Good for you!
I'd almost call myself an "animal rights" person, but I don't because the "animal rights" folks are seven kinds of crazy.

Ban testing hair dye on rabbits? Of course.
Ban terrible battery farming of hens where they're shoved into horrible little boxes for their entire life? Certainly.
Require minimum standards for pigs and cattle so they don't live terrible, miserable lives pumped full of antibiotics and steroids necessary due to overcrowding? That just makes sense.
Punish people who are cruel to cats, dogs, or other domestic animals? Lock the fuckers up before they escalate to a child or spouse. Oh, and if you please, I'd be happy to kick anyone who's willfully neglected or abused a pet right in the crotch.

But ban reasonable medical testing on animals? YOU STUPID CUNT. I'm sorry, but that's just going to cause more death of both people and animals. ALL advances in medical science--human or veterinary--require testing on actual living beings. It's sad and I wish fuzzy little mice didn't have to be chopped up, BUT THEY DO. If we ever get to a point where it's unnecessary, that would be great. But we're not even close. Letting lab animals "free" is the action of a twit of the first water.
(herbivorous, Sat 2 Jul 2011, 7:07, 2 replies)

Will you watch my dog on thursday?

( postal ninja has Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, Sat 2 Jul 2011, 7:48, closed)

If I weren't in the U.S. I'd consider it.

(herbivorous, Thu 7 Jul 2011, 0:47, closed)

People would be surprised if they spent any time in a good animal lab, how much of your life is spent on getting data as opposed to how much is spent on animal welfare, making sure they are well fed, watered, cared for etc. It's about a 90-10 split in favour of the animal welfare. In fact, current lab standards are so good that data gathered in the 1960's is now not very comparable to modern experiments, because the animals are so happy that it gives completely different data!
(Serotonicity was a naughty boy on..., Sat 2 Jul 2011, 9:20, closed)