EnviroLink Forum

Hello,

I'm contacting you about the European citizens' initiative STOP VIVISECTION.
Thanks to this initiative, if we reach one million signatures, the European Commission will have to seriously take into consideration our request to end animal testing.

We have already obtained 479.000 signatures, that's nearly half of our goal!
In the United Kingdom, we have collected 5 200 signatures, 10% of the 54.750 expected signatures.

Please, come and sign the initiative on the official website http://www.stopvivisection.eu, and if possible spread out the word about it. We have until the end of October to collect the million signatures and therefore make our voices heard in the European Union.

Thank you.
Severine for STOP VIVISECTION

I'll sign but only if:

You can assure me that all one million people will be happy we will never be able to cure a number of serious diseases, not just in humans but also in animals, including newly emerging disases and epidemics; and are quite happy to put themselves forward as quality control human guinea pigs for items we already enjoy the benefit of but which still need occasional testing.

Cobie

Only European citizen can sign the initiative.

Animal experimentation has never undergone the "validation" process that is required of non-animal methods, although validation is the reference parameter that should apply equally to animal tests.

Animal testing is still used, due to the mental inertia hindering any change, but also and mostly due to massive economic interests. In fact, animal testing conveniently allows manufacturers of chemical products to select the species or strain of animals to suit their commercial interests.
Animal testing also allows getting around civil liability in the case of disasters, through the "uncertainty of evidence".

The consequence of this serious harm to the environment and human health, which are both increasingly compromised by chemical pollution.

Through the European Citizens' Initiative "Stop Vivisection", we aim at ensuring that a new directive replaces the Directive 2010/63, and that the EU, which is now stuck in an old scientific perspective, puts an end to such a long period of obscurantism and proposes a new law. In this new law, the rapid replacement of old testing in vivo with much more modern technologies available shall be defined.
This will provide immense benefits to:
. The realibility of results
. The completeness of data obtained
. The rapidity of responses
. Cost reduction

The abolition of vivisection will also contribute to a society of solidarity and respect for all living beings that we are striving to create, as this kind of society is the only one able to save our planet.

Source: the poster of the Stop Vivisection initiative.

"Change often involves a pivotal event that opens the door to a new era. Pivotal events in science include the discovery of penicillin, the elucidation of the DNA double elix, and the development of computers. Toxicology, is approaching such a pivotal point:".

These revolutionary words, referring to the transition from animal testing to in-vitro methods, of the USA National Research Council in the report "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century" (2007), have also been adopted by Donald Prater, head of the European Office of the US Food and Drug Administration, in a seminar at the European Parliament (10.10.12).

In fact, tests performed on animals are not predictive for humans and are a serious error in biomedical research, as well as an obstacle to the development of new revolutionary methods, based on the recent developments of biology and genetics.

Source: the poster of the Stop Vivisection Initiative.

Pardon me yawning but again you parrot without engaging the brain. Drug companies or researchers do NOT need another EU initiative, since companies look after their profits and shareholders (even AR people know that, they always reproach them for it) so they will use any cheaper validated and legally approved method not using animals if only because animals will always be more expensive than a tissue culture (and tissue cultures are not "animal-free"). But no tissue culture can replace the intact organism, and therefore the law protects the citizens by demanding drugs will after initial safety trials still be tested in whole animals; and only and only then be approved for release if they subsequently have also been tested in a series of human trials - as you, Letizia, have now been informed of several times on this forum, yet you give us all another dose of AR claptrap supporting a useless initiative.

We are at 520.000 signatures, and we need to reach 1.000.000 signature, mainly from 7 countries in European Union, before the 1st November 2013.

This is the situation of the signatures now
http://www.stopvivisection.eu/en/conten ... context=en

Please sign the initiative if you are European Citizen.
If not you can spread it in USA, also printing and pasting the manifests, spreading the leaflets that you can find at http://www.stopvivisection.eu/en/content/flyer

It's for animal rights, for your health, for how your money would be spent.

It does show which nations have the larger percentages of gullible citizens if the targets were based on percentage populations of the EU.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

No species is a good model for another species. You'll find more and more scientists confirming you that, including researchers members of associations like PCRM (US) and Antidote Europe (France). If you're really interested in that topic, and not commenting on this topic just to criticize a very good European Initiative, you can for example read an explanation here: http://antidote-europe.org/en/why-animals-are-not-good-models-for-the-study-of-human-disease/.
You can also find interviews of researchers opposed to animal testing on the Antidote Europe website.

People ARE guinea pigs in the actual system, since after products were tested on species which don't have the same reaction to the same substances, they're sold to us, and therefore tested on us... Look at medicines like Distilbene, Vioxx, Staltor, Acomplia, recently Mediator, which are responsible of numerous deaths and serious wounds. And that's just the most well-known ones...


Not really, no. Chemical companies are much more interested in selling a lot of products than in reducing their R&D costs, it's way more profitable for them. If they find a new substance (or more often change a very little bit an existing one), and realize that it's toxic on an animal, they just have to test it on another species or lineage which doesn't react to it, and they're good. I don't know the exact number but a scientist recently told me there's more than 200 lineages of mice and more than 200 of rats, with very different reactions to drugs and diseases. How convenient.

Antidote Europe's scientists recently conducted a study on human cells proving that this method is very reliable. 28 chemical substances were tested, all of them already known or "suspected" to be toxic for human health. The test method is called STP, for Scientific Toxicology Program. Here's the conclusion of the study:
As imperfect as it is, STP has already proven much more reliable that animal-based toxicology and should replace it at once. Carcinogenicity tests, which take several months and yield unreliable results in rodents, can be performed in a few days with STP, in conjunction with other tests (neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, acute toxicity, etc.). STP has the advantage of dealing with human genes, thus allowing the identification of sensitive individuals or groups of individuals to a particular substance, based on our knowledge of human polymorphism, unique to humans and not predictable through animal-based toxicology.
More information and detailed results of the study here: http://antidote-europe.org/en/campaigns/28-chemicals/.


Very constructive comment, thank you.


In conclusion: Sign Stop Vivisection, it's important for our health too! http://www.stopvivisection.eu/en

No, it show which country is more informed on the topic and ready to rebel to the conservatives.
Slovenia, Italy and Belgium are the leaders.


They are able to rebel to the conservative catholic oppressive mentality and to the strong economic powers of the drugs companies and researchers.

France and Spain are at the same level.

Bulgaria is relatively in a good position.

Germany is back. And that's strange because Germany is full of vegans, vegetarians and animalists. But the drugs companies and the researchers are very powerful there.
I think Germany will jump in a good position last minute.

No, you will find those with an agenda making such statements.



The problem is the bias in the misleading statements which are not based in scientific reality.



If you were actually educated on the subject, you should know that ALL of these products were tested on human subjects in clinical trials BEFORE they were put on the market. Are you now going to tell us that testing medicines on humans is not acceptable? The logical disconnect is huge and shows either a significant lack on knowledge or a willful misrepresentation in the attempt to support a belief.



How do you reach that conclusion? The leap seems almost superhuman. Why would a company want to place a product on the market they believe may result in not only no return on the investment, but also added legal liabilities for damages?



I suspect it was a "scientist" who had an agenda like has been espressed with the misinformation on drug testing here.



Another leap of faith? A single study and it should be used as the basis of toxilogical studies in the future? I wonder if the promoters will volunteer themsleves and their families as secondary testers? Maybe it will not be like the cold fusion single experiment ......



Since the actual information on how drugs are tested is ignored and misrepresented, it is more constructive than most of the rest of supporting posts in the thread.

You are welcome.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Not if the posters supporting the movement in this thread are any indication. The lack of knowledge or the willingness to misrepresent the truth is very evident.




Unless the Germans actually possess the knowledge of how things work and are not accepting of the misrepresentations presented them.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Some background on the PCRM:

http://www.activistcash.com/organizatio ... -medicine/

“Less than 5 percent of PCRM’s members are physicians,” Newsweek wrote in February 2004. The respected news magazine continued:

The fact that the AMA has had so many problems with the medical claims is interesting in and of itself.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

This is off topic.
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) says obvious things: Americans should not eat hamburgers at fast food. That causes cancer and lots of other diseases.
It's true a vegan diet fights cancer.
A vegan diet is not good for everyone, but eating less red meat and less cheese improves the health of everyone.
Meat and dairy products are acidifying, putting in trouble the basic-acid equilibrium of the body.
It's true that USA with Mc Donald's and fast food has the hightest percentage of cancer and cardio vascular diseases. With big profits of meat factories, fast foods, drug companies, researchers.
The economical powers are not interested in prevention. They make money with the diseases and sickness of the people.

I know Gary Francione: he is crazy. He suggests a vegan diet for cats. He promotes vegan food for cat company. I reported him on facebook as he is causing the death of lots of cats. He wants sell his stupid books.
PETA is not the best example of animalist NGO.

No, the PCRM and Antidote Europe were used as references to support the claims.






Most of the examples used have not be good ones, as they have been full of misrepresentations and clear bias positions.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

The company will have a return on the investment anyway.
It's very difficult for the consumers to prove that the product on the market caused them terrible damages.
The general doctors, the first aid and all the health system will protect the drug created by their friends, the researchers, and sold by their friends, the drugs companies.

It's sad to say but there is a mutual favouritism, a kind of symbiosis.

And it's very difficult for the consumer to do a legal action against a drug company. It's one against the system.