Jun23
Hole + Skull = OK?
Posted at 11:08 AM | Permalink
| 
Comments (19)
The Guardian, a U.K.-based newspaper, was recently "granted exclusive and unfettered access" to a super-secret primate testing facility at an undisclosed location and operated by the staff of an undisclosed university. This facility works on marmosets, drilling "tiny" holes in the monkeys' skulls and injecting "minute" amounts of "liquid toxin."
Basically, they—whoever they are—open monkeys' heads up with a drill and pour in some poison. But hey, don't worry about the monkeys—Guardian blogger James Randerson claims they aren't "noticeably affected" by the holes and poison in their heads.
While you can read the whole article here, I would suggest you better spend your time checking out what PETA Europe's Alistair Currie had to say in his response letter:
When James Randerson was shown around a primate laboratory (Report, May 31) did he ask why he was being shown this particular laboratory—and whether his "unfettered" access was the same as seeing what goes on in his absence? Undercover investigations into primate laboratories consistently reveal animal suffering far in excess of what he saw on this official tour, and the research conducted was itself far from typical—most monkeys in the UK are used in pharmaceutical toxicology research. Nor is the attitude of technicians or scientists the point. Whether they are or are not "caring", monkeys don't belong in cages, their brains are not ours to interfere with and this PR exercise was a cynical misrepresentation of a far uglier reality.
And if you're actively searching for a reason to be seriously frustrated for the rest of the day, The Guardian was nice enough to post this audio slideshow in which the tiny monkeys cling to the bars of their cages. Listen closely for the bit about how research staff consider themselves "compassionate professionals"—aren't you curious to know what their definition of a sadist is?
Posted by Sean Conner
TAGGED:
Comments
that's the saddest thing I've ever seen.
Posted by: gards | June 23, 2008 11:52 AM
That's the most hysterical statement - they aren't "noticeably affected" I would love know what Mr. Randerson would say if a hole were drilled into his head and poison was injected!!
Would he say "I'm not noticing any effect"? Ahhhhahahaha! That is so fucking funny.
Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 23, 2008 12:03 PM
Very good point Sean about the definition of Sadism. I don't how you people keep you cool and do this day in and day out. Often I have thought about applying for a job at PETA, but I don't know. If I had information about who these low life doctors are I would hunt them down, and have their heads on a stake. Then I would do an experiment of my own How quickly an alligator swallows the head of a demonic doctor. And thats how my Brain Works. Post that in your medical journals you godless fools
Posted by: Saucy | June 23, 2008 12:19 PM
Om Mani Padme Hum
Posted by: ALEXANDRA | June 23, 2008 01:04 PM
OKAY!? Poison is put into their skulls for what reason??? And to Mr. Randerson they are slowly being poisoned to death and you stand their taking a few pics all the while they feed them marshmellows... WHAT just to make it look pretty!! And THIS IS why we call you vivisectors SADISTIC!!! Get it!!
Posted by: Carla | June 23, 2008 01:59 PM
I used to be quite nonchalant about the human race.. or humans.. neither loathed, hated nor particularly loved.. I kind of thought they were like me.. moderately moralistic, could see the basic difference between 'right' or 'wrong'.. justice or injustice.. fairly merciful and somewhat 'righteous'.. well. that was before I stumbled across a youtube video which then led onto animal welfare/animal rights site.. and boy of boy it was like opening a really rotten to the core can of worms.. I never realized the terribel terrible abuse and cruelty inflicted onto millions of animals not only individually (which wouldnt' surprise me) but on a huge, massive and commercial scale.. everything.. I never realized humans were so callous, cruel, heartless, sadistic, despicable when doling out so much cruelty and suffering to creatures that were conveniently 'voiceless' and that were other than their own species.. which it seemed kind of gave them the 'all okay' in their eyes..
this particular episode is another one such case of the endless abuse and cruelty to animals.. sometimes I think what kind of a planet is this that I live on? well.. these horrors.. all I can say.. is that the more people were aware of them.. the better.. I guess that is the whole point of Peta and other animal rights sites? education, awareness.. and urge people to change their lifestyle habits.. ie more animal cruelty free.. but vivisection will be a v. difficutl one to argue against.. as they will always purport it is in the name of science and for the benefit of 'humankind'.. and sod the million or so animals that suffer/suffered horrendously in their gruesome experiments.. we may be the most/more intelligent species of the 'animal kingdom' but for what we do to other creatures/species I consider that we are also the most despicable..
Posted by: liz | June 23, 2008 03:02 PM
this is bull shit. what kind of brainwashing video is this? drilling holes in monkeys isn't right. i bet they paid the reporter to say thease things.
Posted by: Josh | June 23, 2008 07:20 PM
I am strongly opposed to animal cruelty, but I am also for scientific research. The practice described above doesn't sound like it falls under the 'cruel' category to me. I think there s a lot of misconception concerning the use of animals in a research setting. To be fair, there are cases of cruelty, but the vast number of scientists using animals in research do so in a humane and careful way. Scientists face scrutiny by their peers and the groups they work for. In most places, the laws governing work with animals, especially primates, are very strict in academia settings.
Industry research does tend to be less controlled and I do advocate the implication of stronger laws in that segment. However, in the example above, the experiment seems, again, not to fall in the cruel category. The 'drilling' and 'hole' the writer is talking about would be handled in a similar way as a human's neurosurgery. The animal would be unconscious during the procedure and given sedatives and/or pain meds after. The 'poison' is likely a neurotoxin. Yes, it would be poisonous. However, the animal would feel no pain or any such thing from this because the brain has no nerve endings. This experiment sounds like a reasonable neuroscience investigation to me.
I think that concentrating on issues such as this and using such inflammatory language detracts from the overall cause of ending animal cruelty. I believe that it is better to go after less regulated and more dangerous organizations such as meat producers, the fur industry, and pet mills.
I think I will get flak for saying this, but I really do believe that coming at the issue from a more rational standpoint will help the cause to be taken seriously by a larger group of people than would have otherwise.
Posted by: Kassandra O'Brien | June 23, 2008 07:35 PM
Kassandra,
Hello. ;) I have a lot of respect for what you are saying. It sounds perfectly logical and well thought-out to me.
I would simply like to bring up a few talking points. I think only a total sadist would turn the other way when a person is suffering with Parkinson's, cancer, blindness, etc. We need to do everything we can to help these folks.
However, the government, funding agencies, etc are not attempting to find alternatives to animal research. Most want simple and cheap shortcuts.
A vast majority of these tests don't result in helpful information and are a waste of time and money, not to mention the fact that ---- an animal gets tortured in the process ----!!
These researchers don't work for free. They get paid and cheap and dirty animal tests are the best way to save everyone money. It is outrageous and for all of our sakes, it needs to be changed.
All we ask is that alternative testing is actively researched without big Pharma telling us what we can and can't do. Complementary drugs need more attention as well.
There has been great "research" with pet dogs in a veterinary setting - the use of Glucosomine has proved useful in releiving dog's arthritis, leading to more human use. This type of 'animal testing" benefits both pet and human.
And one more thought, can we think of any logical, scientific reason why a nonhuman animal's life is less valuable than a human's?
Thank you for listening. ;)
Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 24, 2008 10:36 AM
Unfortunately, I find it very easy to counter any person that says that an experiment is painless: just ask that they volunteer for it. If holes in the skull and neurotoxins "aren't that bad," then we should be able to find humans that would volunteer for such studies in exchange for a little cash. I think most reasonable folks would then suddenly change their tune, agreeing that it's unreasonably deleterious to the individual, doesn't promise that a treatment will be developed that would benefit those suffering the illness, etc.
The cowardly backbone of virtually all prejudice and injustice is the inability to sympathize with others and employ the basic "do unto others" principle.
Posted by: Sinon Robert | June 24, 2008 11:43 AM
An end to animal experimentation COMPLETELY....no matter what
Also please define the word HUMAN, I believe in all areas having to do with animals we have forgotten the true meaning.
Posted by: r | June 24, 2008 04:53 PM
I personally have gone threw several test when phytologist spoke to me for 3 hours a day for one week every year to measure the way my brain is developing because I have a mental disability. they sit you in a tiny crammed office with a folder and make you look at multiple folders full of stupid test for hours. not only is it mentally draining but if they ask you to do something that you can't then you in turn feel stupid for and extended period of tine attempting to find out how you could have answered it correctly or better.
I because of these test I have reserved ever since I was 5 understand a little better then others what the animals are going threw. The major difference is that in there test they can die in mine i only feel abnormally stupid. the way we are alike is that all the test are pointless. The test they give me don't make me smarter and the test that they give them don't cure everyone. The gov. should invest there money somewhere where it is needed, not necessarily for animals though that would be a plus but even in getting food in Darfur would be better than killing animals and giving pointless test. Yes some save lives but is it worth the deaths that come first?
Posted by: Jennifer | June 24, 2008 05:08 PM
Wow Jennifer you are amazing!
Thank You so very much for telling us about your experence.
I can say for sure that you are in no way stupid. Jennifer you are extremely bright, intelligent, articulate, wise, insightful, sensitive, and very kind and kind hearted.
I am so sorry for all you have experenced, you let us know how you feel and how the animals feel from your human experence.
I thank you so very much Jennifer. Your very smart for sure, and very expressive!
Have a Great Day!
and Thank You so very much!
Holly
Posted by: Holly | June 25, 2008 10:46 AM
Sounds a lot like Jeffrey Dahmer...
Absolutely sickening.
Posted by: Anna | June 25, 2008 06:03 PM
any body who drills a whole in a monkeys head and puts posion in it is really, really messed up.
and the monkeys were so cute! :(
Posted by: kristi jackson | June 26, 2008 11:13 AM
man has abandoned nature , replaced it with fashion and law---along the way he has diminished his natural intelligence. the world has become a sad little place. some sub-cultures doubling their population every twenty years or less, using in a year resources that took eons to create. the earth is denatured. the lawyers are the princes and thieir judges are the kings-fueled by lust and greed.
Posted by: jackie cox | July 2, 2008 12:10 AM
I don't think any animal should be forced to suffer and die for a human that refused to make one lifestyle change to save his/her own life. The majority of health problems in this country could be avoided by proper (i.e., VEGAN diet) and exercise. If YOU choose to overeat and YOU choose to smoke and someone has to suffer for those consequences, it should be YOU, not some innocent animal. I am 100% against animal testing and do not think one single animal should die to save the life of a thousand humans that would not do anything to save their own. You all argue for the right to eat what you want, do what you want, be excessively fat--okay, then be willing to die for your choices and not expect that someone innocent is going to die for you.
Posted by: Antigone1000 | July 6, 2008 12:22 PM
Exactly, Antigone 1000! Very well put!
Posted by: lynda downie | July 6, 2008 10:47 PM
I thought the European Commission voted to stop Primate experiments... When do we prosecute?
Posted by: Guy | July 9, 2008 10:08 AM