by "BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather" (bugeyedacura)
Published 04/28/2017 at 16:40
by "BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather" (bugeyedacura)
Published 04/28/2017 at 16:40
No Tags
STARS: 4
And I have no words. I can’t believe that this kind of barbaric treatment of animals still happens today. Let alone at a place where students need safe spaces because opposing thoughts hurt them.
"NostalgicCarLife" (nostalgiccarlife)
04/28/2017 at 16:50, STARS: 0
I wonder why beagles specifically.
"BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo" (bluemazda2)
04/28/2017 at 16:50, STARS: 2
I may or may not have teared up reading that. I love beagles.
There’s a special place in hell for those people.
Safe spaces are fucking stupid. I could never go to UCSD or any other UC school. I’d probably be excommunicated for being a Conservative Republican teenage Latino immigrant. I could offend and trigger them. Oh the horror!
"CaptDale - is secretly British" (captdale)
04/28/2017 at 16:53, STARS: 6
1. Fuck safe spaces
2. Fuck the people that do this. They don’t even deserve a space in hell. They deserve to know 100% that there is nothing for them. Just black, stuck in a void with only their inner voice and crippling guilt.
"itschrome" (itschrome)
04/28/2017 at 17:03, STARS: 1
Mostly thier size and general temperament. Which makes them easy to work with. They are the most common dogs used for testing.
"Sovereign, Purveyor of Coupes" (sovereign-automotive)
04/28/2017 at 17:07, STARS: 2
Holier-than-thou bullshit.
Anyone who would do this to an animal, especially a dog, an animal specifically bred and raised for companionship and trust, deserves to get fucked with a rake.
"itschrome" (itschrome)
04/28/2017 at 17:17, STARS: 4
well ok yeah if you break it down in to simple concepts you can make most things sound awful. these tests are conducted for a reason and it’s not to torture the animals and they are preformed with ethical guide lines. These tests were conducted to find out the the lack or increased thermal response of a patient that may end up using these drugs. they also were’t forced to stay there and be burned. the heat was slowly increased and discomfort measured, or lack there of.
"Bman76 (hates WS6 hoods, is on his phone and has 4 burners now)" (bman76-4)
04/28/2017 at 17:26, STARS: 2
Yeah, animal testing exists, nothing here sounds unethical. I imagine the surgical implants were done properly under anesthesia, not by some guy named bob with a DeWalt he bought at Home Depot.
"CB" (jrcb)
04/28/2017 at 17:31, STARS: 3
I feel like there’s a lot of information missing here and that this is done solely for emotional reaction. Research has to pass ethics approval in order for it to be done.
Also of note: a lot of these dogs are bred specifically for research. You’re not going to take an old dog or a sick dog and do research on them, you’re going to try to control as many variables as possible by going with a dog you know pretty much everything about.
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 17:42, STARS: 6
I won’t rush to deny, but I do work in animal research and may provide some insight.
1. This is obviously coming from a bias source. PETA type organizations are known to exaggerate claims
2. Every research organization that receives federal funding is overseen at both an institutional level (IACUC) and the federal level (depends on where the grants come from, in my case, USDA). These committees are VERY and I mean VERY strict regarding what can and cannot be done. Every experiment is submitted for approval from IACUC. These committees by law are comprised of vets, researchers and someone from outside the research world to provide additional feedback.
Everyone who handles or works with animals must be trained by this committee, and time any changed are made to your protocol they must be approved by the AICUC. Even little things like what time of day the experiments are done must be approved.
3. I and everyone else I have met in my field, including people at UCSD, have the animals in mind when we perform ANY work. We don’t look to torture animals for the sake of data. Even if that were the case, we would be shut down from the oversight committees. We have no reason to want to hurt the animals. If anything, it hurts our data more.
Please ask me any questions so that I may clarify. Animal researchers are not the evil people we are made out to be in Hollywood.
"RallyWrench" (rndlitebmw)
04/28/2017 at 17:45, STARS: 0
That’s horrible, but perhaps the date is incorrect or even intentionally misleading? This was supposed to have ended there, I remember a news blurb on it.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sd-utbg-dogs-experiments-cruelty-20161215-story.html
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 17:49, STARS: 6
cough..... please see my comment below
I won’t rush to deny, but I do work in animal research and may provide some insight.
1. This is obviously coming from a bias source. PETA type organizations are known to exaggerate claims
2. Every research organization that receives federal funding is overseen at both an institutional level (IACUC) and the federal level (depends on where the grants come from, in my case, USDA). These committees are VERY and I mean VERY strict regarding what can and cannot be done. Every experiment is submitted for approval from IACUC. These committees by law are comprised of vets, researchers and someone from outside the research world to provide additional feedback.
Everyone who handles or works with animals must be trained by this committee, and time any changed are made to your protocol they must be approved by the AICUC. Even little things like what time of day the experiments are done must be approved.
3. I and everyone else I have met in my field, including people at UCSD, have the animals in mind when we perform ANY work. We don’t look to torture animals for the sake of data. Even if that were the case, we would be shut down from the oversight committees. We have no reason to want to hurt the animals. If anything, it hurts our data more.
Please ask me any questions so that I may clarify. Animal researchers are not the evil people we are made out to be in Hollywood.
"CaptDale - is secretly British" (captdale)
04/28/2017 at 17:59, STARS: 0
I know there are guide lines. I suppose these types of posts are meant to stir emotions and paint the experimenters in a bad light. So I apologize for my blatant assumption you all torture.
Can we at least agree safe space are worse for the world than animal testing?
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 18:04, STARS: 3
haha, yes those are a bit ridiculous. And if it makes you feel better, I cannot find any research published on alfentanil used on dog in san diego. I’m calling horseshit on this, like most of these exagerated claims. I don’t disagree this can never happen. That was the whole reason why animal use committees were formed in the first place
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
04/28/2017 at 18:04, STARS: 1
Considering thousands of cows are essentially shot in the head at point blank range on a daily basis, getting upset over animal testing makes little to no sense.
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 18:05, STARS: 2
cough..... please see my comment below
I won’t rush to deny, but I do work in animal research and may provide some insight.
1. This is obviously coming from a bias source. PETA type organizations are known to exaggerate claims
2. Every research organization that receives federal funding is overseen at both an institutional level (IACUC) and the federal level (depends on where the grants come from, in my case, USDA). These committees are VERY and I mean VERY strict regarding what can and cannot be done. Every experiment is submitted for approval from IACUC. These committees by law are comprised of vets, researchers and someone from outside the research world to provide additional feedback.
Everyone who handles or works with animals must be trained by this committee, and time any changed are made to your protocol they must be approved by the AICUC. Even little things like what time of day the experiments are done must be approved.
3. I and everyone else I have met in my field, including people at UCSD, have the animals in mind when we perform ANY work. We don’t look to torture animals for the sake of data. Even if that were the case, we would be shut down from the oversight committees. We have no reason to want to hurt the animals. If anything, it hurts our data more.
Please ask me any questions so that I may clarify. Animal researchers are not the evil people we are made out to be in Hollywood.
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 18:07, STARS: 4
Especially considering our work is for the benefit of sick people. Our current medical technologies would be impossible without animals, and I thank them daily for it
"CaptDale - is secretly British" (captdale)
04/28/2017 at 18:07, STARS: 0
Glad to know more
"yamahog" (yamahog)
04/28/2017 at 18:11, STARS: 3
that’s not what safe spaces even are but ok. I’m fairly confident I’ve been through this before so I won’t bother laying out an explanation that will fall on deaf ears because people would rather be offended by what they think a buzzword means than actually look it up, and that’s their prerogative.
"BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo" (bluemazda2)
04/28/2017 at 18:42, STARS: 0
I understand completely now. My apologies. Also, i will note that if anything, most of my post was taking a dig at UCSD and the safe spaces.
Thank you though. I appreciate the explanation.
"DucST3-Red-1Liter-Standing-By" (ducst3-red-1liter-standing-by)
04/28/2017 at 18:48, STARS: 1
no problem! I know we get a bad rep. Like I said elsewhere, I can’t find any published research on drug research on dogs at UCSD, I’m calling bullshit