Anger

[smokingboot]

I am thinking too much this morning, and I find myself growing very angry. A couple of friends of mine have mentioned their thoughts on animal testing, and they have a right to - no problems there. The trouble is when one begins to see people correlating the utterly wrong actions of certain extreme animal liberation groups with the point itself as to whether animal testing is right or wrong. And as ever, when I feel myself sinking into terrible anger, I fall back upon old stories and books.

So help me now, Mr Blake, show me that Man is not a thing of horror and torture, teach me something to elevate me and make me smile and remind me that I am a lucky daughter of the diamond age.



'Here,' said I, 'is your lot, in this space, if space it may be call'd.' Soon we saw the stable and the church, & I took him to the altar and open'd the Bible, and lo! it was a deep pit, into which I descended driving the Angel before me, soon we saw seven houses of brick; one we enter'd; in it were a number of monkeys, baboons, & all of that species, chain'd by the middle, grinning and snatching at one another, but witheld by the shortness of their chains: however, I saw that they sometimes grew numerous, and then the weak were caught by the strong, and with a grinning aspect, first coupled with, & then devour'd, by plucking off first one limb and then another till the body was left a helpless trunk; this after grinning & kissing it with seeming fondness they devour'd too; and here & there I saw one savourily picking the flesh off of his own tail; as the stench terribly annoy'd us both, we went into the mill, & I in my hand brought the skeleton of a body, which in the mill was Aristotle's Analytics.
So the Angel said: 'thy phantasy has imposed upon me, & thou oughtest to be ashamed.'
I answer'd: 'we impose on one another, & it is but lost time to converse with you whose works are only Analytics.'


Yes, they will harm each other, and many more besides.

Oh, what a piece of work is Man.

Comments

My rant...

[the-lore.livejournal.com]

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in most developed countries. Much of the research effort has concentrated on animal models. And yet, for the majority of animal models of human stroke, no formal validation studies have been conducted. In fact, the Home Office admitted last year to never having conducted any study into the efficacy of animal experiments - and has no plans to do so. Similarly, few animal studies have been subjected to systematic review. Where systematic reviews of animal studies of stroke have been carried out, they have raised serious doubts about the interpretation and validity of the animal data with respect to the subsequent clinical research. While more than 700 different drugs have shown promise of efficacy in laboratory animals, only one has proven to have efficacy in human studies – but even this treatment remains highly controversial. Animal models have not provided the hoped-for and much- needed answers, while clinical studies have yet to provide clear treatment guidelines for stroke patients. It is therefore not surprising that adverse drug reactions are the fourth leading cause of death, killing 18,000 people in the UK every year, despite massive animal testing. Clearly, it is time to replace bad science (animal experiments) with good science (21st century human based research methods).

But you can do a little to help ...

Animal Aid set up the Humane Research Donor Card in 1991 (free pack available)

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/campaign/humane/wasted.htm

[QUOTE]But we would still need live bodies for some tests.[QUOTE]

Re animal testing the following explains why the 'intact systems' argument fails

"Causal/functional asymmetry - Let’s assume system S1 has causal mechanisms {a,b,c,d,e}

and system S2 has causal mechanisms (a,b,c,x,y}.

If we stimulate the sub-system {a,b,c} of S1 with stimuli sf and get result rf, then we would expect to get rf from {a,b,c} of S2 as well - if the model is viable.

However, this outcome will be highly probable if and only if {a,b,c} are causally independent of {d,e} and {x,y}.

In biological systems, as those who argue in favor of intact systems emphasize, almost all systems interact. We have no a priori reason to think otherwise."
(Specious Science, R Greek MD, 2002)

Thank you!

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

This is amazing! Do you mind if I quote it on my main lj page?