free porn

sonicreducer

in anatomy lab today we dissected a cow eye. there were 40 pictures in the lab manual. did we really have to euthanize that cow so we could pick at that eye and throw it away ten minutes later? i told my TA i wouldn't do it, and she let me watch another group.

i understand that experimenting is necessary to save lives, but should we all be dissecting eyeballs in college? that has to be a million cows a year. what a fucking waste of life.

those poor cow bastards,...

CJMST3K

sonicreducer wrote:

in anatomy lab today we dissected a cow eye. there were 40 pictures in the lab manual. did we really have to euthanize that cow so we could pick at that eye and throw it away ten minutes later? i told my TA i wouldn't do it, and she let me watch another group.

i understand that experimenting is necessary to save lives, but should we all be dissecting eyeballs in college? that has to be a million cows a year. what a fucking waste of life.

those poor cow bastards,...

humans are sick f's. unfortunate but true.

Ahnimus

sonicreducer wrote:

in anatomy lab today we dissected a cow eye. there were 40 pictures in the lab manual. did we really have to euthanize that cow so we could pick at that eye and throw it away ten minutes later? i told my TA i wouldn't do it, and she let me watch another group.

i understand that experimenting is necessary to save lives, but should we all be dissecting eyeballs in college? that has to be a million cows a year. what a fucking waste of life.

those poor cow bastards,...

Well, one point is that the cow wouldn't have existed if not to disect it. As the dominant species we breed animals for our purpose, if we didn't they wouldn't exist in those environments. Those environments would be for growing corn or parking our cars.

On the other hand, it has to be rough on Hindus that believe the cow is sacred.

chopitdown

sonicreducer wrote:

in anatomy lab today we dissected a cow eye. there were 40 pictures in the lab manual. did we really have to euthanize that cow so we could pick at that eye and throw it away ten minutes later? i told my TA i wouldn't do it, and she let me watch another group.

i understand that experimenting is necessary to save lives, but should we all be dissecting eyeballs in college? that has to be a million cows a year. what a fucking waste of life.

those poor cow bastards,...

i doubt the cow was euthanized for you to dissect the eye...it was prob left over from some other purpose. Or perhaps all the eyes dissected in college are from cows who died naturally in a pasture somewhere...then it's not a waste of life it's a good use of something that has no more life.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Maybe this is a strong moral case for funding and advancement of stem cell research? Students need hands-on knowledge of the physical matter they're dealing with, but when research is done on cells rather than a huge living being, no obvious physical harm or damage is done that will cause hurt that we can quantify in terms of emotional distress. Surely the abstract concept of spiritual human waste should matter less, to anyone who deals in science with matters of practical ethics, than the reality of the physical waste of a living animal capable of experiencing emotional and physical suffering?


I'm not a scientist by any stretch of imagination, sonicreducer. I'm really just asking questions.

Austicman

Its not like killing the cow taking the eyeball and throwing the rest away. More than likely it's the other way round we're your school goes and collects the useful leftovers and uses them were they can. Sorry bit gruesome but that's life sometimes.

CJMST3K

Ahnimus wrote:

Well, one point is that the cow wouldn't have existed if not to disect it. As the dominant species we breed animals for our purpose, if we didn't they wouldn't exist in those environments. Those environments would be for growing corn or parking our cars.

On the other hand, it has to be rough on Hindus that believe the cow is sacred.

I think if we do this, then we should also breed humans for organ transplants. Send them to "summer camp" from birth until we need to harvest them. It's better to have lived-and-lost then to never have lived at all.

crittables

sonicreducer wrote:

in anatomy lab today we dissected a cow eye. there were 40 pictures in the lab manual. did we really have to euthanize that cow so we could pick at that eye and throw it away ten minutes later? i told my TA i wouldn't do it, and she let me watch another group.

i understand that experimenting is necessary to save lives, but should we all be dissecting eyeballs in college? that has to be a million cows a year. what a fucking waste of life.

those poor cow bastards,...

what's sad is i had to do that in elementary school!! well we didn't do the actual disecting, but in 2nd grade the nurse did and groups of about 5 of us watched! we did a lung and heart too, i forget which grades.

FinsburyParkCarrots

crittables wrote:

what's sad is i had to do that in elementary school!! well we didn't do the actual disecting, but in 2nd grade the nurse did and groups of about 5 of us watched! we did a lung and heart too, i forget which grades.

Seriously? We got a rat. But a cow? At school? Wow.

BlackCorduroy

My school does cats. Its pretty disgusting, I went by the room and all i could picture was someones pet lying there on the table to be cut open.


BTW why is this thread titled "free porn"?

trappedinmyradio

how do you know it was euthanized?

sonicreducer

trappedinmyradio wrote:

how do you know it was euthanized?

i asked my professor, who is also head of the lab. clemson buys them from a big company who does euthanize animals for educational purposes. it isn't limited to cows. the majority of the animals we dissect are actually smaller animals.

there are other things i didn't mention earlier that have contributed to my dissapointment in the matter.

firstly: i will only remember it for the lab practical and it is highly unlikely that i will ever need the information again. is that worth a life? i take high regard to all forms of life.

secondly: clemson is a big university. the only reason they dissect all that shit is to make their program look cool. the amount of information we are required to learn and the time we spend versus the time we should actually spend to make it worthwhile is sad.

my solution is not to ban all animals from being used for educational purposes, but to put limits on it.

i am in college to teach high school biology. there are a thousand pictures of dissected eyeballs that i could show my students. there is no reason to actually do it.

if a student is in medical school and will actually be performing studies or surgeries then yes, of course, use it,... but come on, does every average joe have to dissect a rat, a cow eye, a cat, a frog, a lamprey, a dogfish shark, a perch, a frog again, a rat again (but bigger) all in the same semester? (this is from anatomy and vertebrate biology combined)

i don't remember shit, and hey, i could reference a book,...

it just seems like a waste to me,...

sonicreducer

BlackCorduroy wrote:

BTW why is this thread titled "free porn"?

to get attention to my thread

to stir up something

it was idiotic really,...

plus, some kid in class was talking about how porn is getting really bad and his little brother called him to give him some website to check out a 'hot bimbo'. it was kind of funny and really sad at the same time.

sonicreducer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Maybe this is a strong moral case for funding and advancement of stem cell research? Students need hands-on knowledge of the physical matter they're dealing with, but when research is done on cells rather than a huge living being, no obvious physical harm or damage is done that will cause hurt that we can quantify in terms of emotional distress. Surely the abstract concept of spiritual human waste should matter less, to anyone who deals in science with matters of practical ethics, than the reality of the physical waste of a living animal capable of experiencing emotional and physical suffering?


I'm not a scientist by any stretch of imagination, sonicreducer. I'm really just asking questions.

i see your point and i basically agree. histology is important, but so is seeing a real eye,... if you're going to be an eye doctor. not for every kid who takes anatomy though in a big ass public college,...

FinsburyParkCarrots

sonicreducer wrote:

i see your point and i basically agree. histology is important, but so is seeing a real eye,... if you're going to be an eye doctor. not for every kid who takes anatomy though in a big ass public college,...

Yep. That's why I was stunned when, reading this thread, I saw that we were talking about these animals just being brought into a school class! :eek:

kenny olav

Are you sure the cow was already used for beef and leather?

I'm against factory farming, because it's dehumanizing for the workers, environmentally disasterous and unhealthy. I have no problems, however, with slicing up a cow. It's a fucking cow.

hippiemom

BlackCorduroy wrote:

BTW why is this thread titled "free porn"?

That's what I wanna know! I feel ripped off :(

sonicreducer

Kenny Olav wrote:

Are you sure the cow was already used for beef and leather?

I'm against factory farming, because it's dehumanizing for the workers, environmentally disasterous and unhealthy. I have no problems, however, with slicing up a cow. It's a fucking cow.

well, im sure it's more complicated than was presented to me. i simply asked my professor if animals were euthanized for our lab and she simply replied yes.

i would assume that cows that are used for mass food product also get used for educational purposes.

still, it is troubling. there are also many other animals that we have dissected that we could have just looked at pictures and gotten the same information.

i understand your point about it being a cow, but the average consumer has no clue how fortunate they are to have that cow to eat. how often do you give thanks to that fucking cow for filling up your tummy?

Ahnimus

sonicreducer wrote:

how often do you give thanks to that fucking cow for filling up your tummy?

This is my version of saying grace

"Thank you cow for this great feast, thank you beans and corn, thank you lard for this tasty gravy. Ahem, let's eat."

kenny olav

sonicreducer wrote:

how often do you give thanks to that fucking cow for filling up your tummy?

i haven't eaten a cow in almost two years. the reason being i won't eat it unless I know its not factory farmed.

but would i thank the cow...? not exactly. sometimes i say a prayer (to what? i'm not sure) for my food... i've been doing it less lately. i should do it more often.

halv

Ahnimus wrote:

Well, one point is that the cow wouldn't have existed if not to disect it. As the dominant species we breed animals for our purpose, if we didn't they wouldn't exist in those environments. Those environments would be for growing corn or parking our cars.

On the other hand, it has to be rough on Hindus that believe the cow is sacred.

So are you saying the cow should be thanking us? "Oh thank you kind human for breeding me so that I may live a horrible life and eventually be brutally slaughtered for your benefit. I'm so happy I got to live and die in agony rather than not live at all."
You could use that dominant argument for anything. Adults have dominance over children, so should we breed them and them use them for experiements? Hey at least they had a life right, no matter how short?
How about just having a respect for all life. Wow, what a concept.
And...the vast majority of our land is already being used to grow grain...to feed cows!! It takes 16 pounds of grain to "create" 1 pound of beef. What a collosal waste of earths resources.

chopitdown

sonicreducer wrote:

i am in college to teach high school biology. there are a thousand pictures of dissected eyeballs that i could show my students. there is no reason to actually do it.

if a student is in medical school and will actually be performing studies or surgeries then yes, of course, use it,... but come on, does every average joe have to dissect a rat, a cow eye, a cat, a frog, a lamprey, a dogfish shark, a perch, a frog again, a rat again (but bigger) all in the same semester? (this is from anatomy and vertebrate biology combined)

i think it's important in college to do these things b/c you are trying to gain an advanced knowledge of subject matter. But now after doing it, do the pictures really do it justice? I had cadaver anatomy during my masters work and it really opened my eyes and expanded my knowledge of anatomy that I took in undergrad (about 4 classes worth). I understand where you're coming from with it being a little weird but remember, you are becoming an expert in something so you should be exposed to it at a higher level.

Ahnimus

halv wrote:

So are you saying the cow should be thanking us? "Oh thank you kind human for breeding me so that I may live a horrible life and eventually be brutally slaughtered for your benefit. I'm so happy I got to live and die in agony rather than not live at all."
You could use that dominant argument for anything. Adults have dominance over children, so should we breed them and them use them for experiements? Hey at least they had a life right, no matter how short?
How about just having a respect for all life. Wow, what a concept.
And...the vast majority of our land is already being used to grow grain...to feed cows!! It takes 16 pounds of grain to "create" 1 pound of beef. What a collosal waste of earths resources.

So apparently in your version of "all life" grain is not included, it's merely one of the earth's resources.

Why then does a cow fit into your definition of "all life" because it has a central nervous system? So does the fly, the drasopholis, the worm, all the pests people normally exterminate, spiders, etc.. they all have brains, feel pain and so on. The one distinct difference between "all life" and humans is that we are sentient, we have consciousness. Animals and plants do not.

The cow would never thank us for giving it life or protecting it, not in a million years, maybe in a billion years when the cow reaches sentience. Until then, they are just one of earth's resources, much like grain, much like the worms we bait fish with and the worms living inside you and/or your pets stomachs.

Ahnimus

chopitdown wrote:

i think it's important in college to do these things b/c you are trying to gain an advanced knowledge of subject matter. But now after doing it, do the pictures really do it justice? I had cadaver anatomy during my masters work and it really opened my eyes and expanded my knowledge of anatomy that I took in undergrad (about 4 classes worth). I understand where you're coming from with it being a little weird but remember, you are becoming an expert in something so you should be exposed to it at a higher level.

Also considering many people are tactile learners, they will learn better and faster with hands-on experience, as opposed to looking at pictures or reading text.

halv

Ahnimus wrote:

So apparently in your version of "all life" grain is not included, it's merely one of the earth's resources.

Why then does a cow fit into your definition of "all life" because it has a central nervous system? So does the fly, the drasopholis, the worm, all the pests people normally exterminate, spiders, etc.. they all have brains, feel pain and so on. The one distinct difference between "all life" and humans is that we are sentient, we have consciousness. Animals and plants do not.

The cow would never thank us for giving it life or protecting it, not in a million years, maybe in a billion years when the cow reaches sentience. Until then, they are just one of earth's resources, much like grain, much like the worms we bait fish with and the worms living inside you and/or your pets stomachs.

Are you serious? Your saying other non-human animals do not have consciousness?? You seriously belive that?
Sentient :the possession of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive. Sentience is the ability to sense.
Your telling me a cow cannot feel or percieve? If you really believe that than I would have to say that you are not a sentient creature because you obviously have no ability to perceive. Plus you mention the "worms living inside your pets stomach" but no mention of the pet itself. Are you saying that your dog or cat is sentient but a cow isn't? That's just an argument of convience. Just a way of justifying the brutaility to other animals for human want, but not need.

Ahnimus

halv wrote:

Are you serious? Your saying other non-human animals do not have consciousness?? You seriously belive that?
Sentient :the possession of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive. Sentience is the ability to sense.
Your telling me a cow cannot feel or percieve? If you really believe that than I would have to say that you are not a sentient creature because you obviously have no ability to perceive. Plus you mention the "worms living inside your pets stomach" but no mention of the pet itself. Are you saying that your dog or cat is sentient but a cow isn't? That's just an argument of convience. Just a way of justifying the brutaility to other animals for human want, but not need.

It's quite simple really, I don't know why this issue has to be so complex. Cats and Dogs have limit functionality. Language is a good indication of a creatures brain features. They don't view life the same way we do. Their concerns are rather limited, a cow's concerns are even more limited. The consciousness part of all life is variable, sure cats and dogs are more conscious than cows and sheep, but not as conscious as apes or dolphins. When you are talking about a Cow, you are talking about an animal with virtually no consciousness and it would eat you if you looked tasty. It's the nature of nature, a dog or cat loves meat, it will eat it all up. Because it tastes good, the Cat's consciousness would never understand the concept of ethics, most domestic cats think they are human.

I mention stomach worms, heart worms, all kinds of parasites, because they feed on other organisms. They actually destroy their ecological system, much in the same way humans do.

Read this article and see the different viewpoints on the subject of consciousness, about the only constant is that not all life is conscious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

Sentience refers to possession of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive, not necessarily including the faculty of self-awareness. The possession of sapience is not a necessity. The word sentient is often confused with the word sapient, which can connote knowledge, consciousness, or apperception. The root of the confusion is that the word conscious has a number of different usages in English. The two words can be distinguished by looking at their Latin roots: sentire, "to feel"; and sapere, "to know".

That's where the mistake was, my apologies, sapient was the word I intended.

gue_barium

I've worked with cows before. They sure fart and poop a lot. As you probably know, the methane they release is considered something of a hazard to the environment. I saw some dead ones at the butchery one time when I was young. There was a head without any skin or fur, and I remember the eyeball staring out at me in a meaty red skull. Never would I have imagined that eyeball making it to the University.

God Bless.

redrock

BlackCorduroy wrote:

My school does cats.

:eek: I am totally against any form of disection in schools but cats.....:eek: How insensitive can one get!

enharmonic

The eyes probaby come from animals that are raised for eatin'. No cows are being killed for their eyeballs.

Now, if cow eyes were made from tusk/ivory...we might have a real problem on our hands.

Once a "food cow" is dead, it has no more use for its eye. might as well cut it up and learn something about it. I admit that I would feel a bit self conscious about cutting up an eyeball. i mean...it's looking right back at you...and cows have such sad eyes to begin with.

One of the more sobering experiences of my life was when I had to escort the MD eye bank to the morgue at a hospital I worked at. One of the patients was an organ and eye donor, and they have to "harvest" the eyes as soon after death as possible. Watching human eyes get extracted from a human head is a bit unnerving...but when I realized that because of that, it would be possible for two people to gain sight...it was a marvel.

halv

Ahnimus wrote:

It's quite simple really, I don't know why this issue has to be so complex. Cats and Dogs have limit functionality. Language is a good indication of a creatures brain features. They don't view life the same way we do. Their concerns are rather limited, a cow's concerns are even more limited. The consciousness part of all life is variable, sure cats and dogs are more conscious than cows and sheep, but not as conscious as apes or dolphins. When you are talking about a Cow, you are talking about an animal with virtually no consciousness and it would eat you if you looked tasty. It's the nature of nature, a dog or cat loves meat, it will eat it all up. Because it tastes good, the Cat's consciousness would never understand the concept of ethics, most domestic cats think they are human.

I mention stomach worms, heart worms, all kinds of parasites, because they feed on other organisms. They actually destroy their ecological system, much in the same way humans do.

Read this article and see the different viewpoints on the subject of consciousness, about the only constant is that not all life is conscious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

Sentience refers to possession of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive, not necessarily including the faculty of self-awareness. The possession of sapience is not a necessity. The word sentient is often confused with the word sapient, which can connote knowledge, consciousness, or apperception. The root of the confusion is that the word conscious has a number of different usages in English. The two words can be distinguished by looking at their Latin roots: sentire, "to feel"; and sapere, "to know".

That's where the mistake was, my apologies, sapient was the word I intended.

This brings up some interesting arguments. Many human animals are not as intelligent as non-human animals. Many humans are unable to communicate with language or make choices. How about people in a vegatative state? Babies? The mentally handicapped? They all fall into this same category. So is it than morally ok from a human viewpoint to kill them and use them as we please? It's an inconsistency that can't be overlooked. And because of this many scientists and philosphers have said that what defines a sentient creature is not whether it can feel or percieve, but can it suffer. And I don't think there is any question that non-human animals can suffer.
I'm not going to say that cows are as intelligent as humans, but you obviously have never spent time around them. Mother cows are extremely protective of their calves. And ask any dairy farmer how the mother cow reacts when her calf is taken away after two days to be sent to a veal farm. She often will wail and search around for her calf, often for days or weeks.
Ever seen a captive animal once it's escaped or been set free? Their ecstatic! There was an ariticle in the New York Times just the other day about an escaped Emu. Neighbors in the rural area commented on how whenever they saw it it seemed to be playing and having fun. It was caught weeks after escaping and died of a heart attack within hours.
There's no denying non-human animals can feel these senses, just in a different way from us. Non-human animals can communicate, just in a way humans can't understand.
And you mention about dogs and cats being more intelligent. Pigs are as smart if not smarter than dogs. Yet we kill them and use them all the time.
And just because their concerns are more limited why does that make their lives any less important? (Again, many humans have limited concerns as well).

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

So apparently in your version of "all life" grain is not included, it's merely one of the earth's resources.

Why then does a cow fit into your definition of "all life" because it has a central nervous system? So does the fly, the drasopholis, the worm, all the pests people normally exterminate, spiders, etc.. they all have brains, feel pain and so on. The one distinct difference between "all life" and humans is that we are sentient, we have consciousness. Animals and plants do not.

The cow would never thank us for giving it life or protecting it, not in a million years, maybe in a billion years when the cow reaches sentience. Until then, they are just one of earth's resources, much like grain, much like the worms we bait fish with and the worms living inside you and/or your pets stomachs.

Are you getting this from religious upbringing? Animals don't have a soul, or consciousness? Ahnimus, why do you think they call the limbic system, or our emotional brain centers, the mammalian brain? It is because mammals share the emotional brain.

Emotional perception is highly valid whether one can intellectualize about it or not.

I get disappointed by the human ego.