[ 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

Re: Secret 2 related

[ryttu3k]

No, I was NOT saying how that's how it works!

I was saying that the animals most frequently used for animal testing are not, in fact, humans. I was using cats as an EXAMPLE of something where something may produce a very different response in an animal being tested on rather than on human clinical trials.

Do you honestly think that mice and rats are going to respond to ANYTHING the same way as a human will? Seriously?

And see, here's the thing. There have been drugs that have been approved because they're non-harmful to animals but have SERIOUS side effects in humans. Look up Diethylstilbestrol - after extensive animal testing, it was declared safe as a synthetic estrogen in the belief that it would prevent miscarriage. Turns out, when given to humans? It CAUSES miscarriage and premature births, and for those who did survive, many ended up developing cancers (look up DES Daughters and DES Sons). Clearly, animal testing did fuck all here for safety, and yet it was approved SOLELY based on that. If they had done clinical trials with human volunteers who were aware of the risks, then it most likely would not have been approved. Or Isuprel! Originally used as an asthma medication, the dosage in the UK and Australia that was believed to be safe based on the amounts that were safe for animals ended up causing what's described as an epidemic of deaths. Again, animal testing said, "Hey, this is the safe dose", when it turns out that that's lethal for humans.

Humans and rats are not the same type of animal and are going to react extraordinarily differently to things and so animal testing is unnecessary, how is that so hard to comprehend?