News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Alcohol and pig experiments

Started by AllPurposeAtheist, June 05, 2014, 10:48:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

AllPurposeAtheist

I get these emails from change.org from time to time. Some I sign, some I don't, but this one just doesn't make a damned bit of sense. It's not as if there's a lack of humans who drink to fucking much to research.



As a physician and a native of Rhode Island who has been practicing medicine for more than 30 years, I care deeply about the heart health of the people of this state. That’s why I take real issue with the cruel and medically unnecessary use of pigs in experiments conducted at Rhode Island Hospital by a Brown University faculty member.

The experimenters, led by Frank Sellke, M.D., first operate on the pigs, surgically reducing blood flow within the animals’ coronary arteries in an attempt to simulate heart disease. The animals are cut open to expose their hearts and take measurements.

Published studies show that several pigs died due to cardiac events, such as lethal abnormal heart rhythms or bleeding following surgery. The survivors are then fed either sucrose or what Dr. Sellke deemed to be a "moderate" quantity of alcoholâ€"approximately five shots of vodka or three glasses of wine per day. At the end of the study, all of the animals are killed.

These experiments are supposedly aimed at understanding the role of moderate alcohol consumption in preventing heart disease. But the relationship between alcohol intake and the heart is complex, and it has been described in numerous human studies.

Rhode Island Hospital and Brown University should terminate these experiments in favor of a more human-based approach.

Please join me in urging Rhode Island Hospital and Brown University to end these experiments now.


https://www.change.org/petitions/stop-cruel-animal-experiments-where-pigs-are-forced-to-drink-vodka-and-wine?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=73775&alert_id=KfAifNLtLe_B1JQDmG5QwBPANM2od2DckV6bHe2JNZXBCDWtdJzh1o%3D
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

AllPurposeAtheist

Quotes don't seem to work with this phone.. Yet..
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Mermaid

You either gain medical knowledge or you don't. Medical advances are not gained through osmosis. This is nothing unusual, this kind of cardiovascular research goes on in many forms. As for "unnecessary", I'd say this is a subjective entity. I suspect there is much disagreement as to the necessity of this sort of thing.

If you oppose research with animals, that is respectable. But you also need to accept that medical advances won't be made at the same speed. We cannot have our cake and eat it, too.
A cynical habit of thought and speech, a readiness to criticise work which the critic himself never tries to perform, an intellectual aloofness which will not accept contact with life’s realities â€" all these are marks, not as the possessor would fain to think, of superiority but of weakness. -TR

stromboli

Forgive me for being a heartless monster, but I'm having a hard time coming up with sympathy for something I barbecue.

AllPurposeAtheist

It's not that I care about pigs all that much, but go to any bar or convenience store. There's more than enough alcoholics with heart problems  to go cutting into pig hearts then getting them drunk.
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Mermaid

Quote from: stromboli on June 06, 2014, 11:11:03 AM
Forgive me for being a heartless monster, but I'm having a hard time coming up with sympathy for something I barbecue.
I think it's THE most important thing to consider when using animals for food or for research--more important than anything. The welfare of these animals is absolutely paramount. Sorry I am probably taking a light-hearted thread and turning it into a serious one, but it's something I am pretty passionate about. There is no excuse whatsoever to fail to treat living creatures with respect and not cause them undue suffering.
A cynical habit of thought and speech, a readiness to criticise work which the critic himself never tries to perform, an intellectual aloofness which will not accept contact with life’s realities â€" all these are marks, not as the possessor would fain to think, of superiority but of weakness. -TR

stromboli

I grew up in a rural farming community and participated in a lot of farm activities. You tend not to get emotionally attached to something destined to be your dinner or somebody else's. Animals are looked at like dogs, cats, horses, food. I have participated in the deaths of many turkeys and even killed a few stray cats and dogs, because they were predators killing chickens. I have beheaded a chicken or three.  I have participated in the denutting of calves. Call me heartless, but my reality is different than yours.

Oh and btw- if you decide to move out in the country, make sure you are not downwind of a hog farm.

Hydra009

Quote from: Mermaid on June 06, 2014, 07:55:19 AMYou either gain medical knowledge or you don't. Medical advances are not gained through osmosis. This is nothing unusual, this kind of cardiovascular research goes on in many forms. As for "unnecessary", I'd say this is a subjective entity. I suspect there is much disagreement as to the necessity of this sort of thing.

If you oppose research with animals, that is respectable. But you also need to accept that medical advances won't be made at the same speed. We cannot have our cake and eat it, too.
Agreed.  I generally see animal research as a necessary evil, though not all experiments are warranted.

I don't know the exact statistics on this, but a lot of animal research has moved away from primates and "cuddly" animals towards animals that no one's going to have much of a moral problem with disposing of - mice, frogs, fruit flies, zebrafish, etc.  Pigs are kinda iffy since they're steadily becoming a pet species (more sympathy) but they're also largely a livestock species (less sympathy).  But generally, I don't have a problem with using them in experiments.

stromboli

Quote from: Hydra009 on June 07, 2014, 01:40:35 AM
Agreed.  I generally see animal research as a necessary evil, though not all experiments are warranted.

I don't know the exact statistics on this, but a lot of animal research has moved away from primates and "cuddly" animals towards animals that no one's going to have much of a moral problem with disposing of - mice, frogs, fruit flies, zebrafish, etc.  Pigs are kinda iffy since they're steadily becoming a pet species (more sympathy) but they're also largely a livestock species (less sympathy).  But generally, I don't have a problem with using them in experiments.

Exactly. A lot has to do with how we perceive the animal. Before Pot Bellied Pigs (cute!) they were smelly, ugly gigantic critters that were good for football skins and food. Pigs are the most efficient animal in terms of converting food (to them) into food (for us) There is more edible meat by weight on a hog than any other critter. It all comes back to viewpoint. I don't believe in being cruel to animals, but there is always going to be some point where cruelty vs utility will be debated.

SGOS

The sequel to the remake of Planet of the Apes is soon to be in theaters, and we will all know the end result of medical experimentations on animals.  Yet, at this point, I find myself identifying with the apes and cheering for them when they kill humans.  So my indifference to the suffering of other species is just reversed, while my level of compassion has not changed.