Jul09
Vivisector of the Month!
Posted at 09:29 AM | Permalink
| 
Comments (36)
 |
First and foremost, I'd like to congratulate Jason Cromer, who won last month's contest by a single vote. I'm so happy to see that the competition was heated last month, and I hope that you'll agree that this month's contestants are equally well matched.
If you love word association, then you're certain to love the conveniently named Michael Weed. His interests include alcohol, morphine, cocaine, ecstacy, and the simian equivalent of HIV (Simian Immunodeficiency Virus, or SIV). And he generously bestows all these wonderful gifts on his monkey friends, who can't fight back.
In one particularly gruesome study funded by the National Institutes of Health, Weed trained monkeys in a basic motor task, infected them with SIV, then checked how they performed the task—while on cocaine. He has also studied SIV in monkeys without going the extra mile of giving them cocaine. One time, for example, he assessed 10 monkeys' performances on memory tests before and after they were infected with SIV. He concluded that his findings matched what was already known from human AIDS patients. Brilliant work, Weed! Even if he'd made stunning new conclusions, would it mean that we should start giving cocaine to people with HIV or that we should warn people with HIV that the white stuff ain't the right stuff?
In another hideous and meaningless study, Weed decided to create opiate dependence in monkeys by giving them a tasty orange-flavored drink spiked with morphine every six hours for several months. Monkey-lovers and M.A.D.D. members alike, please vote for Michael Weed!
If you ever find a pig in cardiac arrest and need to perform CPR, Gordon Ewy would be the man to call. Occupying an endowed chair and serving as director of the University of Arizona's Sarver Heart Center, Ewy has dedicated much of his life to saving pigs' lives (for a brief while, anyway)—after he induces cardiac arrest in them via asphyxiation or other methods.
Ewy's heart-stopping modus operandi typically involves letting his victims sit at a cardiac standstill for eight minutes or more before trying to resuscitate them via different combinations of "chest compressions and assisted ventilation" (i.e., experimental CPR). The success of his methods is measured by the number of pigs who survive, and the number of surviving pigs who retain full brain function after their near-death experiences. In one particularly revealing experiment, Ewy assessed whether chest compressions using stacked hands or side-by-side hands would significantly affect survival. Lo and behold, they did not.
Who will you vote for? Weed, for his extensive work at creating a nonhuman primate crack house, or Ewy, for his life-threatening, "lifesaving" work on pigs? Leave a comment to let me know!
Posted by Sean Conner
TAGGED:
Comments
WOW!! Are they not the fricked up bunch!! Ewy or Weedy?? Hard pick!? But Ewy has my vote for now, cause this just might be the very thing that kills him -a cardiac arrest!! Look at him the blood isn't flowin' too good!! The heck with all of them and their USELESS tests!!!
Posted by: Carla | July 9, 2008 11:34 AM
My vote is for Weed. He can keep his cocaine to himself!
Posted by: Lola | July 9, 2008 11:58 AM
Ewy has my vote.
What a filthy piece of nasty shit. I bet this is something Cochran would enjoy taking part in, he's just as filthy.
Both of these humans are part of the worst. And our tax dollars are funding these murderers.
Someday, somewhere.
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 9, 2008 12:14 PM
Sick pair of fuckers, nothing between them. It amazes me how these cretins go on and on ! dishing out abuse to these creatures, without getting some divine backlash..still there ain't no God, can't be.
Posted by: keith | July 9, 2008 12:44 PM
Sean! I love your article, I'm voting for Weed and his sadistic methods on discovering what we already know! Great work, I hope by this article that his funding isn't taken away. (not!!!). He must be a real winner.
Posted by: Kelsie | July 9, 2008 12:45 PM
HELP! I don't what to do here. Our local Giant Eagle Grocery Store in Barberton, Ohio, is keeping live lobsters in a over crowded tank. They have claws, and every thing else taped together. What can PETA do about this?
Posted by: Sue | July 9, 2008 12:56 PM
Keith,
I couldn't agree with you more!
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 9, 2008 01:01 PM
What a sick, demented piece of crap this old man is...maybe someone should perform these barabic experiments on him or his family members. And to think this is GOVERNMENT money ASSISTING IN THIS evilness...god help us OR WE ARE ALL DOOMED IF THIS DOESNT STOP..
Posted by: R | July 9, 2008 01:29 PM
'' Judith,'' just love your comment, especially about Cochran ! if it wasn't so serious and sad, you could laugh, Please keep em coming.
Posted by: keith | July 9, 2008 01:49 PM
I don't quite get what is the point of 'voting' for these gruesomely warped minded individuals.. I mean what does anyone even less so the animals get out of it?
celebrate kindhearted individuals or heroes/heroine who have come to the aid or assistance/rescue of animals or are involved tirelessly in animal libeartion/rights or welfare.. why waste time, effort or even 'bother' to vote for these hideous and warped monsters??? pointless and a total utter waste of your millisculeth second of time.. they're not even worth that!! frankly.. they're ALL as bad as each other.. if they test and/or experiment on animals.. it's simple. they're evidently and glaringly obviously animals abusers.. and the same goes for the rest of them.. anyone who hurts, harms or causes suffering to an animal.. they're all in the same boat!!
Posted by: liz | July 9, 2008 01:54 PM
liz, i think the point of voting is to encourage more folks to read carefully and thereby learn a tiny bit more about the gruesome reality of the lives of animals in laboratories.
not every action must physically save an animals life, much of our work as activists will be dedicated to simply educating other caring individuals so that they will be inspired to take action.
that said, i would vote for weed in this case, only because i have a few HIV positive friends and can relate more easily to what SIV must be like. ugh.
Posted by: Sinon Robert | July 9, 2008 02:32 PM
Judith, loved yoyr first post 7-9-08 12:14 PM!!!!!!
Keep them coming!!!
Posted by: Ana | July 9, 2008 03:30 PM
Vivisectors...there IS divine justice. What you sow you shall reap. In another life, you too, could be vivisected upon without thought or care from souless vivisectors like yourselves.
What heartless, souless men.
Posted by: Soliel | July 9, 2008 03:30 PM
BOTH. I think they are both worthy candidates for this month.
Posted by: Aneliese | July 9, 2008 04:26 PM
Sinon Robert, So beautifully put.
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 9, 2008 04:44 PM
They are both sadistic idiots. I can't decide so I'll just vote for both. But why even do this if nothing is going to happen to them. I am sure they won't get fired just because we are voting for them so what good does this do?
Posted by: Rex's Mom | July 9, 2008 05:57 PM
Thanks Ana, I though of you when I posted this. I am sick and tired of him terrorizing the good and decent people here.
What he sows he shall reap!
Love to you Ana.
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 9, 2008 07:40 PM
My vote for weed. What a real human being he is
Posted by: Coral | July 9, 2008 07:49 PM
Well...
they say that one should choose the lesser of the two evils, but these "gentlemen" are quite a mouthful when it comes to choosing.
Weed has as much of integrity as any rock, and that is saying something...or his emotional intelligence is that of a teaspoon...but I will vote for him, surely he will enjoy one last high...stomped by his apes.
Posted by: Camilo | July 10, 2008 02:03 AM
Gordon Ewy
Posted by: Rachel | July 10, 2008 08:37 AM
Weed gets my vote. Disgusting!
Posted by: Jennifer Hauck | July 10, 2008 11:29 AM
Tough choice, but Weed gets my vote (I think he was partaking himself). If these guys can dream up enough redundant, pointless experiments, they can make it to retirement without actually ever having worked.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | July 10, 2008 01:34 PM
The devil goes by many names and these two guys are part of that list. Dificult choice but I will go with Ewy.
Posted by: Maureen | July 10, 2008 01:53 PM
A couple months ago PETA was protesting a vivisector in my home town. It got front page news and after 40 minutes(when the media left) so did PETA's VA employees! No follow-up or appeal to 370 locals who support PETA! Besides myself I would like other members here to emphasize the importance to PETA to get locals involved in the aftermath of the protest. As great as PETA is they are human and cannot single-handedly do everything. Since PETA RARELY teams up with other groups this is important to get them to wake-up . Thus, the vivisectors in my neighborhood are MORE re-inforced in their ways knowing that PETA is now gone for another year or two before they return
Posted by: Gerry | July 10, 2008 02:05 PM
maybe the employees left because they were from virginia? hotels are costly, man. i would probably cancel my membership if peta started putting people up in hotels for weeks at a time on my dollar.
Posted by: Sinon Robert | July 10, 2008 03:05 PM
This is so hard to choose. Giving drugs to aids-infected monkeys or murdering and/or sadistically torturing pigs rendering them unconscious to see if they can be revived. These are definitely pointless and redundant experiments and should be abolished. Those aren't humans those are psychotic monsters.
Posted by: vegancoin | July 10, 2008 11:28 PM
Weed gets my vote, for "discovering" something we already knew, thus making him not only an animal abuser but a complete idiot.
Posted by: Leigh | July 11, 2008 06:37 AM
they both suck in my book.
can we have a tie for first place loser?
How about we practice all this on humans who actually volunteer instead of a defenseless animal that can't speak up and say yes or no. My guess is, the animals would not volunteer.
I see a ton of crackheads who use drugs by choice. If they got their daily drug dose, they would probbaly volunteer right away. I'm not saying this would be right to practice on humans either- but at least we have a say. An animal doesn't.
Posted by: brandie r. | July 11, 2008 10:15 AM
When I read about two human monsters like these men, it makes me question humanity on a daily basis. It's just so, so sad. What's wrong with these people. I don't get it!
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 11, 2008 03:30 PM
why not just toss them all up in the same pan.. and turn up the heat.. HIGH!!!! give them a little taste of the pain they inflict on so many many lab animals that they warpedly experiment or test on relentlessly.. these shameful shameful, mentally warped, emotionally disfunctional,soulfully twisted and void and BEREFT of any decent feelings human beings..!!!
Posted by: yf | July 11, 2008 04:24 PM
yf, I am all for that plan!
If only.
Peace for all animals!
Posted by: Judith | July 12, 2008 01:32 PM
One word can sum up the pain felt by animals: Karma.
Posted by: Ashley | July 12, 2008 07:52 PM
They are both bastards.
Posted by: Zeta | July 16, 2008 07:29 AM
Great write up, Sean. Weed gets my vote.
Posted by: lynda downie | July 20, 2008 08:47 PM
It's very strange isn't it? How nearly every person you come across is against animal testing. I myself used to be against it too and can only presume that the main reason for this is all the videos sent out be organisations like PETA or BUAV. These videos are often very old and date back to the 60s/70s/80 and have been altered - maybe not by the organisation showing them, but somewhere along the line. You can usually tell how old they are by looking at the technology in the background - more often than not, the computers are old! Also, most of them are taken illegally at night, when of course the animals are in cages as that is where they sleep! Even pets sleep in cages!
So, the videos may not be reliable, but that doesn't automatically make animal testing lovely, does it? I mean, when someone knows little about animal testing and sees a video, it's common sense to dislike it - animals being cruelly treated for no real reason at all when computers could easily take their place!
These things are not so.
Firstly, computers or other test method ARE used whenever it is possible, the law requires it, however unfortunately these method are not yet reliable enough to replace animal testing fully, though thanks to them the number of animals in tests has reduced by 50% since the 70's. This is obviously a very good thing and all scientists hope that one day, technology will have the capability to replace the use of animals in tests completely, but until then the use of animals is vital.
Humans cannot replace animals in tests as not enough volunteers would be available, and it costs, literally millions to test on just one human - something our governments cannot afford. Also results would be much longer coming from a human than a rat or small rodent.
So, what about the animals being treated cruelly? The government checks labs randomly at least 12 times a year to make certain that NO animal abuse is taking place. Before any tests go ahead, labs have to have permission from the government that it is indeed necessary and that the minimum numbers of animals are being used. 93% of animals in tests are under painkillers/anaesthetics so therefore cannot feel any pain, the other 7% don't need any form of pain relievers. Labs are directed by either a vet or other expert in animal health to make sure that the animals are treated kindly with respect and have sufficient food, housing and care.
Many people also believe that labs are stuffed full with monkeys and dogs and cats, when in reality only 0.001% of lab animals are primates and only 0.5% is a cat or dog. 85% of animals in labs are rats, mice or poultry which we eat, trap and poison - silly really.
And lastly, what about the reason? According to the videos the tests are carried out for either no reason or for the production of cosmetics - make up etc. As I said in the previous paragraph, permission from the government must be obtained before tests go ahead partly to ensure that they NEED to happen. Cosmetics DO NOT need to be tested where as medicines generally do and the pose as more of a threat and are much more complex than and perfume/lip gloss. It is illegal to test cosmetics in the UK, the Netherlands and Belgium. The EU is banning cosmetic tests in 2009. Some forms of cosmetic testing are not allowed in the US. Medicine testing saved 4.355 billion people's lives; this includes babies and toddlers, that's a reason to test medicines if anything. Aswell as them millions of animals - largely pets - lives have been saved by animal testing too! This means more lives are saved than lost.
So that is why I believe that animal testing needs to continue. For the sake of our animals and children and generations to come, meanwhile we can have our fingers crossed that an alternative comes up soon.
Posted by: Hermione | August 4, 2008 09:09 AM
Hermione: There is an alternative--it's called PREVENTION. Humans can stop smoking so animals don't have to die in tests to learn how to prevent cancer from smoking. People can exercise/eat right so animals don't have to die in studies to learn how humans can be overweight and disgusting and yet not die from it. Truly--why should one single animal die to save the life of human that will not make the slightest attempt to improve his own health?? None of these animals are volunteers or particularly care about saving human life nor should they. People need to start looking out for their own health or pay the consequences, not expect innocent animals to die for them.
Posted by: Antigone1000 | August 4, 2008 06:43 PM