Covance, anyone?
- Thread starter pyro
- Start date
Soldato
Pyro
they told him what they would be testing on him, and what it was for, as well as any side effects they were expecting. Obviously before they stuck it in him, otherwise it wouldnt matter what they were testing, you'd be stuck with it anyway!
they told him what they would be testing on him, and what it was for, as well as any side effects they were expecting. Obviously before they stuck it in him, otherwise it wouldnt matter what they were testing, you'd be stuck with it anyway!
Man of Honour
I agree! Let's bang up black people and non-Christians too!basmic said:
basmic, so you're saying you use medicine, and other products (tested on animals) but want to pretend that the products aren't tested on animals?
And your comment about forcing testing of experimental drugs on criminals without their consent
Have you considered joining the Nazi party?
I don't like animal testing either, but I'm afraid it has to be done. These animal rights people that threaten workers are nut jobs. Although from the looks of it these animal testing labs need to be all properly regulated and any OTT abuse should be reported and the people should be prosecuted
And your comment about forcing testing of experimental drugs on criminals without their consent
Have you considered joining the Nazi party?I don't like animal testing either, but I'm afraid it has to be done. These animal rights people that threaten workers are nut jobs. Although from the looks of it these animal testing labs need to be all properly regulated and any OTT abuse should be reported and the people should be prosecuted
Soldato
vaultingSlinky said:
[size = even smaller]Yup, although i am an evil capitalist pig, i just dont think there's any money in pumping babies full of anything
[/size = even smaller]why do you think the payoff is so good, because things may go wrong, you dont get something for nothing.
People > Animals > the french,
i dont like seeing cruelty to animals, but if i had to kill 10 monkeys to save one person, then i think i could and still sleep at night.
Soldato
basmic said:
From that:
I fail to see the relevance of this picture and quote. Hes just a guy that enjoys his job. Whats wrong with that?
Soldato
I had to click on this after someone else quoted it.basmic said:
What kind of twisted mind see animal testing as cruel but forced human testing as fine? Are you mental? Seriously, get a grip man.
Soldato
Tru said:
Test new drugs on murderers. They might as well at least try and contribute something to society, seeing as we can't just execute the wee buggers. Sitting in prision their whole lives is just leeching off the rest of the tax paying public.
before the thread get's locked for hopelessly unrecoverable derailment...
my wife used to work at the leeds covance. she managed trials.
it's as safe as anything can be. the worse you're likely to get is boredom.
the money is good. but the risk is yours. small as it may be.
if you're a student, it's a good way to earn a few quid.
i would have done it and i probably had a better insight than most, but being married to a manager there, wasn't allowed.
hth.
my wife used to work at the leeds covance. she managed trials.
it's as safe as anything can be. the worse you're likely to get is boredom.
the money is good. but the risk is yours. small as it may be.
if you're a student, it's a good way to earn a few quid.
i would have done it and i probably had a better insight than most, but being married to a manager there, wasn't allowed.
hth.
Permabanned
At the end of the day black/white/tanned/whatever criminals, are in the clink for a crime.
So why not 'punish' them using a few weeks medicine testing as an alternative to prison?
I see it as a way they can contribute to the society. It eleminates the need of animals who don't have the capacity to make a choice for themselves.
So why not 'punish' them using a few weeks medicine testing as an alternative to prison?
I see it as a way they can contribute to the society. It eleminates the need of animals who don't have the capacity to make a choice for themselves.
Man of Honour
Yeah, and because the drugs wouldn't have been tested on animals first there'd also be a much higher chance of eliminating them.basmic said:
Way to go.
Soldato
What if a criminal gets used for drug testing and it leaves him mentally and/or physically handicapped. It would then cost the state far more to care for him, maybe those ones should get put down.
Lets say someone is locked up for 10 years for embezzlement. He gets tested with the latest cancer cure, which unfortunately kills him. Evidence then comes to light that exonerates him, but now he's dead. Who do his family sue?
Lets say someone is locked up for 10 years for embezzlement. He gets tested with the latest cancer cure, which unfortunately kills him. Evidence then comes to light that exonerates him, but now he's dead. Who do his family sue?
Soldato
But....in my opinion, that s a good thing.Beansprout said:
Swings and Roundabouts.
Why? I would.AcidHell2 said:
Now now, personally I'd only have then test on murderers, violent criminals, and those dirty kiddy-fiddlers.Tru said:
Last edited:
Soldato
Does it? We're doing it to help people with serious illnesses. They do what they do to harm people to achieve their own (usually unrealistic) desires.AcidHell2 said:
Sure, its a bit harsh on the criminals, but then again, it might encourage more people that crime does not pay.
Meh? The animals are invariably innocent every time, yet its apparently ok to brutalise them regardless. One possible loss of an innocent, for the potential gain of many lives saved is an acceptable risk in my mind.vaultingSlinky said:
Last edited: