[ SECRET POST #2750 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2750 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________


















02. [WARNING for animal death]




__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 058 secrets from Secret Submission Post #393.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Ok, doing cruel shit to living beings is a sad part of medical and scientific advancement. We get this.

What would you all prefer? mice and rats and shit? Or condemned criminals?

Re: Secret 2 related

[kaijinscendre]

Mice, rats, rabbits, pigs, etc. Inevitably there will have to be human trials. But these should be done with consenting subjects.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Criminals condemned to what.

I would hope "criminals" don't get put into medical testing for possesssing pot.

Re: Secret 2 related

[iceyred]

Condemned criminals.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

I'm okay with all of it, though the human trials should be done with consent. It's not like lab animals in cages make me happy, but it'd be hypocritical to enjoy the benefits of all the scientific and specifically medical advances that wouldn't be possible without animal testing.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Human experimentation would probably get more accurate results and I don't really give a shit about what happens to criminals who have committed terrible crimes but I still hesitate to say they should be experimented on

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Cruel medical experiments should be done on:

- People who clog up escalators by standing wherever they want
- People who walk down halls slowly side-by-side
- Anyone who tries to talk to people about their religion on a public street
- Anyone who tries to get me to listen to their spiel about their charity and insults me when I don't stop no matter how much of a hurry I'm in
- Frat boys
- Bad drivers
- People who try to chat with me about stupid crap while I'm working and won't take the hint that I'd rather just do my work

I could probably think of a lot more.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Honestly, I would greatly prefer that drugs be tested on serious criminals. Might as well let them have some positive impact on society.

Re: Secret 2 related

[xalus]

I would be all for testing on criminals convicted of violent offenses, but then again, there are always innocents that get wrongly convicted, and that would be really adding to the general suckiness of the whole going-to-prison-for-something-you-didn't-do thing, so I'd probably have to say animals.

Re: Secret 2 related

[queerwolf]

Criminals condemned for violent crimes

Re: Secret 2 related

[kallanda_lee]

Rodents - criminals are still people, not to mention not all crimes are equal and innocent people do end up in jail.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Experimenting on non-consenting humans is a crime. It shouldn't be punishment for one no matter what the criminal did.

Before anyone says it, yes, I am 100% against the death penalty, prison labor, and other prison conditions that are illegal everywhere else.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE DUE TO THISE THREAD

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

I don't approve of experimenting or killing criminals, even "condemned" men. However I do understand that some times D-class personnel may be required to voluntarily put their lives at risk for the greater good. Of course anyone voluntarily asking what the alternative to volunteering is should report to personnel office for status reclassification.

Re: Secret 2 related

[otakugal15]

Animals, mostly. but say...people along lines of Manson? Use them. I don't fucking care. At least use our tax money for some good and kill two birds with one stone.

B/

No.

[(Anonymous)]

All of you who are suggesting that we should test on human subjects without informed consent really need to read "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" and see how incredibly wrong you are.

Re: Secret 2 related

[augustbird]

mice because they have a relatively short generation turnover with many established protocols that don't exist for other model organisms, including humans.

but in all honesty this isn't really a valid question from a scientific standpoint, so.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Preferably none of the above.

Obviously I have to say test on animals over humans, but I'm 100% against tests that deliberately put animals through severe pain or emotional distress. If testing is necessary, the animal should be comfortable and entitled to its own happiness - play, socialization, exercise.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

Consenting individuals.

And even then, depending on how extreme the experiment/study, I might prefer no one.

Re: Secret 2 related

[cloud_riven]

I'd rather have prisoners work toward rehabilitation, than be turned into replacements and commodities. I don't actually identify with rats and mice for all that I read Redwall during my developmental years :U

Re: Secret 2 related

[darkmanifest]

Testing requires a lot of controls. Condemned criminals who've been on death row long enough for all their appeals to have run out are too few and too much the same (overwhelmingly male, white, and middle aged) to be of much use for testing. For scientists to get the variety they need for useful results, we'd have to increase how easy it is to get condemned and restrict the appeals process, which would lead to much more innocent test subjects, and kind of defeats the point of the "deserving" getting tested on that lurks behind this question, as if testing is a punishment instead of a necessity.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

See, I'm for the death penalty, but I would be very against testing condemned criminals.

Re: Secret 2 related

[(Anonymous)]

I'd prefer using any kind of animal to nonconsensual human trials.

Re: Secret 2 related

[ryttu3k]

Neither. Trials with consenting human participants (what do people think clinical trials are, seriously?), and testing using things like synthetic skin (for things like make-up), computer modelling, artificial organs (3D printing is coming along very nicely!), and stuff like that.

I'm completely against testing on non-consenting humans for all the reasons listed above, but I'm also completely against animal testing as well. On top of it being cruel and sadistic, it's also terrible science, since most animals used in testing have major physiological differences. For instance, cats? Either aspirin or paracetamol/acetominaphen, I don't remember which one, is lethal to them. If it had been tested on cats, it wouldn't have been approved, when it's fine for humans. The physiological differences affect drug interactions, healing time, and a host of other things - the ONLY way to develop medical science and medicine for humans properly and efficiently and safely is to make sure the tests are run ON HUMANS.

Re: Secret 2 related

[diet_poison]

I can't believe so many people picked the latter option. That's sightly frightening.