Animal Testing and Vivisection
Marc Bekoff on Animals, Animal Emotions, Science, and More
Published May 22, 2009 @ 07:50AM PT
I adore Marc Bekoff. He's a brilliant biologist and ethologist, a compassionate and dedicated animal advocate, and a compelling author. I've been moved and educated by his books, and by chance, I was lucky enough to be one of the copyeditors on the wonderful four-volume Encyclopedia of Human-Animal Relationships he edited a few years ago. This video marks the first time I've actually had the chance to see him speak, even via video. Watch.
Cruelty and Killing, for Publication, for Money, and for No Reason at All
Published May 18, 2009 @ 03:05PM PT
I told you on Saturday that I hoped I would soon be able to direct you to the (devastating) conclusion to this story: Your Turn: Why Unnecessary, Cruel Research Happens. Jen has now posted her story at That Vegan Girl. Please go read it: In Memory of Vincent, Remy, and Henri.
The introduction:
This is a story about three rats. Actually, it’s a story about 25 rats, but only three of them really had a chance at redemption, and even that didn’t happen in the end. I gave them names, even though I never met them, because I couldn’t stand to let them die known only by numbers. They were ordinary hooded rats, three months old. They and their 23 brethren (and of course the other millions of rats we kill yearly) all deserve to be remembered not as objects, but as the clever, curious, sentient beings they were even if they were never treated as such.
This is also a story about three girls in their early 20s; three girls who made very different choices. I wish I could say they were nothing alike, but I think that would be untrue.
From later:
A lot of people in the animal rights movement still deny the logic of direct action, and would never consider taking part. They feel like they should do what they can through legitimate means wherever possible. Before this, that’s exactly how I felt. Now, I can understand exactly what spirit grips those who do what they know to be right, no matter what the costs. In many cases, we cannot trust ‘legitimate means’ when the very system they rest on is so biased against animals. What happens when legitimacy is at the mercy of one person’s bad attitude or psychotic whims? What happens when the whole system is set up to take the blame away from those who don’t follow the rules in place for “the animals’ protection” [and] simply walk away, degree in hand?
There's much more to the post. Please read it. What ended up happening in this case and the actions and inactions taken by those in an official position to stop it is infuriating and horrible, but please do me a favor, would you? You will understand immediately, as I did, when you read Jen's story, that despite her feelings to the contrary, this was not her fault, that she was doing her best to save these lovely animals, and that she couldn't have known what the investigator would do. I know what it feels like to blame yourself for not being able to save the life of an animal you desperately tried to save. Let Jen know the blame isn't hers.
---
Photo by Flickr user AlexK100
Rats Make the Front Page of the Wall Street Journal
Published May 16, 2009 @ 07:31AM PT
A couple weeks ago, a Wall Street Journal reporter interviewed me for an article she was writing on rats, on advocacy for rats, that is. Her article is in today's paper--on the front page. That's right: our much-maligned furry friends have made the front page of the WSJ. If after reading the article, you're wondering what video the reporter is talking about, that was a reference to the uber-sweet video in this post: The Love of a Rat (this post is also the reason I ended up being interviewed for the piece). I'm going to hold off for now on giving my detailed thoughts on the article, but I imagine I'll do that in the next couple days.
In the meantime, if you want to know how life (and death) go for most rats used in labs (they don't get gentle care and loving adoption) and how unnecessary and pointless research on them is, see, for example, these two recent posts telling a couple firsthand stories: Former Vivisector Speaks Out about Cruelty and Bad Science and Your Turn: Why Unnecessary, Cruel Research Happens. And an update on those rats mentioned in the second post: despite Jen's pleas to save and adopt them, they were still cruelly killed--via having their heads cut off. I hope to be able to later direct you to more of the story regarding what happened there [edit: that post now appears here].
Finally, the few comments on the article as of this writing are leaning more toward anti-rat (and anti-rights) than pro-rat, and I expect that snarky or anti-rat remarks in the thread probably won't be rare. Feel free to rectify that (respectfully--I know that can be difficult when other commenters are being offensive jerks, but even if the thread ends up going that way, try your best to keep your cool) and to thank the WSJ and Ms. Searcey for giving the rats some rare positive mainstream attention.
Leaping Bunny--Now on iPhone
Published May 14, 2009 @ 08:40AM PT
Watch out, BNB--you have competition! The American Anti-Vivisection Society has just announced its own iPhone and iPod touch app for cruelty-free shopping--a digital version of the helpful Leaping Bunny resource. The app is from a well-respected nonprofit dedicated to helping animals, and it's free too. Search for "Leaping Bunny" in your iTunes store, and you'll find it. Following are a couple screenshots from the store (the second gives some more details on the application). I'll be interested to learn what iPhone users think of the two apps--this one and the previously mentioned Be Nice to Bunnies app. Who wants to go check out the two and give us some comparisons and reviews?
Are You Boycotting Procter & Gamble Yet? Time to Start
Published May 14, 2009 @ 05:37AM PT
When I started becoming more aware of animal issues, there was one mammoth corporation I learned about--and learned to watch out for and avoid--immediately: Procter & Gamble. In the world of unnecessary, cruel testing on animals, P&G is one of the bad guys. And oh, are they everywhere. If you aren't boycotting P&G yet, it's time to start--and when better to start than this Saturday, May 16, the day of global boycott and action called for by Uncaged (UK) and In Defense of Animals?
Be Nice to Bunnies via Your iPhone!
Published May 11, 2009 @ 11:00AM PT
One of my Twitterverse pals, @larrysullivan, has been spreading the word about a cool new iPhone app for those who want to make compassionate purchases when they're out and about. I myself am iPhone-deprived, but those of you who are luckier than I need to check out this application:
BNB (Be Nice to Bunnies!) is a searchable application for your iphone or ipod touch that helps you make an informed decision about cruelty-free purchasing anywhere, any time, at home or in-store. The App is available for purchase from the iTunes store, priced at $1.99. A portion of the profits for the app will be donated to animal non-profit organizations.
Compiled from up to date public sources, and regularly updated, BNB is an extensive database of personal care (from cosmetics to toothpaste), household and animal companion products at your fingertips. Search by brand, manufacturer or by product category, and view a full list of ‘Do’ and ‘Don’t’ test companies. Mark your most used products and brands, adding them to your personal ‘favorites’ list for quick and easy reference on the run! Companies and products that are vegan (don’t contain animal byproducts) are also noted.
Handy!
Edit: Did I need to clarify what this app's developer means by "cruelty free" here? If so, my apologies. Applications and other resources such as this are geared toward helping you find products that weren't tested on animals, and many--like this one--will also note which products are vegan (i.e., no animal ingredients either).
Business Interests Trump Animal Welfare--Always
Published May 06, 2009 @ 04:04PM PT
The animal agribusiness and pharmaceutical lobbies are fucking unscrupulous. And the politicians who consistently, repeatedly bow to their demands aren't much better. I don't give a damn how many welfare reform laws we pass or try to pass, in this country or any other--the financial interests of the companies and individuals who make their money off abusing, tormenting, exploiting, and killing animals will always, always trump animals' basic interests in simply living free, natural lives. Governments and industries will always find a way around inconvenient reforms, even when the reforms are laughably minor, when it's in their financial interest to do so.
You don't want animals to be put through hell and then killed for no good reason? Wonderful. Then stop eating them. Stop donating to organizations that fund research on them. And when it comes to animal experimentation, start demanding not that governments and industries give animals bigger cages or nicer treatment or file more reports, but that they stop experimenting on animals. We have alternatives. We have excellent alternatives in terms of what eat. And we have excellent, scientifically superior alternatives in terms of how we conduct our research. What brought on this rant tonight? I'll let the folks at Animal Aid (UK) tell you:
The European Parliament has voted to allow millions of animal ‘procedures’ to go ahead throughout the EU each year without the need to seek formal approval. Only ‘moderate’, ‘severe’ and primate experiments would need approval from a central authority, leaving an estimated 4.3 million experiments to go ahead ‘on the nod’.
MEPs were voting on a draft Directive that will update the current 23-year old statute governing vivisection across the EU. The May 5th vote was a critical moment in a hard fought battle during which parliamentarians have been targeted by pharmaceutical company lobbyists who are desperate to create an even more profit-friendly regime at the expense of animal protection.
Despite MEPs having voted last year to phase out all primate experiments, months of intense lobbying weakened their resolve. On May 5th, they voted to delay indefinitely a proposal by the European Commission to phase out the capture of wild-caught monkeys for breeding purposes. The Commission had also wanted monkeys to be used only in experiments relating to ‘life-threatening or debilitating’ human conditions. But, MEPs backed an amendment permitting primate use also for ‘basic’ or curiosity-driven research. The back-tracking amendments were tabled by British Tory MEP for the South-West region, Neil Parish, who is Rapporteur for the European Parliament’s Agricultural Committee.
