bit preachy, i dont expect other people to do it too, its up to them but i dont like it when people asume because i say im against something i dont actually stick to it. once i get something in my head i have to stick to it, a bit of a pride issue me thinks. lol


----------



## sequeena

cassie01 said:


> sorry if i came acocross a bit preachy, i dont expect other people to do it too, its up to them but i dont like it when people asume because i say im against something i dont actually stick to it. once i get something in my head i have to stick to it, a bit of a pride issue me thinks. lol


Don't worry, you didn't come across as preachy at all :001_tt2:


----------



## cassie01

sequeena said:


> Don't worry, you didn't come across as preachy at all :001_tt2:


thats good then i can get carried away at times. lol


----------



## testmg80

Instead of using animals for research to test drugs for human use, why not use child molesters, sex offenders, rapists, and felons for research. The results would be much more conclusive and meaningful. And it would make people think twice about committing heinous acts against children and others. They're not doing much good anyway. But then there would always be the bleeding heart liberals who would claim violation of civil rights and legalized Nazism. But what about the civil rights of the victims of crimes?
I still think vivisection should be banned everywhere, and other methods such as those above be used. I don't like looking at pictures of cut apart and dismembered live animals any more than anyone else, and in my 10 years of animal rights activism, I've seen plenty. As a footnote, years ago, I remember looking thru a particular magazine at photos of the Red Chinese and NVA cutting apart strung up captured American soldiers during the Vietnam War, it was not pretty, I had to remove those pages so I could finish reading the magazine. It still haunts me today. That's what cats amd dogs endure every day at HLS and other 'research' labs. Just my opinion.

Steve


----------



## FREE SPIRIT

testmg80 said:


> Instead of using animals for research to test drugs for human use, why not use child molesters, sex offenders, rapists, and felons for research. The results would be much more conclusive and meaningful. And it would make people think twice about committing heinous acts against children and others. They're not doing much good anyway. But then there would always be the bleeding heart liberals who would claim violation of civil rights and legalized Nazism. But what about the civil rights of the victims of crimes?
> I still think vivisection should be banned everywhere, and other methods such as those above be used. I don't like looking at pictures of cut apart and dismembered live animals any more than anyone else, and in my 10 years of animal rights activism, I've seen plenty. As a footnote, years ago, I remember looking thru a particular magazine at photos of the Red Chinese and NVA cutting apart strung up captured American soldiers during the Vietnam War, it was not pretty, I had to remove those pages so I could finish reading the magazine. It still haunts me today. That's what cats amd dogs endure every day at HLS and other 'research' labs. Just my opinion.
> 
> Steve


Funny how you use loads of medication....gonna stop taking it? No of curse you wont.


----------



## testmg80

FREE SPIRIT said:


> Funny how you use loads of medication....gonna stop taking it? No of curse you wont.


A lot of people take medication, how it was tested no one knows. and my personal business has no place in a forum like this.


----------



## FREE SPIRIT

testmg80 said:


> A lot of people take medication, how it was tested no one knows. and my personal business has no place in a forum like this.


If you were that interested you would check out if your medication was tested on animals.


----------



## testmg80

FREE SPIRIT said:


> Funny how you use loads of medication....gonna stop taking it? No of curse you wont.


My personal business is of no one's concern and this Forum is not the place to air it.


----------



## FREE SPIRIT

testmg80 said:


> My personal business is of no one's concern and this Forum is not the place to air it.


You aired your views on this forum...im merely suggesting if you were as concerned as you claimed then you would do your research and stick by your morals.


----------



## sequeena

FREE SPIRIT said:


> If you were that interested you would check out if your medication was tested on animals.


I have to agree FS :yesnod:

Either way in a perfect world no-one would get sick and no animals would get hurt but this isn't a perfect world.


----------



## cassie01

lets not argue, it matters not if you use the meds or not, about 80% of stuff passed by animal testing killed people and probably about the same percentage of stuff that wasnt passed by animal testing has saved lives. so even if a drug has been tested on animals orriginally its probaly been changed before being administered to people anyway!! also almost everyone deserves the right to live if thats what they want ok it might not be fair but if the will to live is that great theres not much other choice!!!

the point is there is no need to test medicines on animals with percentages like that, personally i wouldnt want to use drugs proved to work in mice as surley thats mice medicine not peoples!!! i dont know anyone that would take an animals medication if they had a similar illness to them, that would be stupid!! there are plenty of alternatives and spare people to test on! criminals, illegal immigrants etc so why waste animal life!! its unessecary and cruel


----------



## FREE SPIRIT

sequeena said:


> I have to agree FS :yesnod:
> 
> Either way in a perfect world no-one would get sick and no animals would get hurt but this isn't a perfect world.


Exactly.....


----------



## noushka05

toxicology testing on animals is extremely unreliable you might aswell toss a coin!

&#8220;Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies.&#8221; 
(Mike Leavitt, Health and Human Services Secretary, Food and Drug Administration Press Release Jan 12th 2006)

This means that even after all the animal tests, less than 1 in 10 drugs actually make it to become prescription drugs. This is a massive failure rate, which the FDA, one of the main drug regulators in the world, acknowledges.

Despite using over 100 million animals worldwide every year, less than 30 brand new drugs come onto the market on average every year in the US (the largest pharmaceutical market). This shows how hugely wasteful animal testing is.
(Anon 2008. Editorial: &#8220;Only 17 new molecular entities were approved by the US FDA in 2007, a fall from 53 in 1996&#8221;. Science 320, 1563)and Estimates of worldwide laboratory animal use in 2005. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 36, 327&#8211;342.)


----------



## Spellweaver

This is a very emotive subject. I take regular prescribed drugs for arthritis and high blood pressure - I know that when these drugs were researched they will have been tested on animals because that is the way things are done. The drugs are there; I need them in order to live; it is a fact of life.

However, all the latest research seems to be pointing towards the fact that testing on animals is actually unnecessary, so why should we continue to do it? Just because we did it in the past doesn't mean that we have to keep on doing it. I would much prefer to take a drug that has not been tested upon animals - at the moment, I do not have a choice.


----------



## noushka05

Spellweaver said:


> This is a very emotive subject. I take regular prescribed drugs for arthritis and high blood pressure - I know that when these drugs were researched they will have been tested on animals because that is the way things are done. The drugs are there; I need them in order to live; it is a fact of life.
> 
> However, all the latest research seems to be pointing towards the fact that testing on animals is actually unnecessary, so why should we continue to do it? Just because we did it in the past doesn't mean that we have to keep on doing it. I would much prefer to take a drug that has not been tested upon animals - at the moment, I do not have a choice.


well said x

everyone tho can join this virtual march against animal testing... End EU Animal Tests - Virtual March

Ricky Gervais's animal protest
Thursday, July 16, 2009 
Ricky Gervais has joined an online virtual protest against animal testing. 
The Office star has united with actress Joanna Lumley OBE and rockers Brian May CBE and Chrissie Hynde for the cyber Mave Animal Testing History campaign, which features virtual cartoon versions of themselves championing the cause at End EU Animal Tests - Virtual March.

Ricky said: "When I was asked if I'd like to back the campaign to Make Animal Testing History I said 'yes' immediately, as it is a cause that I am very, very passionate about


----------



## lizzie444

No I wouldnt but the point is that there is no longer any need for this barbaric treatment of animals in the name of medical research.


----------



## flufffluff39

I don't think any animal testing is right and try to use all products that state that. On the other hand though with human guinea pigs being payed for testing new drugs!! Thats not right either. I have watched many videos of vivisection and animal testing even for dog and cat food and they make me sick but at the end of the day what can the minority do when the majority are doing it???


----------



## turkeylad

noushka05 said:


> i think it should be banned even for medical research because its outdated & unreliable & there are now other alternatives so using animals is cruel because its unesessary
> 
> BUAV state using animals in experiments for medical purposes is deeply flawed and old fashioned and an impedient to real medical progress, such procedures are fundamentaly compromised by the phsyical differences between Human beings and other species of animal.
> 
> These are the findings of Dr Jarrod Bailey, Scientific Director, Europeans for Medical Progress.(MEP are NOT an animal rights organisation, they are an organisation based on HUMAN ethics & believe that animal experiments do not serve the best interests of the public & compromise Human safety!)........
> 
> He said that claims about the effectiveness of animal experiments are meaningless without supporting evidence from scientific literature. He took 'The Associate Parliamentary group for Animal Welfare' through numerous examples of medical research being hindered or
> delayed by animal experiments including the case of Antibiotics being shelved for 10 years due to an adverse reaction in rabbits.
> 
> He stated that medical progress advances 'despite' of and not because of animal use and stated that research must remain in a Human context.
> 
> He quoted many instances of dangerously ineffective & misleading animal research from Primate based Aids research into Multiple sclerosis to stroke research, incluing the recently withdrawn arthritis drug Vioxx which had cardioprotective effects in animals but caused as many as 140,000 fatal heart attacks & strokes in Humans.
> 
> He said that 82% of GP's are concerned that animal Data can be misleading when applied to Humans & that animal experiments have Never been formally evaluated and the Home Office has no plans to do so.


Absolutely right!!!!


----------



## Blitz

I cant see why the researchers would use animal testing if it was not the best way forward. It will be expensive, take a lot of time and be very frustrating. If there are other ways then all well and good but personally I would rather the most failsafe method was used.
I have worked with animals that were used for research into animal anaesthetics. I can honestly say they were all well treated, had a good if short life and didnt suffer in the slightest during any of the procedures. As they were all bred specifically for the job or, in the case of horses, sometimes donated so they could spend a year or so in happy retirement doing a useful job, I can honestly say that none of them had their lives cut short and that their quality of life (however long) was far better than a lot of pet animals.

If there are centres that do not follow the stringent laws that are laid down and have handlers that love their animals then they should be closed down, but I would imagine that most of the 'horror stories' are fabricated by the activists.


----------



## Guinevere13

Should vivisection be banned? YES.


----------



## fluffybunny2001

this may be harsh,but there are prisons full of peadophiles and rapists,use them!


----------



## Tigerneko

fluffybunny2001 said:


> this may be harsh,but there are prisons full of peadophiles and rapists,use them!


That is exactly what I think.


----------



## fluffybunny2001

glad im not the only one


----------



## emzybabe

turn this into a poll


----------

