Now Playing Tracks

thedragondancer asked:

Do you have any reliable sources for why animal testing is unnecessary to progress science?


Besides the fact that it’s ethically barbaric, I would like to share the facts with you that have brought me to the conclusion that animal testing is a waste of time.

-In the book Vivisection Unveiled  Dr John Carpenter explains that 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% as explained in the MEIC Evaluation of Acute Systemic Toxicity. 

-92% of drugs passed by animal tests immediately fail when first tried on humans because they’re useless, dangerous or both. This is revealed in the 1998 book Nature Biotechnology. 

-The two most common illnesses in the Western world are lung cancer from smoking and heart disease. Neither can be reproduced in lab animals as published in Smoking: New York Times and Heart disease: Animal Models in Cardiovascular Research.

-A 2004 survey of doctors in the UK- commissioned by patient safety group Europeans for medical progress- showed that 83% wanted an 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.

-In the Drug Metabolism reviews, it’s said that 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. This was published in World Medicine Volume 79.

-Volume 298 of Science Magazine said 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.

-Page 41 of Vivisection Unveiled says that gender differences among lab animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.

-AP Fletcher revealed that 75% of side effects identified in animals never occur.

-Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics said that 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. This was revealed in Current Opinions in Lipidology.

-Science Volume 297 said that genetically modified animals are not like humans. The mdx mouse is supposed to have muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate with no treatment.

-The Journal of the American Medical Association published that 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.

-The Journal of the American Medical Association also said that in America, 106,000 deaths a year are attributed to reactions to medical drugs.

-Nature Medicine 2000 revealed that each year, 2.1 million Americans are hospitalised as a result of 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. Earl Baldwin published this.

-Professor Hoff at the congress of clinical medicine said that 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 doctor’s congress Munchner concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.

-Munchner also concluded that according to a thorough study, 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which passed animal tests.

-Developmental Toxicology said that 70% of drugs which cause human birth defects are safe in pregnant monkeys.

-Volume 19 of Biogenic Amines revealed that 78% of foetus-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. This was published in Sax’s Dangerous Properties Of Industrial Materials.

-One of the most common lifesaving operations (for ectopic pregnancies) was delayed 40 years by vivisection said the Birmingham Daily Post.

-In The Story Of Medicine by K. Walker, it’s said that blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies.

-The polio vaccine was delayed 40 years by monkey tests said the Yale University Press in the report The History Of Poliomyelitis.

-The Journal of the American Paraplegic Society published that 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.”

In conclusion, the practice is not only unethical but obsolete. 

When vivisectionists are asked why they use animals in labs, they tell us it’s because the animals are like us. But when asked why it’s acceptable to do this to animals, they tell us it’s because the animals are not like us.


Just because it seems teacup pigs are coming back and all I see is ~omg cute i want a pig now~, I think this seriously needs to be addressed:
"Teacup" pigs are produced by humans using incredibly cruel methods. The mothers are impregnated before they are fully grown, as babies themselves, in order to stunt the growth of the piglets. Mothers are underfed in order to produce runts (the "super cute" teacup pigs) - weak, fragile, malnourished and riddled with health problems.

When they are born, the piglets are only allowed to feed from their mothers for approximately 1 week (again, to deprive them of the nutrients and food they need to grow), they are taken from their mothers (in many of these “cute” videos you can clearly still see their umbilical cords) and in order to be kept small, are underfed for the rest of their typically short lives.

Common health problems for teacup pigs (and other teacup animals) are:

  • Heart Deformities, often resulting in a short lifespan.
  • Digestive system deformities (very common in teacup pigs).
  • Liver deformities, known as shunts.
  • Prone to Hypoglycemia.
  • More at risk to head/brain injury as the soft spot on their skull may not harden correctly.
  • More susceptible to illness and stress.
  • Tend to have more fragile bones.
  • More dental problems.
  • Higher rate of Epilepsy.
  • More prone to dehydration.
  • Physical defect where the outside stops growing but the internal organs continue to
  • Other deformities in offspring due to inbreeding often used to get such small animals.

And finally, to add insult to injury, many MANY of these pigs end up growing, despite the chances they have. Which means they are abandoned, surrendered, sold (sometimes into slaughter) and left homeless because people didn’t get the minuscule, permanent foetuses they signed up for.

So before you start with the “so cute” and “I want one” bullshit, actually think about the pigs and the disgusting way they’re manipulated, modified and abused by humans. It’s not all so cute and innocent now. So not are we now eating pigs (one of the most abused animals on the planet), we can now abuse and torture them in a different way and display them as cute accessories/must-have items. When will you people be satisfied with the amount of damage you have done and continue to support?






Military Sign Language

YES, this is very relevant to my interests…

HUGE pet peeve of mine, I see it a lot in TV shows. The troops are walking quietly toward their objective. The leader holds up his hand in the halt signal and then



The whole point of these hand signals is to be silent so the close range enemies you’re about to engage DON’T HEAR YOU GIVING COMMANDS

though why I’m still expecting sense out of tv shows I don’t even know


(Source: wind-wave)


all you upper class whites can pour buckets of water over your head to your hearts content, meanwhile millions go without clean water and the worldwide water epidemic continues
but remind me again about your deep rooted concern for those less fortunate than you
even if you do donate money it’s just going towards fruitless and outdated animal testing trials, so you’re managing to support animal cruelty while you’re at it

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union