Of mice and men
-
That's obviously not true. Cuba's life expectancy ranks 37th in the world, and everybody knows that they have the best health care system in existence.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
Cuba's life expectancy ranks 37th in the world, and everybody knows that they have the best health care system in existence.
link? :P you keep repeating this and I have no clue what your on about ... atleast provide some sort of backing.
-
And you remember my words when you're lying on your death-bed stuffing ever more usekess pills down your throat, each to counteract the effects of the last, and wondering why you're still dying. And meanwhile you are betraying your ignorance if you think that the only alternatives are a block of wood and a hacksaw. You have been suckered by the hype that any drug or procedure that hasn't been tested on animals must be useless. Just as a statement on it's own, can't you see the illogicality of that?
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Cuba's life expectancy ranks 37th in the world, and everybody knows that they have the best health care system in existence.
link? :P you keep repeating this and I have no clue what your on about ... atleast provide some sort of backing.
originSH wrote:
atleast provide some sort of backing
Why? I'm pretending to be a liberal, so there's no need.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Have you been to see a psychiatrist? I don't think they have been tested on animals so you should be alright on that one :P
originSH wrote:
a psychiatrist? I don't think they have been tested on animals
If only.... read on (this is a repost of mine from an earlier thread some weeks ago) for an example of the sue of animals for (supposedly) psychiatric research. And when you've read it ask yourself who it is needs their head examined. These people are sick. ... For many years during the 1970's, the New York Museum of Natural History had been conducting experiments on cats which involved (according to the museum's own accounts) the infliction of a wide range of mutilations on sexually "experienced" male cats and on three-month old kittens, including the removasl of the eyeballs, the surgical destruction of the sense of hearing ans smell, lesionings of the brain, castration, severence of the spine, and more... I won't go into the details of how this was done, it is too disturbing... In 1978 Hans Ruesch was able to interview on radio the then president of the National Society for Medical Research, a Dr Dennis. HR asked DD what the purpose of such experiments was. This was his reply, verbatim: "You remember that rape is a serious problem, and you know that there are abnormalities in sexual behaviour that play a role in developing rape. I believe what they were working on was to try to figure out, working with cats, which in some respect have a brain that is comparable to the human - I know, I know it's not nearly as complex but in mnay respects for this sort of purpose it is - and they were studying, I believe, with this end in view. That is what they have been working on."
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
I just squeeze it out of my own tea tree. Doesn't everyone?
What is a tea tree?
John Carson
Its a big wooden thing with leaves. :~
The only conspiracies that concern me are the ones I am completely unaware of. By the time I find out about it, its probably a done deal. Nothing in the entire universe is more useless than morality without authority. A morality free of hypocrisy is no morality at all.
-
originSH wrote:
a psychiatrist? I don't think they have been tested on animals
If only.... read on (this is a repost of mine from an earlier thread some weeks ago) for an example of the sue of animals for (supposedly) psychiatric research. And when you've read it ask yourself who it is needs their head examined. These people are sick. ... For many years during the 1970's, the New York Museum of Natural History had been conducting experiments on cats which involved (according to the museum's own accounts) the infliction of a wide range of mutilations on sexually "experienced" male cats and on three-month old kittens, including the removasl of the eyeballs, the surgical destruction of the sense of hearing ans smell, lesionings of the brain, castration, severence of the spine, and more... I won't go into the details of how this was done, it is too disturbing... In 1978 Hans Ruesch was able to interview on radio the then president of the National Society for Medical Research, a Dr Dennis. HR asked DD what the purpose of such experiments was. This was his reply, verbatim: "You remember that rape is a serious problem, and you know that there are abnormalities in sexual behaviour that play a role in developing rape. I believe what they were working on was to try to figure out, working with cats, which in some respect have a brain that is comparable to the human - I know, I know it's not nearly as complex but in mnay respects for this sort of purpose it is - and they were studying, I believe, with this end in view. That is what they have been working on."
As stated earlier I'm not a full supporter of animal testing ... What was the outcome of this study? We're they vindicated and obtained information that greatly helped the profiling of rapists or were they just clutching at straws and a good example of why animal testing should be *very* careful thought about before use?
-
As stated earlier I'm not a full supporter of animal testing ... What was the outcome of this study? We're they vindicated and obtained information that greatly helped the profiling of rapists or were they just clutching at straws and a good example of why animal testing should be *very* careful thought about before use?
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
-
So the Nobel Prize for medicine has gone to researchers for their "groundbreaking work in gene technology" - introducing human diseases into mice via genetic changes to the animals' stem cells. Clickety[^] I have no problem with genetic research per se, and believe it could one day have tremendous and wonderful consequences, but anyone that believes the claim of the Nobel Committee (and other apologists for animal research) that such work "had led to many new insights into conditions such as cancer and heart disease" is fooling themselves. We hear this claim every two or three years, throughout my life and before it: "Folks, we are just a short step away from a cure for cancer! We just need a bit more of your time and patience... oh, and money." It ain't gonna happen. I promise you. Read my lips: in 20 yerars time you will still be dropping dead from cancer and heart disease, and these "scientists" will still be telling you how close they are to solving the problem and you - just like those Stanford University students back in the 50's - will bow and scrape to their white-sugar-coated wisdom and say "Yes Sir! Thank you, Sir!" There was as thread on here recently about some poor old sod in the US having trouble getting some $thousands medication for a fungal infection between his toes. I don't know his case, obviously, but I would stake money that a $10 botle of Tea Tree Oil from his local health store would have cleared it up in a couple of days. But that's the nature of the chemical-pharmaceutical-medical business these days: get this, folks: they have no interest in curing you. All they want is to carry on selling you more and more expensive drugs. So far, they're doing pretty well, and they will continue to do so as long as you continue to blindly follow every word they say. These monsters are creating as much disease, if not more, than they are curing. Half the drugs on the market today are only there to counteract the side-effects of the other half. There are far more medicines than diseases, and guess what? You are still getting ill, still dying from diseases they promised you cures to decades ago. Wake up. Why are you, like that man with the fungal infection, paying thousands in medical insurance when all you need is a little bit of nature? (Again, for the record, I haven't got a problem with medical insurance per se - just the current sys
You know what? This is just bloody insulting. I happen to have worked first hand as a cancer researcher. I happen to know alot of other physicists, radiation oncologists, cancer biologists and geneticists (some of whom died from cancer) that dedicate their lives to fighting this terrible disease. So for all of them who haven't seen this ridiculous thread of yours - thanks dumbass. Thanks for not having a clue and turning the life's work and dedication of thousands of individuals into a farce. Jackass.
-
You know what? This is just bloody insulting. I happen to have worked first hand as a cancer researcher. I happen to know alot of other physicists, radiation oncologists, cancer biologists and geneticists (some of whom died from cancer) that dedicate their lives to fighting this terrible disease. So for all of them who haven't seen this ridiculous thread of yours - thanks dumbass. Thanks for not having a clue and turning the life's work and dedication of thousands of individuals into a farce. Jackass.
I have no problem at all in insulting people like you. Don't give me the "I know what I'm talking about and you're just an ignorant fool" crap. Your work is a farce, except it's not evcen funny. It is sadistic crap. It is little short of evil - giving false hope to people while causing unnecessary suffering to animals on an immense scale. If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
-
And you remember my words when you're lying on your death-bed stuffing ever more usekess pills down your throat, each to counteract the effects of the last, and wondering why you're still dying. And meanwhile you are betraying your ignorance if you think that the only alternatives are a block of wood and a hacksaw. You have been suckered by the hype that any drug or procedure that hasn't been tested on animals must be useless. Just as a statement on it's own, can't you see the illogicality of that?
Right, right. You can use all sorts of "alternative" remedies that provide all the risks of real medicine with none of the benefits. At least the hacksaw actually does something, but by all means go with whatever feels right. Just be sure not to chicken out later, because I don't want the costs of emergency treatments for people like you to be reflected in my insurance costs.
-
I have no problem at all in insulting people like you. Don't give me the "I know what I'm talking about and you're just an ignorant fool" crap. Your work is a farce, except it's not evcen funny. It is sadistic crap. It is little short of evil - giving false hope to people while causing unnecessary suffering to animals on an immense scale. If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
Fred_Smith wrote:
If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
If a guy who does this[^] complimented my position on animal research, I just might take it as an insult. I certainly hope you don't have any children and, if you ever do, I certainly hope they never get cancer. I imagine that you're the type to refuse treatment and sentence them to death.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Right, right. You can use all sorts of "alternative" remedies that provide all the risks of real medicine with none of the benefits. At least the hacksaw actually does something, but by all means go with whatever feels right. Just be sure not to chicken out later, because I don't want the costs of emergency treatments for people like you to be reflected in my insurance costs.
James L. Thomson wrote:
I don't want the costs of emergency treatments for people like you to be reflected in my insurance costs.
Of course you don't - you'll happily take the pain, suffering and death of millions of sentient beings to save you from a headache, but won't give an inch to anyone who dares to disagree with you. Well, don't worry, some of us have integrity and you won't find me cluttering up your precious hospital beds. Much good may that fact do you.
-
James L. Thomson wrote:
I don't want the costs of emergency treatments for people like you to be reflected in my insurance costs.
Of course you don't - you'll happily take the pain, suffering and death of millions of sentient beings to save you from a headache, but won't give an inch to anyone who dares to disagree with you. Well, don't worry, some of us have integrity and you won't find me cluttering up your precious hospital beds. Much good may that fact do you.
Do you have dreadlocks?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Fred_Smith wrote:
If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
If a guy who does this[^] complimented my position on animal research, I just might take it as an insult. I certainly hope you don't have any children and, if you ever do, I certainly hope they never get cancer. I imagine that you're the type to refuse treatment and sentence them to death.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
They would get the best treatment available - which would be nowhere near any hospital you'd send yours to die in. I reckon mine would stand a better chance of sirvival than yours, whatever the type of cancer they had. And have a better quality of life in the meantime. If it was down to me, I'd have you all done for child cruelty, for giving your kids radiation therapy and chemo and sentencing them to life-imprisonment in some ghastly hospital ward or hospice while they're dying.
-
I have no problem at all in insulting people like you. Don't give me the "I know what I'm talking about and you're just an ignorant fool" crap. Your work is a farce, except it's not evcen funny. It is sadistic crap. It is little short of evil - giving false hope to people while causing unnecessary suffering to animals on an immense scale. If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
Fred_Smith wrote:
I have no problem at all in insulting people like you. Don't give me the "I know what I'm talking about and you're just an ignorant fool" crap. Your work is a farce, except it's not evcen funny. It is sadistic crap. It is little short of evil - giving false hope to people while causing unnecessary suffering to animals on an immense scale. If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
You can't insult me, so quit running your mouth. Instead of posting endless reams of your drivel on here, why don't you demonstrate you have something to contribute instead of ignorance. Ever visited a terminal cancer ward? No, you haven't. Especially a pediatric one. Why don't you go do that? While you're at it, why don't you also look at the available cancer treatments they use on animals too - you know, to save and respect life of not just people but animals too. I know you won't because I know that's not important to you. You're just a sadist who enjoys watching people, children and animals suffer.
-
Do you have dreadlocks?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Do you have balls?
-
James L. Thomson wrote:
I don't want the costs of emergency treatments for people like you to be reflected in my insurance costs.
Of course you don't - you'll happily take the pain, suffering and death of millions of sentient beings to save you from a headache, but won't give an inch to anyone who dares to disagree with you. Well, don't worry, some of us have integrity and you won't find me cluttering up your precious hospital beds. Much good may that fact do you.
I can't help but notice that you didn't try to refute my point about alt-meds not actually doing anything.
-
They would get the best treatment available - which would be nowhere near any hospital you'd send yours to die in. I reckon mine would stand a better chance of sirvival than yours, whatever the type of cancer they had. And have a better quality of life in the meantime. If it was down to me, I'd have you all done for child cruelty, for giving your kids radiation therapy and chemo and sentencing them to life-imprisonment in some ghastly hospital ward or hospice while they're dying.
Fred_Smith wrote:
They would get the best treatment available - which would be nowhere near any hospital you'd send yours to die in. I reckon mine would stand a better chance of sirvival than yours, whatever the type of cancer they had. And have a better quality of life in the meantime. If it was down to me, I'd have you all done for child cruelty, for giving your kids radiation therapy and chemo and sentencing them to life-imprisonment in some ghastly hospital ward or hospice while they're dying.
You like to run-off at the mouth. You post alot of big words, but they're vacuous. I have an idea - why don't you go watch a terminal cancer patient die before you write this shit.
-
Fred_Smith wrote:
I have no problem at all in insulting people like you. Don't give me the "I know what I'm talking about and you're just an ignorant fool" crap. Your work is a farce, except it's not evcen funny. It is sadistic crap. It is little short of evil - giving false hope to people while causing unnecessary suffering to animals on an immense scale. If you think I'm insulting you now, you ain't seen nothing.
You can't insult me, so quit running your mouth. Instead of posting endless reams of your drivel on here, why don't you demonstrate you have something to contribute instead of ignorance. Ever visited a terminal cancer ward? No, you haven't. Especially a pediatric one. Why don't you go do that? While you're at it, why don't you also look at the available cancer treatments they use on animals too - you know, to save and respect life of not just people but animals too. I know you won't because I know that's not important to you. You're just a sadist who enjoys watching people, children and animals suffer.
I spent three days and nights without (hardly any) sleep watching my father die in a cancer ward, sh*thead, so f*** off and die. And no-one that supports vivisection has any right to accuse someone else of enjoying watching animals suffer. You, in your line of work, have caused or supported more suffering than I ever will in tem thousand lifetimes.
-
I can't help but notice that you didn't try to refute my point about alt-meds not actually doing anything.
Fine. I refute it.