Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!jbs
From: jbs@rti-sel.UUCP
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,net.veg,net.pets
Subject: Re: Re: Re:... Animal testing for Cosmetic and Household Products
Message-ID: <1083@rti-sel.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Nov-86 14:51:37 EST
Article-I.D.: rti-sel.1083
Posted: Wed Nov 19 14:51:37 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Nov-86 02:18:10 EST
Reply-To: jbs@rti-sel.UUCP (Joe Simpson)
Distribution: world
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, NC
Lines: 10
Xref: watmath misc.consumers:260 net.veg:991 net.pets:2837

In article <762@ulowell.UUCP> ross@ulowell.UUCP (Ross Miller) writes:
>Better the animal than me.  Sueing someone when I am dead doesn't help.

Better no animals (people included) when other alternatives are available
and accurate. I'd like to see if YOU could put acid in an animal's eyes 
and then sit there and watch it squirm as its eyeballs burn away.
   Sure, there are some times when it's unavoidable to use animals. But I
can't see how putting Draino in the eyes of 100 mice does anybody any good.
I can hear it now -  "Yup, Vern, looks like we was right! Draino burns the
little suckers! Listen to 'em squealin'! Here - gimme another bottle."