Recent comments in /f/IAmA

TylerJWhit t1_jbaozxn wrote

Why do you choose to associate yourselves with an organization that is far removed from its actual claimed intent? PETA kills upwards of 90% of all animals it 'rescues': https://newsfeed.time.com/2013/04/09/peta-takes-heat-over-claims-it-killed-90-of-animals-dropped-off-at-virginia-shelter/

Do you think it's OK that PETA members dressed up in KKK robes to protest the Westminister Kennel Club Dog Show?

Are you concerned with the garbage disinformation that PETA spread regarding milk causing Autism?

Do you stand by PETA's criticism of Steve Irwin?

Do you maintain that meat consumption is a form of toxic masculinity?

Do you maintain that people should not have pets?

Are you concerned about the lies PETA spread about sheep shearing?

Why not work for a more reputable animal rights organization? There are plenty here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animal_rights_groups

173

bigkinggorilla t1_jbanvcb wrote

Yes, but in cases where the testing is necessary because the models aren’t able to fully replicate the animal, what steps can be taken to minimize their suffering afterwards?

37

[deleted] OP t1_jbanekm wrote

Good question, u/melon_23! Anyone can encourage research funders or institutions to replace the use of animals in experiments by contact their representatives to support the Research Modernization Deal (you can take action at the bottom of this page: PETA.org/RMD. You can also contact your local colleges and universities to let them know you don't support animal testing. And be sure to always buy products labeled cruelty free (https://crueltyfree.peta.org/)! If you are a student in the sciences and are feeling pressured to test on animals, we can help! Reach out to us: https://headlines.peta.org/science-advancement-outreach-division/who-we-are/#contact.

−7

[deleted] OP t1_jbampoa wrote

The majority of people in the U.S. are in agreement that they want to see the use of animals in research completely replaced. Public opposition to the use of animals in experiments has increased steadily, from 8% in 194842 to 52% in 2018.

−3

[deleted] OP t1_jbal960 wrote

This is the question of the hour u/that1dyke. There are a few things holding NIH and other agencies back. One would be inertia from the biomedical sector (it's hard to try something new!). Another is the billion-dollar industry that exists to maintain testing on animals (selling animals and all the equipment that is used to house them and perform procedures on them).

−1

motherof3kitties t1_jbakhz2 wrote

In your experience, is the general public with you or against you on this issue? I feel like most people claim they are against animal testing but not sure most people are actually informed on the issues?

−20

[deleted] OP t1_jbak7pv wrote

They are related, but not the same. The FDA Modernization Act gave the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the statutory authority to consider evidence from non-animal methods—including data from in silico tools and complex in vitro models of human physiological systems, like organoids and organs-on-chips—when assessing whether a new compound can enter clinical trials with human volunteers. And the Research Modernization Deal can take us the rest of the way, providing a path to phasing out experiments on animals in non-regulatory research!

−23