Kester tests flux on LIVE bunnys' eyes & LIVE mice! Serious, not a joke! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 11:31:11 am
content: Kester tests solder flux onlive rabbits' eyesandlive micefor a duration of 24 hours per test.This is very serious, andnota joke.I invite you to see the proof for yourself, straight from Kester:Go to Kester'sMSDS(Material Safety Data Sheet) page.Look for "Select Page: " on the right side of the page. Use the drop down menu next to "Select Page:" and select "Page 2". Wait for page 2 to finish loading.Scroll down almost to the bottom of the page, and on the left side look for the last item in the table labeled "2331-ZX MSDS".On the right side of the screen on the same line as "2331-ZX MSDS", there is a link titled "View Data Sheet".Click the link labeled "View Data Sheet", and the PDF MSDS data sheet will open for the file "2331-ZX MSDS". If the page does not open, be sure you have a PDF viewer likeAdobe Readeror Okular for KDE installed on your computer. If you do not have a PDF reader, you can download and installAdobe Readerwithout cost. Once you have a PDF reader already installed, click again on the link labeled "2331-ZX MSDS" to open the file.After the MSDS sheet is open for the ""2331-ZX MSDS" file, go to page 3 and you will see where the description of horrors begins.If you want a quicker, easier way to view the proof, then open the2331-ZX MSDSPDF file at All-Spec'sKester 2331-ZX flux penpage under the "Technical Information" tab.If you dislike the cruel practice of testing on animals, vote with your money next time you need solder or flux, and please buy a brand other than Kester.

author: KTP
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 11:36:02 am
content: better to buy from China...they don't test it at all so no worries about animals getting hurt.mmmm, melamine flavored cat food...yum!

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 11:48:57 am
content: Hate to break it to you, but this is not unusual. For example, just about any drug and health care product you are consuming and using was subject to mandatory animal testing one shape or form. That also includes solvents and chemical products that humans get in regular contact in their home.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 12:26:56 pm
content: Yeah, it's really despicable and sadly all too common.That's why i buy products with a 'not tested on animals' label.However solder is not something i would have expected to need itI have made a note to stay away from Kester.

author: johnmx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 12:46:59 pm
content: Off course I don’t like to hurt animals and not talking about this specific case, the tests must be done.Do you prefer to run the tests on humans?One thing is to hurt animals just for fun and another thing is to hurt them to prevent hurting humans.If you are a vegetarian them it makes no sense to continue this discussion.

author: danntor
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 12:50:17 pm
content: A manufacturer of glycol tests their stuff on mice and rabbits(the skin and eyes). I found this out today after pressurizing a cooling system and having a glycol mix going all over me. Protip: always wear eye protection when working with fluids(they saved my eyes twice today!).

author: KD0CAC John
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 12:50:45 pm
content: Michael ,Take any subject , unless you have an alternative and give it with a complant , then any complaining is just propaganda ,without knowing you , I think you are manipulated to do ?What would you have them do , experiment on people instead ?Or just put out a product without testing .Constructive criticism comes with alternatives , no alternatives is just spewing .

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 01:23:25 pm
content: I understand that tests can be essential for product safety what I cannot see the need for is the continual repeated tests that are carried out time and again often as an EU requirement the raw materials are tested and then the combination but that should suffice but some of these tests are carried out on every batch of products this is particularly the case with soaps and shampoos the same product using the same mix and the same base materials is tested continually, There cannot be any real need for this especially as there are product that can be made without animal testing.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 01:42:41 pm
content: You wanna stay away from kester? Okay then.Because it's obvious you can't test it on a human, what if somebody decides to sue Kester over a accident on a wrong mixture of flux that burnt this human?Would you rather have untested flux that might burn your skin upon contact or some animal that has been tested on expense? I'm pretty sure the other well known companies do the same thing... why not avoid using solder then?About bunnies ... what if you own a pet bunny and it happens to get in contact with some of your weird flux on their eyes and something goes wrong? Are you going to sue the manufacturer?Now how about YOU get in contact with flux and tell us, is it moral to use humans as a test subject?Don't blame me michael ...

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 03:30:34 pm
content: The bunny test is the Draize test. Don't blame Kester. Its part ofstandardtoxicology suites in the USA and probably EU.http://www.alttox.org/ttrc/tox-test-overview/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draize_test

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 03:47:40 pm
content: Thalidomide went through all these tests, just look ask someone with birth defects caused by this drug how effective they are.Some animal research is obviously essential but all to often they do not work and testing cosmetics is just not required to the extent that it is done, also the constant repeating of the tests every time the same product comes out but with a different label is an absolute nonsense.

author: silicon_ghost
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 04:22:45 pm
content: Testing on dead bunny eyes and dead mice would not meet the government regulations.So, we should buy from a manufacturer in a country that does not have (enforced) government guidelines (testing on animals)? Yep, let's go buy the Chinese knockoffs. This is how you end up with Chinese products containing lead (that should not), foods with additives that kill babies & pets so some Chinese amoral company can shave a few pennies off the cost of the product; We become the rabbits and guinea pigs.Kester did not create the regulation. They are following it. A Kester exec did not wake up one morning and say "Hey, let's go put some animals in pain for fun." We are simply not at the point where we can eliminate all animal testing. If the choice is my family or the bunny? Well, sorry Mr. Bunny.

author: KTP
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 05:43:10 pm
content: In other shocking news, it has been determined that bacon is harvested from pigs in a destructive process that does not leave the subject in a happy state.mmm, bacon...

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 07:04:00 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on August 14, 2012, 03:47:40 pmThis is an obvious logical fallacy and even if it weren't it is factually incorrect. The failure of testing to detect all dangers does not demonstrate that testing is ineffective. Also, testing requirements were increased greatly after thalidomide.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 07:08:28 pm
content: Quote from: KTP on August 14, 2012, 05:43:10 pmI was about to say...a few bunnies here and there versus the millions of animals we slaughter to eat...hmmm

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 07:11:44 pm
content: There are little to no viable alternatives at the moment to animal testing.I don't like the idea of "unnecessary" products such as cosmetics being tested, as the product has no health benefit to society.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 07:12:43 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on August 14, 2012, 07:11:44 pmThat's true. I agree with that.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2012, 07:30:12 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on August 14, 2012, 07:11:44 pmAnd people will never say anything!humans ...

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 02:46:23 am
content: Quote from: KD0CAC John on August 14, 2012, 12:50:45 pmI was not manipulated to do anything.I made my post solely because I was very surprised and shocked and thought others may want to know. If you don't care about what I said in my post then that is your right; just ignore the post.Quote from: KD0CAC John on August 14, 2012, 12:50:45 pmI would prefer toxicology experiments not be performed on anything that isalive. I know there exists chemistry software with remarkable accuracy in predicting the outcome of a myriad of complex chemical reactions. I read there are very sophisticated computer models of animals specifically for biology and testing. I read that about a decade ago, so it stands to reason there might be models that can be used for toxicology studies. If using the models for toxicology study was viable, I prefer that be used instead of potentally harming something that is alive.Please seeComputer Models Used to Predict Animal Cell Behaviourfor an example computer animal cell model.Quote from: KD0CAC John on August 14, 2012, 12:50:45 pmNo, anything that is potentially harmful should be studied first for safety before making it generally available.Quote from: KD0CAC John on August 14, 2012, 12:50:45 pmFirst, I never claimed it was "Constructive criticism". My post was a notice to all who cared about animals, and no one else. Second, I suggested the alternative to buy a brand that does not do animal testing for anyone who is concerned about harming animals.

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 02:54:37 am
content: Quote from: ejeffrey on August 14, 2012, 07:04:00 pmWhat about Vioxx and Advair? Lots of deaths there, despite getting the stamp of approval from the FDA.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:06:34 am
content: The argument is still a logical fallacy. If you look hard enough, you will always find exceptional circumstances where particular product has fallen through the cracks. One can not expect animal experiments to catch all unforeseen dangers, the best thing anyone can do is reduce the probable occurrence of bad side effects to acceptable safe levels.The reality is that animal testing is a necessary evil.

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:14:49 am
content: Quote from: T4P on August 14, 2012, 01:42:41 pmYou seem to be getting rather agitated/excited. Lets keep this calm, please.Everything potentially harmful should be tested before being generally available; and that testing should be done in a manner that does not harm animals or humans (who are also animals).Quote from: T4P on August 14, 2012, 01:42:41 pmNo, I would not sue the manufacturer. I would take personal responsibility for being stupid enough to leave anindustrial chemicalwhere children or animals could be hurt by it.Quote from: T4P on August 14, 2012, 01:42:41 pmI never suggested any living thing be used for testing; that was your assumption. And as for testing on humans, if it is a specific person's will to allow their corpse be used for testing, then I don't have a problem with that kind ofconsensualtesting.Quote from: T4P on August 14, 2012, 01:42:41 pmI'm not blaming anybody. My post was solely a notice only to anyone who preferred animals not be harmed, and no one else.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:20:54 am
content: Quote from: Michael Weston on August 15, 2012, 03:14:49 amDoes not harm animals? That's no testing at all!Quote from: Michael Weston on August 15, 2012, 03:14:49 amThat's why testing is neccesaryQuote from: Michael Weston on August 15, 2012, 03:14:49 amAnd trust me, nobody's going to let a lab test on a human dead or alive

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:21:08 am
content: Yeah, it's sad that we kill animals; but at the end of the day it all breaks down to one simple FACT - we (not just I) would rather the rabbit die than ourselves! That's why we test things on animals... if the product causes cancer in mammals that are exposed to it, we want to find out before it gets sold to humans; not after.Believe it or not, scientists are NOT smart enough to predict if a mammal will die upon being exposed to a chemical; we only can know this after seeing mammals die upon being exposed to the chemical... and if we don't see mammals die upon being exosed to it, that doesn't mean we still won't die! We typically test drugs on rats; not because they react more similarly to humans than do bunny rabbits, but because they are cheaper to order in bulk, and people think they're ugly so we don't care as much about killing them. Honestly, does this sound any more moral to you than testing the stuff on animals in the first place? No, but who cares!

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:28:08 am
content: Quote from: tom66 on August 14, 2012, 07:11:44 pmThankfully, that is incorrect. Please seeComputer Models Used to Predict Animal Cell Behaviour.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 04:03:02 am
content: Quote from: Michael Weston on August 15, 2012, 03:28:08 amDon't confuse the concepts modelling vs. empirical evidence. Computer modelling, like many other aids used by theorists, are very useful tools for building an understanding on concepts through extrapolating on the things we already know. But at the end of the day, a computer model is not evidence; one demands empirical observation in the lab for something to pass peer review.

author: Michael Weston
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 04:19:30 am
content: There seem to have been some misconceptions about motivations for my post.I want to set the record straight.First, my post was solely to raise awareness ofanyone who preferred animals not be harmed, andno one else. If you don't care about this subject, that is your right, and please just ignore my Kester bunny testing post. I did not make my post to offend anyone, nor was it directed to any specific user by name, nor did I intend to start a morality debate, nor for me to be on either side of a "devil's advocate" type of argument.Everything potentially harmful should be tested before being generally available; and that testing should be done in a manner that does not harm live animals. And as for testing on humans, if it is a specific person's will to allow their corpse be used for testing, then I don't have a problem with that kind ofconsensualtesting. I'm hoping with enough time and improvements in technology, highly effective, accurate computer models of full animals will make testing on live animals completely unnecessary, too expensive, and illegal worldwide.Significant progressis already being made in that direction with models that are viable and useful today.If you know of a solder related product that is safe despite not being tested on animals, please post in this thread about it.Otherwise, let's please get back to electronics relevant posts and discussions.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 06:00:08 am
content: We have a rather harsher view of bunny rabbits in Australia,than many other countries,as rabbits have been the scourge of both agriculture & the natural environment in this country since some halfwit introduced them back in the 1800s.They bred like-----well,rabbits,and soon there were millions of them,eating their way across the country,until they were everywhere,despite such efforts as the "Rabbit Proof fence".And they ate virtually everything,out competing the indigenous animals,until many like the Bilby were on the brink of extinction.The introduction of Myxomatosis finally stopped the rabbit "plague",but at terrible cost to the poor bunnies!"Myxo"was not an easy death,& the pathetic little buggers suffered & died in their millions.Some didn't die,however,& started a new generation of "Myxo-tolerant" rabbits,which have increased as before,but other, probably no more humane, methods have kept them at manageable levels.Other creatures decimating our wildlife are "dear little pussycats" gone feral,& feral foxes.We bait for them,how humanely I don't know.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 06:43:01 am
content: I'm rather surprised that Aussies never really took the opportunity to harvest these rabbits for food.Rabbit is awesome. Rabbit stew... mmmm.Same thing with carp.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 07:05:12 am
content: And what about bleach, we all know that if you pour bleach into eyes it is not going to do them much good yet every time a manufacturer comes up with a new scent for bleach they have to do the same test, that is just down to bureaucratic stupidity.

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 08:10:16 am
content: Why the fuck are we testing flux on animals?You should wear fucking goggles while you are soldering anyway. Why test products that are not meant for human consumption?Flux should be treated like any other laboratory chemical, used with fume extraction and proper protective equipment. If you fuck up then you fuck up. People need to take some fucking responsibility.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 09:48:29 am
content: If you've watched nature videos for any length of time, you'll see that it's not any more "humane" in the wild either. We're just using animals as a greater benefit to us than a source of energy.Quote from: ftransform on August 15, 2012, 08:10:16 amIt's so they can tell you what happens if by accident or whatever reason itdoeshappen.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 11:34:24 am
content: Quote from: Michael Weston on August 15, 2012, 03:28:08 amIt would be FAR cheaper to test using computer models than animals. Do you think companies like to throw away money testing on animals when they could test on a computer? Especially when they have to deal with the additional costs of moral complications and negative PR? It isn't done for fun or for deliberate cruelty, it is a harsh necessity.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 11:55:21 am
content: just a question do you eat meat? then you hurt animals too. so i dont see a reason to get upset on produtct being tested on those animals whose are breed for this very reason. do you feel bad while eating fruits etc? it hurts the plants and trees too you cripple their reproduction capabilities

author: cwalex
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 11:57:35 am
content: Animal testing is just wrong!! No sentient being should be hurt or killed for flux sake!

author: cwalex
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 11:59:03 am
content: Quote from: M. András on August 15, 2012, 11:55:21 amDo you really think plants feel pain? If so can you please explain how that happens?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 12:21:17 pm
content: Plants don't feel pain but where do you draw the line? Do small insects feel pain? If they do, it could only be a chemical reaction (autonomous), and nothing is really feeling pain. It's arguable that even many larger insects and small mammals don't have much concept of it other than to avoid it. It is very fuzzy and hard to draw a line upon.

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 12:30:09 pm
content: QuoteCircuit simulators are FAR more refined and accurate than biology simulators. Now, imagine for a minute that building a circuit that you're not sure will work was immoral somehow (just pretend). Would you purchase a complex electronic device that has never been field tested; only simulated using ideal components? Of course not! People who are going to be exposed to fumes from a new cleaner, etc, don't want to have only your highly inaccurate simulations for evidence that they won't die!As for why they need to test flux in animals' eyeballs... it is because it is POSSIBLE that someone may get it in their eyes, and they need to know how dangerous it is to evaluate the safety profile of the flux before releasing it. It also provides info for the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) so that poison control will know what to do when someone calls in with this problem.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 01:41:42 pm
content: Quote from: cwalex on August 15, 2012, 11:59:03 amwho knows? for a serious answer no i dont think they feel anything at all it was just an extrapolated example for this idiocity btw i dont feel sorry for labrats etc they are kept for that reason, if i keep a little fluffy bunny as a pet of course i wont eat it or torture it. cos i raised it from since 6weeks old age, or if i had the parents of the little thing i "raised and fed them from the birth" its a total different thing do you feel sorry for the chickens kept in industrial enviroment for eggs and for meat? etc. i would gladly give some animal activits to larger predators as food if you think they are lovely while freely roaming streets etc then be my guest and feed them. their idiotism made meat products in the eu atleast 2-3 times more expensive like idiotic regulations suchs as chickens need a few m2 space. so on i wont list all of these bullshit things what they demanded....

author: cwalex
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 01:56:27 pm
content: Quote from: M. András on August 15, 2012, 01:41:42 pmIf you keep a fluffy bunny and torture it you would be charged with a criminal offence. But it is ok to do it in a lab makes no sense.I do feel sorry for the chickens kept in industrial environments for eggs and meat.Caring for the feelings of other sentient beings is nothing to be ashamed of.If you think there is a difference between a house pet and the same kind of animal being rased for lab torture then there is something wrong with you.

author: KTP
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 02:07:01 pm
content: I would suggest that in addition to avoiding Kester products you also avoid almost all medications when you get sick, as many of these have been animal tested.But hey, a thalidomide mutated baby isn't so bad...

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 02:12:57 pm
content: Quote from: cwalex on August 15, 2012, 01:56:27 pmThat's because the world is full of idiots and some of them make laws.Quote from: cwalex on August 15, 2012, 01:56:27 pmNothing to be proud of either, just shows you are too dumb to understand why you care.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 02:26:35 pm
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 15, 2012, 06:43:01 amLots of Aussies in the country subsisted for a long time on "Underground mutton",but the numbers were too enormous to make much of a dent in them.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 03:44:00 pm
content: They should make a branch of KFC and call it KFR............ A winner there.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 04:06:39 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on August 15, 2012, 03:44:00 pmBe sure to gouge its beady little eyes out before dunking the little bugger into the deep fryer. We don't want flux in our diet, now do we?

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 04:52:40 pm
content: Quote from: cwalex on August 15, 2012, 01:56:27 pmi would have no problem of shooting down dogs and cats which are 1. bark every damn night. makes tons of dogshit in my outer yard which isnt covered with fence. cats piss out plants and damn annoying during summer. as for the birds which wakes me up every morning i would do the same i dont see their usefulnes cos they dont eat the bugs they just crawling at the bug screen (i dont know the exact word looked it from dictionary correct me if i picked the wrong word) at open windows they cant get in but those damn birds wont eat them at alledit: a headshot isnt painful or torture its instant death for every creature but i would still get in jail FOR ANIMAL TORTURING...

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2012, 05:04:00 pm
content: If we have reason to kill them, we will kill them. Even if that reason is small. Sure it's sad, but we aren't about to change. We're not the only animals that kill other animals for inconveniencing them.When drugs are being tested, we pump rats full of the drug UNTIL they die... not just to find out if they do die with a reasonable amount. FDA requires a value be established known as the LD50, which is the AVERAGE dosage of a drug, per body weight, that will kill rats. Even if the intended human dose is 20ug/kg, rats will be given as much as they can be stuffed with until they die, just so they can record what that value was. And they don't just do that for one rat; they do it for hundreds, even thousands, to establish a bell curve and a high probability confidence that their mean and standard deviation is accurate.

author: cwalex
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2012, 06:45:57 am
content: QuoteBug screen is close enough. We call them fly screens in Australia.

author: nukie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2012, 12:22:35 pm
content: Firstly we are on top of the food chain so its up to us to manage the stuff below us. Bunnies seems to be cute but what about thousands of easter bunnies eaten during Easter? Until they start to multiply fibonacci style you start to call them pest. And fyi, rabbit meat is also sold as pet food.If I can choose I would test flux on those Japanese fishery who hunts for dolphin and whales. Afterall its all in the name of science and research, no harm done!!tapatalk