Chinese scientists clone five monkeys and deliberately give them mental health conditions using gene editing

Five cloned monkeys have been born with a host of genetic mental health conditions in a controversial experiment in China.

The monkeys - all clones of one primate - have been specially bred to create a 'diseased' population of animals to use in laboratory tests.

All five have the same DNA altered, which has resulted in symptoms similar to the human conditions of anxiety, depression and schizophrenia.

The quintet were born at the Institute of Neuroscience (ION) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) in Shanghai. Researchers used the same technique as was used last year to produce Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua – the first ever two cloned monkeys - and Dolly the sheep, famously cloned in the late 90s in Scotland.

The animals will be destined for a life in a laboratory and the scientists claim the gene-edited primates will be used to test groundbreaking new treatments for diseases ranging from brain disorders to cancers.

But this latest move will inevitably raise ethical questions about the future of human cloning - and how close modern science is moving towards gene-edited clones.

China has also been rocked by controversy after scientist He Jiankui claimed to have created the world's first genetically edited babies. State officials say he acted illegally in pursuit of fame and fortune.

The vast majority of animals cloning procedures end in failure with as little as 1 per cent resulting in living, apparently healthy offspring.

Dolly, who was cloned at the Roslin Institute in 1996, has developed arthritis earlier than might have been expected.

Scientists believe she may have aged prematurely because she was cloned from a six-year-old adult.

A study by professor Ian Wilmut, leader of the team that cloned Dolly the Sheep, highlighted unpredictable defects suffered by cloned animals.

He found a calf cloned in France did well for several weeks but died suddenly at 51 days after its ability to produce white blood cells failed.

Scientists at Roslin had to put down a 12- day- old cloned lamb because the muscles around its lungs had grown so thick that it had great difficulty breathing.

Dr Julia Baines, Science Policy Adviser at PETA UK, said: 'Cloning is a horror show: A waste of lives, time, and money – and the suffering that such experiments cause is unimaginable.

'Because cloning has a failure rate of at least 90 per cent, these two monkeys represent misery and death on an enormous scale.'

Yesterday scientists revealed they had cloned two monkeys, potentially paving the way to ‘copying’ humans.

'The work in this paper is not a stepping-stone to establishing methods for obtaining live born human clones', said Professor Robin Lovell-Badge, Group Leader of The Francis Crick Institute.

'This clearly remains a very foolish thing to attempt, it would be far too inefficient, far too unsafe, and it is also pointless.

'Clones may be genetically identical, but we are far from only being a product of our genes.'



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6623727/Five-cloned-monkeys-created-China-using-technique-produced-Dolly-sheep.html?login#readerCommentsCommand-message-field

The thought of animals being bred in this way with the sole purpose of experimentation is horrible, but...how can certain diseases be treated, cures found, research done without?
I hate the idea of animals being used as guinea pigs to advance the research in beauty products....use human beings for that, but medical research is different.
Obviously, the animals should be treated with as much humanity as possible....but I doubt they are.

Use humans, they are human diseases, animals get stressed, anxious and depressed usually when in captivity and badly used. You could ask for volunteers with nothing to loose, pay people etc. I believe there are different ways to test drugs and theories these days than subjecting living creatures to a life of hell. The Chinese though, don't have a great reputation with other species, let's be honest they have a terrible reputation.

your right Vintage, Tiger. Rhino, Elephant, all fall victim to Chinese "medicine" . You'd think the Government would stop it. But they care very little for Human rights ,Animals have no chance !

It suprises me that if there is anything in the Chinese medicine thing, there may well be, as many common drugs are from plant origins, why not analyse whatever bit they use and make it synthetically, rhino horn is hair, tiger bits and pieces are just the same as other animals and of course people, unless there is some kind of chemical produced because of how they live and eat. There'll be nothing left before long if humans aren't made to sit up and take notice what they are doing. Human beings are becoming a virus that has overtaken the body of the planet and are
causing havoc, there are so many of us we just use and abuse everything. Your family and friends mean a lot to you and most people feel for other people they don't know just because they are human, if you really think about it, what good are the majority of people in planetary terms, what do we do that doesn't impact negatively on the natural world because of our numbers.

Vintage wrote:It suprises me that if there is anything in the Chinese medicine thing, there may well be, as many common drugs are from plant origins, why not analyse whatever bit they use and make it synthetically,  rhino horn is hair, tiger bits and pieces are just the same as other animals and of course people, unless there is some kind of chemical produced because of how they live and eat. There'll be nothing left before long if humans aren't made to sit up and take notice what they are doing. Human beings are becoming a virus that has overtaken the body of the planet and are
causing havoc, there are so many of us we just use and abuse everything. Your family and friends mean a lot to you and most people feel for other people they don't know just because they are human, if you really think about it, what good are the majority of people in planetary terms, what do we do that doesn't impact negatively on the natural world because of our numbers.

Pretty depressing when put like that.   
The strongest will always survive, hence why the human species are in control, and the stronger ones will always control the weaker ones.
But we should be more mindful of how we treat the planet and everything on it because it's having a devastating effect on other species that should live alongside us in harmony. 
If that doesn't affect the way we think maybe realising that we are making life intolerable for the ones who come after us, including our own flesh and blood, may concentrate the mind more.

Syl wrote:The thought of animals being bred in this way with the sole purpose of experimentation is horrible, but...how can certain diseases be treated, cures found, research done without?
I hate the idea of animals being used as guinea pigs to advance the research in beauty products....use human beings for that, but medical research is different.
Obviously, the animals should be treated with as much humanity as possible....but I doubt they are.

There's no humanity in breeding a sentient being so that it has mental health issues. It's fucking monstrous.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:The thought of animals being bred in this way with the sole purpose of experimentation is horrible, but...how can certain diseases be treated, cures found, research done without?
I hate the idea of animals being used as guinea pigs to advance the research in beauty products....use human beings for that, but medical research is different.
Obviously, the animals should be treated with as much humanity as possible....but I doubt they are.

There's no humanity in breeding a sentient being so that it has mental health issues.  It's fucking monstrous.

Well there is humanity when it helps end incuraable diseases for not only humans but animals

What if we are nothing more than lab rats, by a supreme intelligent being and nothing more than an experiment of science?

That would be far more logical sense than any religious nosensene

Do I think we should test on aniamls to save lives?

100%

We already use humans as test patients for medical science

It will in many cases save the lives of species destined to become extinct

In fact its already helped many from becoming extinct. Adavances in science have helped stop animals becoming exitinct

If we are just lab rats then its no wonder we seem to suffer so much. Experiments on animals don't always translate to humans, they still have to be tested on humans, Humans with terminal diseases should be asked to take pert in tests, so much can be done initially without animals, humans have a choice, animals don't I don't believe we have the right to use animals in such a way. 
When I had my problems I was happy to take part in trials, for the benefit of others and hopefully myself, it was a regret that the substances and methods had probably been tried on animals first. That advances can help animals is a bonus as far as I am concerned, we as humans put ourselves first in all situations, its time we used ourselves first, for the benefit of others and those species that have no choice in how we use them. 
If you are religious you are told to care for the planet - to be a good steward, if you aren't the much vaunted human compassion should come in to play. How can you care for your equals but have no compassion for those species that aren't so 'advanced'.

Vintage wrote:If we are just lab rats then its no wonder we seem to suffer so much. Experiments on animals don't always translate to humans, they still have to be tested on humans, Humans with terminal diseases should be asked to take pert in tests, so much can be done initially without animals, humans have a choice, animals don't I don't believe we have the right to use animals in such a way. 
When I had my problems I was happy to take part in trials, for the benefit of others and hopefully myself, it was a regret that the substances and methods had probably been tried on animals first. That advances can help animals is a bonus as far as I am concerned, we as humans put ourselves first in all situations, its time we used ourselves first, for the benefit of others and those species that have no choice in how we use them. 
If you are religious you are told to care for the planet - to be a good steward, if you aren't the much vaunted human compassion should come in to play. How can you care for your equals but have no compassion for those species that aren't so 'advanced'.

Which means humans are also used as guniea pigs also in such experimentsts and many willing to do so. As its often their last hope of survival.

So your view is that we should skop the process of testing of animals and simple experiment on humans instead

We already do in the later part of the process

As much as I love animals and admit to being a hypocrite, I think these kind of arguments are so shallow and preposterous. As your daily life, causes the death and injudy to many species without you ever knowing that you do

The point with science, they are trying to save lives and hence the best test subjects are other animals. Even for animals with illnesess, how do you think they are able to cure them?

How on earth do you think we have come to now be able to ive as long as we have today?

Everyones long life is based on such experiments on animals, including yours Vintage

We now have the ability to create creatures now long extinct from past mistakes from our ancestors

Oh and by the way, if anyone thinks i am in the wrong. Then they should stop taking any medication, that they need to help them live a normal life.

Otherwise like me, you are simple hypocrites on this issue.

And not only on medication

People didn't or didn't want to understand  what went on, now we do, we can say we don't want it anymore, we have computers to run all sorts of scenarios, we already know so much about how drugs impact on living bodies. There are many people, short cut the research, it has to be tested on humans eventually, just take out the middle creature, who has no say in the matter.

Vintage wrote:People didn't or didn't want to understand  what went on, now we do, we can say we don't want it anymore, we have computers to run all sorts of scenarios, we already know so much about how drugs impact on living bodies. There are many people, short cut the research, it has to be tested on humans eventually, just take out the middle creature, who has no say in the matter.

How can computers perform tests without data Vintage?

How depressing....

We already have data,  everything is mathematical,  chemical, enzymes etc. We run scenarios on just about everything from climate change to everything else. We already do tests on cells without an entire organism.

Vintage wrote:We already have data,  everything is mathematical,  chemical, enzymes etc. We run scenarios on just about everything from climate change to everything else. We already do tests on cells without an entire organism.

Ho do computers gain data Vintage?

How can a computer also then formulize pattersn without patient information?

The only thing that needs to be asked here in regards to this

Is what is the reasoning behind these experiments

Are they to help save or better peoples and animals lives or are they being used to cause harm

That is only ethical question that should be asked. As many would not be alive today without medical experiments that would done in the name of science to help save people

If their intentions are unethical, then rightly we should all condemn

Night everyone

Vintage wrote:If we are just lab rats then its no wonder we seem to suffer so much. Experiments on animals don't always translate to humans, they still have to be tested on humans, Humans with terminal diseases should be asked to take pert in tests, so much can be done initially without animals, humans have a choice, animals don't I don't believe we have the right to use animals in such a way. 
When I had my problems I was happy to take part in trials, for the benefit of others and hopefully myself, it was a regret that the substances and methods had probably been tried on animals first. That advances can help animals is a bonus as far as I am concerned, we as humans put ourselves first in all situations, its time we used ourselves first, for the benefit of others and those species that have no choice in how we use them. 
If you are religious you are told to care for the planet - to be a good steward, if you aren't the much vaunted human compassion should come in to play. How can you care for your equals but have no compassion for those species that aren't so 'advanced'.

Are you vegan Vintage?

Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

Vintage wrote:Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

Well you do a lot more than I do that's for sure.
I was vegetarian for years when I was younger, tried not to buy leather products etc, but I lapsed as I got older, and now I do wear leather and do eat fish a lot (very little meat)
I think it can be a bit overwhelming if we vow never to use any product that has involved death or cruelty to animals, even milk in your coffee can be the cause of animal suffering.

+1

Its difficult these days, I use various plant milks, not soya though because deforestation. Now I hear so many people are using chick peas its causing problems for countries who have them as a staple.
 If only we can stabilise the population  so that everyone is fed and watered without pushing other species to extinction. Instead of aid we should be putting resources in place so people can run  their own countries and producing more and more meat isn't the answer, we need to reduce the population, I don't mean culling or anything just reduce the birthrate, sorry soapbox time again.

I agree, instead of money, -------send Contraceptives !

So many people refuse contraception in the name of religion....that one aspect of it alone is enough to persuade any right thinking person to shun organised religion imo.

Vintage wrote:Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

I cant for the life of me think why someone gave you a red for this post...have a green to even the balance.

(Maybe they pressed the wrong button)

Yes, I didn't think it was particularly controversial but thank you.

Syl wrote:

Vintage wrote:Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

I cant for the life of me think why someone gave you a red for this post...have a green to even the balance.

Me neither, so I gave her a green too.

Vintage wrote:Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

Fair play Vintage and at least you are trying to stick to your principles and ethical views on this. Where many people end up simeple contradicting themselves over this

Thor wrote:

Vintage wrote:Well, I don't eat meat. or meat products, or fish for that matter, don't use animal products that as far as I can tell which are acquired through the death of an animal or by cruelty.
I spend a lot of time reading labels although even then you can't always tell.
My shoes are compressed cardboard, they are pretty durable to be honest and shine up as well as leather does, not very waterproof though, as are any bags that I possess although usually I have my stuff are in my pockets.
I'm trying not to use anything that involves the death or cruelty to animals, I don't always succeed I must confess. I'll probably find out my cardboard shoes have some kind of animal product connected with them
and I'll have to change to sabots/clogs.

Fair play Vintage and at least you are trying to stick to your principles and ethical views on this. Where many people end up simeple contradicting themselves over this

Like meat-eaters?

eddie wrote:

Thor wrote:

Fair play Vintage and at least you are trying to stick to your principles and ethical views on this. Where many people end up simeple contradicting themselves over this

Like meat-eaters?

Yeah but I openly admit to be a complete hypocrite on this and even more so have I do love meat

Fair enough and fair play to you for admitting hypocrisy in this matter.

Maybe its easier for me, I don't much like the texture of meat and never have, I read somewhere that some blood groups differ in their need/preference of food intake, it even stated that certain diets (not the slimming ones)are better for people of different blood groups, don't know how true that may be. There may be some truth in it though, meat makes me gag, now that may be psychological, too much bread products gives me rampant indigestion and heart burn.
I'm sure you all wanted to know that!

Vintage wrote:Maybe its easier for me, I don't much like the texture of meat and never have, I read somewhere that some blood groups differ in their need/preference of food intake, it even stated that certain diets (not the slimming ones)are better for people of different blood groups, don't know how true that may be. There may be some truth in it though, meat makes me gag, now that may be psychological, too much bread products gives me rampant indigestion and heart burn.
I'm sure you all wanted to know that!

I could have written your post. That’s exactly how I feel. And yes, the blood type diet is supposed to be pretty accurate to most people.
Interestingly, when I looked into mine, it was an almost vegetarian diet. It also mentioned that I should avoid cashews, which I used to love...but strangely they always made me feel slightly sick.

Could be a biological truth then.

Vintage wrote:Could be a biological truth then.

Not sure Vintage, it certainly listed quite a few foods that “disagreed” with me.
Who knows?

According to what I read, my blood group A should be vegetarian with legumes etc making up my main diet, with very, very occasional meat or fish if desired.
Is that why the Japanese enjoy such longevity? They tend to or at least tended to eat fish and particularly meat as a luxury food in small quantities.
The Maori had strict dietary laws, only royals men and women and warriors could consume meat, everyone else ate fish.

Vintage wrote:According to what I read, my blood group A should be vegetarian with legumes etc making up my main diet, with very, very occasional meat or fish if desired.
Is that why the Japanese enjoy such longevity? They tend to or at least tended to eat fish and particularly meat as a luxury food in small quantities.
The Maori had strict dietary laws, only royals men and women and warriors could consume meat, everyone else ate fish.

Ben and I were just discussing the Japanese diet today...how odd. Yeah, they have an extremely healthy diet and stay quite slim...until they move here and become fat on our western diets.

eddie wrote:

Vintage wrote:Maybe its easier for me, I don't much like the texture of meat and never have, I read somewhere that some blood groups differ in their need/preference of food intake, it even stated that certain diets (not the slimming ones)are better for people of different blood groups, don't know how true that may be. There may be some truth in it though, meat makes me gag, now that may be psychological, too much bread products gives me rampant indigestion and heart burn.
I'm sure you all wanted to know that!

I could have written your post. That’s exactly how I feel. And yes, the blood type diet is supposed to be pretty accurate to most people.
Interestingly, when I looked into mine, it was an almost vegetarian diet. It also mentioned that I should avoid cashews, which I used to love...but strangely they always made me feel slightly sick.

My blood group is AB, I'm supposed to eat veggie. Which I did for a few years. I have to say I prefer vegan and veggie food.

I hope that those who claim to have removed, or who try to remove,  "all animal product"  contaminated items from their lifestyles, wherever possible,  have stopped using any of the following (not just meats and dairy products) in their day-to-day existence :

Wool,   Cashmere,   Angora,   Mohair,   Alpaca;    Felt (rabbit or wool..);
Leather & suede;    Lanolin,   lard,   blood&bone, bone products (e.g. needles);

Any fruit&vege's grown with manures and animal-based fertisers,
Any manures and such (e.g. 'blood and bone') on your own gardens;

Seafoods, fish skins,  'whale bone'/scrimshaw, baleen, walrus tusks; 
Eggs, eggshells, feathers/downs,
Honey, beeswax, propolis, 'royal jelly', bee venom
Bones, antlers, horns, ivory, cartilage

Vaccines,
'Catgut' (actually the lining of a cow's intestine - i.e. "cattle gut"..),
Any medical treatments tested on animals, or using animal parts or products,
Pregnancy testing;

Any cosmetics using animal-based products, (not just those "not tested on animals"..)

Oh --  and there's no room for any pet dogs, cats, birds, horses, rodents, sheep, goats, cows, pigs, alpacas, rabbits, guinea pigs, ferrets, reptiles, fish or insects in your lives, either --  that's "exploitation", pure and simple, going by vegan manifestos.

Otherwise,  I would consider you to be just as "hypocritical" as the meat-eaters you like to criticise so often on here.

And that isn't even touching on the fact that 'plants have feelings too !';   or taking into consideration the environmental impacts that mining&oil industries have, to provide you with your smartphones, computers, televisions, cars, refrigerators and washing machines, plastics and synthetic fibres, day-to-day energy needs..

And let's not mention deforrestation due to urban sprawl, rogue timber merchants, heavy pollution, bad governments selling forests to the "pulp paper" industries at below cost (!), big agribusiness concerns plundering third world countries, aggravated by -- and adding further to --  the effects of 'climate change' --  that's deserving of a whole other discussion in itself...

People can only be hypocritical if they lecture others. Of course, veggies/vegans/whatever do their best to avoid animal exploitation, but it's their business what they do and what they feel comfortable with, and if they "fail" in some areas that doesn't make them hypocrites.

Why do some people have this ideas that veggies/vegans go around telling others what they should eat or wear?

Raggamuffin wrote:People can only be hypocritical if they lecture others. Of course, veggies/vegans/whatever do their best to avoid animal exploitation, but it's their business what they do and what they feel comfortable with, and if they "fail" in some areas that doesn't make them hypocrites.

Why do some people have this ideas that veggies/vegans go around telling others what they should eat or wear?

Yes it does make them hypocrites

Every aspect of your life is based off harming many species, and yet you are unaware that it does

If being vegan, then countless species are simple killed in the process of simple farming products you eat that are not animals

At least Vintage sees this factor and tries, but never denies this.

You on the other hand seem to want to take the mantle of Mother Thersea. Who by the way was barbaric

Raggamuffin wrote:People can only be hypocritical if they lecture others. Of course, veggies/vegans/whatever do their best to avoid animal exploitation, but it's their business what they do and what they feel comfortable with, and if they "fail" in some areas that doesn't make them hypocrites.

Why do some people have this ideas that veggies/vegans go around telling others what they should eat or wear?

Dead right.
Maybe it's the way some people  compensate themselves for the fact that they themselves do sod all to help the planet or the other species living on it.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:People can only be hypocritical if they lecture others. Of course, veggies/vegans/whatever do their best to avoid animal exploitation, but it's their business what they do and what they feel comfortable with, and if they "fail" in some areas that doesn't make them hypocrites.

Why do some people have this ideas that veggies/vegans go around telling others what they should eat or wear?

Dead right.
Maybe it's the way some people  compensate themselves for the fact that they themselves do sod all to help the planet or the other species living on it.

Possibly. I don't know any vegetarians who lecture others or judge them. Some non-veggies lecture veggies/vegans though and call them hypocrites when they're just minding their own business and eating/wearing what they feel comfortable with.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

I hope that those who claim to have removed, or who try to remove,  "all animal product"  contaminated items from their lifestyles, wherever possible,  have stopped using any of the following (not just meats and dairy products) in their day-to-day existence :

Wool,   Cashmere,   Angora,   Mohair,   Alpaca;    Felt  (rabbit or wool..);
Leather & suede;    Lanolin,   lard,   blood&bone, bone products (e.g. needles);

Any fruit&vege's grown with manures and animal-based fertisers,
Any manures and such (e.g. 'blood and bone') on your own gardens;

Seafoods, fish skins,  'whale bone'/scrimshaw, baleen, walrus tusks; 
Eggs, eggshells, feathers/downs,
Honey, beeswax, propolis, 'royal jelly', bee venom
Bones, antlers, horns, ivory, cartilage

Vaccines,
'Catgut' (actually the lining of a cow's intestine - i.e. "cattle gut"..),
Any medical treatments tested on animals, or using animal parts or products,
Pregnancy testing;

Any cosmetics using animal-based products, (not just those "not tested on animals"..)

Oh --  and there's no room for any pet dogs, cats, birds, horses, rodents, sheep, goats, cows, pigs, alpacas, rabbits, guinea pigs, ferrets, reptiles, fish or insects in your lives, either --  that's "exploitation", pure and simple, going by vegan manifestos.

Otherwise,  I would consider you to be just as "hypocritical" as the meat-eaters you like to criticise so often on here.

And that isn't even touching on the fact that 'plants have feelings too !';   or taking into consideration the environmental impacts that mining&oil industries have, to provide you with your smartphones, computers, televisions, cars, refrigerators and washing machines, plastics and synthetic fibres, day-to-day energy needs..

And let's not mention deforrestation due to urban sprawl, rogue timber merchants, heavy pollution, bad governments selling forests to the "pulp paper" industries at below cost (!), big agribusiness concerns plundering third world countries, aggravated by -- and adding further to --  the effects of 'climate change' --  that's deserving of a whole other discussion in itself...

For the millionth time:

I don’t eat meat because I dislike it.
I don’t give a flying fuck about animals most of the time. I wish them no harm but they are low on my list of give-a-fucks.

So I’m less of a hypocrite then you, darling.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

I hope that those who claim to have removed, or who try to remove,  "all animal product"  contaminated items from their lifestyles, wherever possible,  have stopped using any of the following (not just meats and dairy products) in their day-to-day existence :

Wool,   Cashmere,   Angora,   Mohair,   Alpaca;    Felt  (rabbit or wool..);
Leather & suede;    Lanolin,   lard,   blood&bone, bone products (e.g. needles);

Any fruit&vege's grown with manures and animal-based fertisers,
Any manures and such (e.g. 'blood and bone') on your own gardens;

Seafoods, fish skins,  'whale bone'/scrimshaw, baleen, walrus tusks; 
Eggs, eggshells, feathers/downs,
Honey, beeswax, propolis, 'royal jelly', bee venom
Bones, antlers, horns, ivory, cartilage

Vaccines,
'Catgut' (actually the lining of a cow's intestine - i.e. "cattle gut"..),
Any medical treatments tested on animals, or using animal parts or products,
Pregnancy testing;

Any cosmetics using animal-based products, (not just those "not tested on animals"..)

Oh --  and there's no room for any pet dogs, cats, birds, horses, rodents, sheep, goats, cows, pigs, alpacas, rabbits, guinea pigs, ferrets, reptiles, fish or insects in your lives, either --  that's "exploitation", pure and simple, going by vegan manifestos.

Otherwise,  I would consider you to be just as "hypocritical" as the meat-eaters you like to criticise so often on here.

And that isn't even touching on the fact that 'plants have feelings too !';   or taking into consideration the environmental impacts that mining&oil industries have, to provide you with your smartphones, computers, televisions, cars, refrigerators and washing machines, plastics and synthetic fibres, day-to-day energy needs..

And let's not mention deforrestation due to urban sprawl, rogue timber merchants, heavy pollution, bad governments selling forests to the "pulp paper" industries at below cost (!), big agribusiness concerns plundering third world countries, aggravated by -- and adding further to --  the effects of 'climate change' --  that's deserving of a whole other discussion in itself...

For the millionth time:

I don’t eat meat because I dislike it.
I don’t give a flying fuck about animals most of the time. I wish them no harm but they are low on my list of give-a-fucks.

So I’m less of a hypocrite then you, darling.

Bullshit...

I never named any names in my post...

But three individuals have exposed their positions (so far), by unnecessarily attacking my simple statement when they could just as easily have said nothing..

Thor and Vintage have been honest about where they stand --  you other three have been simply pathetic.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

I hope that those who claim to have removed, or who try to remove,  "all animal product"  contaminated items from their lifestyles, wherever possible,  have stopped using any of the following (not just meats and dairy products) in their day-to-day existence :

Wool,   Cashmere,   Angora,   Mohair,   Alpaca;    Felt  (rabbit or wool..);
Leather & suede;    Lanolin,   lard,   blood&bone, bone products (e.g. needles);

Any fruit&vege's grown with manures and animal-based fertisers,
Any manures and such (e.g. 'blood and bone') on your own gardens;

Seafoods, fish skins,  'whale bone'/scrimshaw, baleen, walrus tusks; 
Eggs, eggshells, feathers/downs,
Honey, beeswax, propolis, 'royal jelly', bee venom
Bones, antlers, horns, ivory, cartilage

Vaccines,
'Catgut' (actually the lining of a cow's intestine - i.e. "cattle gut"..),
Any medical treatments tested on animals, or using animal parts or products,
Pregnancy testing;

Any cosmetics using animal-based products, (not just those "not tested on animals"..)

Oh --  and there's no room for any pet dogs, cats, birds, horses, rodents, sheep, goats, cows, pigs, alpacas, rabbits, guinea pigs, ferrets, reptiles, fish or insects in your lives, either --  that's "exploitation", pure and simple, going by vegan manifestos.

Otherwise,  I would consider you to be just as "hypocritical" as the meat-eaters you like to criticise so often on here.

And that isn't even touching on the fact that 'plants have feelings too !';   or taking into consideration the environmental impacts that mining&oil industries have, to provide you with your smartphones, computers, televisions, cars, refrigerators and washing machines, plastics and synthetic fibres, day-to-day energy needs..

And let's not mention deforrestation due to urban sprawl, rogue timber merchants, heavy pollution, bad governments selling forests to the "pulp paper" industries at below cost (!), big agribusiness concerns plundering third world countries, aggravated by -- and adding further to --  the effects of 'climate change' --  that's deserving of a whole other discussion in itself...

For the millionth time:

I don’t eat meat because I dislike it.
I don’t give a flying fuck about animals most of the time. I wish them no harm but they are low on my list of give-a-fucks.

So I’m less of a hypocrite then you, darling.

So why are you judging me and laughing at me based on hypocrisy around meat?

Wolf has a point in that it ranks of hypocrisy your views here Eddie

I dont mind you judging me on this, in fact I welcome critcism, but you should also at least entertain the fact that others will do the same of you here.

To me the only person that actually shows true honesty within this whole debate, trying to actually make a decision, is Vintage and I respect her even more so for this. Than I already do. You know I have loads of respect for you Eddie, but Wolf has a right to critically challenge what he sees as poor views. Just as you have the same right to do so. One thing I know about Wolf, is his knowlege medically and on animals is far superior to many on this forum. Which has come about through a life of experince. You may not like how he acts and posts, but I certainly respect his views on said issues, as he far more knowledgeable than most on this.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:


For the millionth time:

I don’t eat meat because I dislike it.
I don’t give a flying fuck about animals most of the time. I wish them no harm but they are low on my list of give-a-fucks.

So I’m less of a hypocrite then you, darling.

Bullshit...

I never named any names in my post...

But three individuals have exposed their positions (so far), by unnecessarily attacking my simple statement when they could just as easily have said nothing..

Thor and Vintage have been honest about where they stand --  you other three have been simply pathetic.

I disagreed with your position that it makes them hypocrites, and I think it was necessary to do so. Why should I say nothing when I disagree with you? You're the pathetic one for not understanding that people might actually disagree with what you say.

BUT, why, oh why oh why...did they name them wolfie, and allow em to post on here????????

A hypocrite is someone who preaches one thing and does another, Rags said that and I agree. I haven't seen anyone here do that.
I also think that people who snigger about other peoples life choices often do so because their own is lacking.

I note wetwipe gave me a red for my post...….obviously he takes some comments personally.....wonder why.

I don’t care what anyone eats. I was merely pointing out for the millionth time that I am NOT a vegan (as I’m often referred to my Wolf) and I am not a vegetarian because of the animals.

I can’t be a hypocrite if I don’t sit on here professing hw much I love animals whilst still chomping on them, and that was my point.