Do They Look Like They're "Enjoying" Life to You?
Published July 11, 2009 @ 11:08AM PT
Dr. Weindruch and his statistician, David Allison of the University of Alabama, Birmingham, said the dieting monkeys were expected to enjoy a life span extension of 10 percent to 20 percent.
And later:
Dr. Weindruch joined the rhesus monkey experiment in 1990. He said he was used to being introduced as a man of incredible patience by biologists who study aging in laboratory roundworms, which live about three weeks. Dr. Weindruch will need the patience: he says he has another 15 years to go before the last monkey is expected to die.
Decades. Decades--an entire lifetime--in that horrible lab. No one is "enjoying" these 75 monkeys' "life span extension" (or life in general) except the researchers raking in money to put these animals through captive hell for up to (or even beyond) 40 years, for an entirely unnecessary experiment.
Samuel Klein, MD, director of the Center for Human Nutrition at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, who was asked by WebMD to review the study, described the study’s findings as "remarkably positive" and "very good news." . . .
He says he’s "very impressed" that the study showed that caloric restriction reduced brain atrophy (brain shrinkage) in monkeys that were studied. Such studies can't be done in humans for ethical reasons, "so this is getting as close as you can get to that," Klein says.
Newsflash: the studies in animals aren't ethical either. Humans think this is important research for their own benefit? Fantastic. They can volunteer to be the subjects.
This isn't "remarkably positive." It's inhumane. It's inexcusable.
Researcher Weindruch is quoted in Science thus:
"If we reach the 40-year-old life span, the study could continue for another 15 years," Weindruch said. "That would probably round out my career."
And that's what it's about for these researchers. Career. Money. Publication.
I hope you'll forgive me if I hope these caged animals don't live 15 more miserable years.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Creating and Celebrating Primate Obesity and Diabetes
-
Vivisectors vs. Vivisectors in a New Lawsuit
-
All Chimpanzees Deserve Sanctuary
Comments (12)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Stephanie is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull.
It's moments like these when I feel like an alien. I wonder how a human being could be so utterly detached from what he is doing to another sentient being and see the situation merely as a means to an end and a way to further his career.
It's difficult to read their words and realize we are made of the same stuff. Who are these people and how did they get this way, I ask? Meanwhile, it is we who are the minority, and it is we about whom they query: Who are those people and why do they think that way?
There is such a thing as right and wrong. And unfortunately the moral compass of mainstream society has been trained to point in a certain direction that benefits humankind. The good news is that if it can be trained once, it can be trained again.
Posted by Mary Martin on 07/11/2009 @ 01:59PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The white man must treat the beasts of the land as his brothers. What is man, without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, also happens to the man...
Chief Seattle
Puget Sound Squamish Tribe
1855
Posted by Scarlett Porter on 07/11/2009 @ 02:55PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Please, send these babies to their original home...let them LIVE in harmony.
Posted by Mary Poole on 07/11/2009 @ 03:09PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
No! The research can not do everything and anything. There are limits! We must all fight for stop all these monstrosities. These doctors, researchers and other scientists are dangerous to humanity. Such practices are indefensible. That is Unacceptable. These are crimes against humanity itself.
Excuse me for my approximate English, but I am outraged, disgusted and frightened!
Posted by C D on 07/12/2009 @ 02:50AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thanks Mary Martin for a most thoughtful and intelligent comment above. I agree most whole heartedly, with heavy heart and wounded spirit for the animals who suffer in terror, misery and hopelessness in the hell holes of research laboratories, while our government funds the "White Coats" and legalizes animal cruelty as long as its done in the pristine chambers of a laboratory. Something stinks here - Are we the only ones who recognize this evil, unforgivable travisty against the creatures of our world? I hope not. Continue to speak out, write, call, we cannot be silent. We are their only hope. Thank you.
Posted by Netanya Nathan on 07/12/2009 @ 06:19AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Seeing people so callous and blind makes me wonder if they are the same species as me. How can someone inflict such pain and suffuring on a living being and go home to their family? People who hurt animals often turn into violent serial killers and the like. It makes me wonder if the people around them feel safe. I know I woulden't, knowing I'm around someone who tortures and kills for a living.
Posted by Matsi Yasei on 07/12/2009 @ 08:55PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I have a question for all the ARs - I do not approve of testing on animals at all - it's barbaric and cruel - but has everyone given up every single drug tested on animals? It's easy to switch to cruelty free beauty products - but does no one pop Tylenol - or use birth control? I have been struggling with this one...thanks!!
Posted by Kristen Magno on 07/13/2009 @ 06:14AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
@Kristen: I don't think every AR person has given up these drugs. You see, as it stands, the powers that be in the USA do not require cosmetics etc. to be tested on animals, so those manufacturers have a choice - and they chose the wrong way. On the other hand the FDA requires drugs to be tested on animals: they cannot be FDA approved without these studies (the logistics of exactly what must be tested requires some research). Many vegans give up any product tested on animals where there is a choice involved. We fight to get the legal requirements for animal testing removed in lieu of better, more efficient, and morally sound alternatives. But we do not give up all drugs, because there aren't alternatives. I personally avoid taking drugs tested on animals if at all possible, but would do so in an emergency (and sometimes I do take analgesics for cramps).
Birth control is another matter for me personally. This one's not a life saving device: there exist other methods of contraception that are animal friendly (vegan condoms, for example - yes, normal condoms contain casein). The residual hormones in oral contraceptives have also been known to leech into the water supply, where they are not filtered out by our purification systems. These hormones have negative effects on fish populations, and may cause harm to other species (including our own) that we're not fully aware of yet. To me, that's a pretty good reason not to take them.
Gary Francione has a good explanation of why it might be morally permissible for vegans to consume drugs tested on animals, if you want to read more about it. I think it's on his web site....?
Posted by Jen Ruff on 07/13/2009 @ 04:43PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I worked with the project on calorie restriction and know Rick. The monkeys are in no way being starved. The implications of the research are quite important and have provided major clues on the mechanisms of aging.
Posted by Thomas Berg on 09/02/2009 @ 09:08PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Gee, Thomas, if they are so damned important, why don't YOU volunteer to be caged for the next 40-55 years and let the experiment run on YOU? After all, you won't be starved and you'll live longer because you won't get hit by a car, get cancer from the sun or suffer from obesity.
Whether the monkeys are being starved is almost irrelevant as the cruelty begins with their caging and will only end in their death. But gee, some asshole human might live another couple years destroying more of the earth because of this so-called "research". What an important "implication".
Posted by Rebecca Schneider on 09/04/2009 @ 06:10AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I saw this story on the front page of my local paper. I have written letters of concern to the author of the article and to the lab in Madison, if only to express my feelings, and I have since become a vegetarian. I wish I could send these guys both to a sanctuary. I inquired where they are now, and of course, they are still in the study, which I'm assuming will be the case until they die, which means they will have spent their entire lives in a laboratory. That's just plain wrong.
Posted by Judy Ellwanger on 09/08/2009 @ 09:06PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I wonder if your own grandfather had Alzheimer's your view on the subject of getting brains scans from these monkeys would change. That being said, let me provide you with a few FACTS about animals in research.
It's ethical, it's for the greater good. No, these animals are not being treated inhumanly - they're provided with suitable food, medical attention, and environmental enrichment.
The picture you're parading is from the Wisconsin study - these monkeys are old - that's what old monkeys look like. NO, they're not sad - and how do I know that ? The researchers actually went through the pains of reporting that data. Also, these are rhesus monkeys - look up where they live, what their natural habitat is - for the most part, it's very intertwined with human beings - they are used to us. Moreover, I'd like to add that, human beings do, in fact participate in human trials of caloric restriction. What this study does, is, it provides a better understanding of how aging works to deteriorate health and decrease lifespan, without the confounding factors that come with a human study.
If you really wish to protest against animal cruelty - you should consider locking horns with the multi-billion dollar beef, pork and poultry industries- where animals are, in fact, treated inhumanely for the mere purpose of providing you with meat you don't need to consume. While you're at it, also protest against horse-racing, bull fighting, seal hunting, polar bear hunting and hunting as a sport, because, guess what, those activities do not undergo peer-review the way animal research does.
I suppose it is easier to be up on your high-horse after looking at a picture of two monkeys than it is to get your facts right and act on your convictions.
PS. Once you have finished saving the animals from perceived cruelty, perhaps you will have time to think of all the children being forced into labour in third world countries in order to produce cheap consumer goods for YOU.
Posted by Shivangi Trivedi on 11/21/2009 @ 09:51PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.