Fauci lied, beagles died

[Jezcoe]

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

And who still uses “pwnd” ?

Well I did. Got a problem with that? It conveyed the point. It applied to you.

yer funny

[Kelby]

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

No, it doesn’t make us special which is why there is general disgust across the country that such research was funded with our tax dollars.

So when did this disgust start?

Was it years ago? Has there been any advocacy of this position that can be pointed out?

Disgust about unnecessary dog torture, pretty much always been a thing in the US, at least as long as I have been alive.

Is medical research deemed unnecessary now?

Care to tell us what medical purpose was served by allowing sand flies to eat their ears while they were immobilized? Can you think of some other way to infect them that doesn’t involve that step?

Was that Fauci’s agency?

[Guvnah]

@Kelby

Was that Fauci’s agency?

Article linked earlier quotes NIH admitting that it funded such studies.

[Jezcoe]

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

I don’t believe this sudden and newfound concern for the well being of animal conditions for medical experimentation.

Opinion noted.

Doesn’t change the fact that you got suckered by the headline of the article you posted.

And to some degree I agree with you about the leveraging of the “breaking news” about the experiments funded by NIH. See my post #38.

The Daily Mail shows that the picture that is going around was not from the experiment.

They did other experiments involving sand flies, but the dogs were not immobilized. They had a container with the flies strapped to them. That was the study that the NIH funded.

This is the funny thing… all of these dogs were slaughtered. No one cares about that part.

What they don’t like is the upsetting picture from a study that the NIH didn’t fund.

This is why I can’t any of this outrage seriously.

[Kelby]

@Guvnah

@Kelby

Was that Fauci’s agency?

Article linked earlier quotes NIH admitting that it funded such studies.

Not those particular ones, though.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/25/fauci-puppy-experiments-conspiracy-republicans/

[Guvnah]

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail shows that the picture that is going around was not from the experiment.

Still digging with that same broken shovel, I see.

@Jezcoe

This is the funny thing… all of these dogs were slaughtered. No one cares about that part.

Cool. You made that lie up too.

[Guvnah]

@Kelby

Not those particular ones, though.

Trade shovels with Jez.

[Jezcoe]

@Guvnah

Still digging with that same broken shovel, I see.

The Daily Mail article shows the containers strapped to the dogs.

They are similar studies in that they are studying the same thing but the methods of infecting the dogs were different.

So… are we upset that dogs are intentionally being infected with leishmaniasis in order to study it?

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

No, it doesn’t make us special which is why there is general disgust across the country that such research was funded with our tax dollars.

So when did this disgust start?

Was it years ago? Has there been any advocacy of this position that can be pointed out?

Disgust about unnecessary dog torture, pretty much always been a thing in the US, at least as long as I have been alive.

Is medical research deemed unnecessary now?

Care to tell us what medical purpose was served by allowing sand flies to eat their ears while they were immobilized? Can you think of some other way to infect them that doesn’t involve that step?

They are studying leishmaniasis infections.

And? Can you think of any high tech way to infect them that doesn’t involve letting the sand flies eat their ears?

[Guvnah]

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

And? Can you think of any high tech way to infect them that doesn’t involve letting the sand flies eat their ears?

That is the study that the NIH did not fund.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

And? Can you think of any high tech way to infect them that doesn’t involve letting the sand flies eat their ears?

That is the study that the NIH did not fund.

Strapping it onto them is no better. You know what a needle is right?

[Jezcoe]

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

Dude… we are talking about different studies. The study with the pictures that are upsetting everyone was not funded by the NIH. How hard is that to understand?

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

And? Can you think of any high tech way to infect them that doesn’t involve letting the sand flies eat their ears?

That is the study that the NIH did not fund.

Strapping it onto them is no better. You know what a needle is right?

So… the act of infecting them and killing them isn’t the bad part.

Having insects bite them is?

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

Dude… we are talking about different studies. The study with the pictures that are upsetting everyone was not funded by the NIH. How hard is that to understand?

Kidding yourself if you think photos of strapping the flies onto them is any more palatable to the public.

[Guvnah]

@Jezcoe

The study with the pictures …

Stuck on stupid.

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@zantax

And? Can you think of any high tech way to infect them that doesn’t involve letting the sand flies eat their ears?

That is the study that the NIH did not fund.

Strapping it onto them is no better. You know what a needle is right?

So… the act of infecting them and killing them isn’t the bad part.

Having insects bite them is?

Unnecessary cruelty is generally frowned upon, yes.

[Kelby]

@Jezcoe

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

Dude… we are talking about different studies. The study with the pictures that are upsetting everyone was not funded by the NIH. How hard is that to understand?

Right wing media lies to them AGAIN and they get mad at US for pointing it out.

Must be another day ending in “y”.

[Jezcoe]

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

Dude… we are talking about different studies. The study with the pictures that are upsetting everyone was not funded by the NIH. How hard is that to understand?

Kidding yourself if you think photos of strapping the flies onto them is any more palatable to the public.

Why not? In the part of the whole process where the dogs are intentionally infected and later slaughtered to be studied… the getting bit by insects part… that is the bad thing.

Really ?

[zantax]

@Jezcoe

@zantax

@Jezcoe

@Guvnah

@Jezcoe

The Daily Mail article …

Too much stupidity here to continue this with you.

Dude… we are talking about different studies. The study with the pictures that are upsetting everyone was not funded by the NIH. How hard is that to understand?

Kidding yourself if you think photos of strapping the flies onto them is any more palatable to the public.

Why not? In the part of the whole process where the dogs are intentionally infected and later slaughtered to be studied… the getting bit by insects part… that is the bad thing.

Really ?

Yes, because that part, is uneccessary cruelty, not hard to understand.