In recent research done on primates at columbia university, a test was done on to study the effect of stress on the menstrual cycle. To induce the "stress" part of the experiment, a weight was surgically attached to the skull. Researchers then observed the primate's stress levels resulting from having to walk around with a weight surgically attached to its skull. And what about primates that are injected with AIDS? How about ones that are subjected to electrocution of the testicles to induce ejaculation?
are there other ways the researchers could have induced stress? I don't know. The hard part with human and animal research is trying to make it clean and limit the other factors. And I'll concede it sounds barbaric, but at the same time is it any different than putting a halo on someone who has a cervical fracture? It doesn't hurt to have it in and it looks barbaric to have 4 holes in your head with metal coming out. If you know more about this method of testing than the person who's conducting it, by all means, I'm all ears. But if the PETA literature (sorry, i saw it wasnt A.L.F) says it's mean I don't put a lot of stock in it. but we're not here to debate the merits and methods of this persons work. do you have any references for the electrocution and ejaculation claim? I'm sure they used electrical impulses to induce ejaculation b/c it is a neural response and if you fire the correct stimulus you'll get the desired response...which is not electrocution.
Those sound pretty nazi-like to me. And so because an oversight board approves all of this, that must mean it's ethical? You do make a point that humans do sometimes benefit from those experiments, but using that as a justification is just basically saying that human life is more valuable that an animal's life. So, like I was saying, the difference is that the nazis thought of jews as animals. And if we call thinking of certain people as animals sick and heinous, then I would say that most of the population would qualify as a nazi.
I AM saying that humans are more valuable than animals. I'm not saying animals aren't important and we should abuse them, I"m not saying that at all...but I'm also not saying they are on teh same level as humans. Furthermore, I believe since we are better than animals, we have an obligation to make sure we protect them. I'm sure that there cases where animals are abused in scientific work, I'm not naive. But I'm also fairly sure those instances are very few and very far b/t. You were able to give me enough information to find 4 researchers with questionnable procedures. There are thousands of people who do lab based experiments on animals and they dont do those things.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
but at the same time is it any different than putting a halo on someone who has a cervical fracture? It doesn't hurt to have it in and it looks barbaric to have 4 holes in your head with metal coming out.
You're asking me what the difference is between someone needing a procedure and someone not needing a procedure, but still receiving that procedure anyway because he/she doesn't have a choice and is thought of as a good experiment candidate? You're asking me what the difference is?
I could be wrong, but I would think that a person who just came out of surgery probably needs pain meds. Are these primates getting these pain meds? If so, do they enjoy being on pain meds? Do they enjoy being kept in a cage? You wouldn't think that whole experimence to be unquestionably traumatic regardless of whether or not the primate feels any serious pain?
If you know more about this method of testing than the person who's conducting it, by all means, I'm all ears. But if the PETA literature (sorry, i saw it wasnt A.L.F) says it's mean I don't put a lot of stock in it. but we're not here to debate the merits and methods of this persons work. do you have any references for the electrocution and ejaculation claim? I'm sure they used electrical impulses to induce ejaculation b/c it is a neural response and if you fire the correct stimulus you'll get the desired response...which is not electrocution.
I was thinking of primate-electroejaculation, which I guess is not actually electrocution now that I've looked it up. I heard it being discussed on am radio, and it sounded like someone was simply hooking up a couple of clamps to chimp's ballsack. It's actually a probe that is inserted into the rectum and adjacent to the prostate. The probe stimulates the prostate via a slight electric current. The question is whether you'd want your own pet being subjected to that kind of procedure. If not, then it's torture.
I AM saying that humans are more valuable than animals. I'm not saying animals aren't important and we should abuse them, I"m not saying that at all...but I'm also not saying they are on teh same level as humans. Furthermore, I believe since we are better than animals, we have an obligation to make sure we protect them. I'm sure that there cases where animals are abused in scientific work, I'm not naive. But I'm also fairly sure those instances are very few and very far b/t. You were able to give me enough information to find 4 researchers with questionnable procedures. There are thousands of people who do lab based experiments on animals and they dont do those things.
I am going to assume for a moment that this oversight body does enforce criteria that would be considered "humane". And you've acknoweldged that there is a portion of research that is done that is not humane.
What I'm getting at that without this oversight board, who knows just how inhumane it would really get. And would you then still call these researchers sick and heinous? How about the inhumane research that is being done? Are those researchers sick and heinous?
And that's why I say that nazi death doctors were not sick and heinous. They were given the opportunity to do what most people would do if they lived in a society where a certain race of people were thought of as animals.
You're asking me what the difference is between someone needing a procedure and someone not needing a procedure, but still receiving that procedure anyway because he/she doesn't have a choice and is thought of as a good experiment candidate? You're asking me what the difference is?
I could be wrong, but I would think that a person who just came out of surgery probably needs pain meds. Are these primates getting these pain meds? If so, do they enjoy being on pain meds? Do they enjoy being kept in a cage? You wouldn't think that whole experimence to be unquestionably traumatic regardless of whether or not the primate feels any serious pain?
I was assuming that pain and the barbaric appearance of the apparatus was your "sticking point" and I can see why that is a concern. Someone who has just had the surgery is on pain meds. I do not know if the primates are getting pain meds; if there is an issue with pain and treating the pain doesn't interfere with the dependent variables, i would see no reason why they wouldn't have them, but then again, i'm no neurologist. I don't think the primates enjoy being in a cage; i'm sure if they had their druthers (do animals have druthers?) they'd rather be out in the wild. I'm not trying to say that the experiment isn't traumatic b/c there is trauma involved, but the reason we have animal oversight committees is for this exact reason so animals aren't just toyed with and injured.
I was thinking of primate-electroejaculation, which I guess is not actually electrocution now that I've looked it up. I heard it being discussed on am radio, and it sounded like someone was simply hooking up a couple of clamps to chimp's ballsack. It's actually a probe that is inserted into the rectum and adjacent to the prostate. The probe stimulates the prostate via a slight electric current. The question is whether you'd want your own pet being subjected to that kind of procedure. If not, then it's torture.
If I signed my pet up for this I'm sure I'd come back after one day and he'd be smoking a cigarette saying "thanks"
I am going to assume for a moment that this oversight body does enforce criteria that would be considered "humane". And you've acknoweldged that there is a portion of research that is done that is not humane.
What I'm getting at that without this oversight board, who knows just how inhumane it would really get. And would you then still call these researchers sick and heinous? How about the inhumane research that is being done? Are those researchers sick and heinous?
And that's why I say that nazi death doctors were not sick and heinous. They were given the opportunity to do what most people would do if they lived in a society where a certain race of people were thought of as animals.
That's a fair assumption b/c that's their job. And yes, I acknowledge that I'm sure there is unethical research being conducted, even with the tightest regulations.
Yes, if those researchers are being unethical and being cruel to the animals w/o cause (some could argue some human research is cruel, but with informed consent that sort of makes everyone feel a little better about it) then they are sick people.
I see where you are going with saying hte nazis were not sick and heinous...we are just going to disagree on whether the person is sick and heinous..but we'll agree that the acts are.
and with that...i'm out; it's late.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
The surgically attached weight on the primate's skull was sort of my sticking point, and you did have a point that it might not be as painful as it looks.
I just think that there will be a time in the future when all animal testing will be outlawed, all meat eating will be outlawed, and maybe even pets will be outlawed (as I think that pet breeding is inhumane). And we'll look back and say wtf were we thinking.
And it's of course hard for me to think that nazi death doctors were normal people. But, I also think it would be too much of a coincidence if they were actually mentally imbalanced. Dr. Mengele was not alone. Other doctors rotated between experiments. If they're sick, then where did the nazis come up with these guys? Were there other candidates who refused when offered that job?
It's just too much of a coincidence that a whole nation could suddenly go psychopathic overnight. I think it's just what happens when there is a police state.
I just think that there will be a time in the future when all animal testing will be outlawed, all meat eating will be outlawed, and maybe even pets will be outlawed (as I think that pet breeding is inhumane). And we'll look back and say wtf were we thinking.
Couple questions for you...
First on pets...have an old 17 year old Mutt I got from pound when he was a pup...I'm thinking he's had an incredible life....yea I don't know that to be a fact...I didn't castrate him as I thought that was inhumane...but of course poor fella's still a virgin...now if we stop having pets...wouldn't most breed of dogs go extinct as they can't fend for themselves? Do you support that. Second, are you a vegetarian??? I've thought of this allot....but somehow feel its okay for me to eat meat as I am on the food chain and am a carnivore. I dooo love animals and force myself into denial and justify it.
thanks
Oedipus was a king. Kings represent an absolute monarchy. An absolute monarchy is different from fascism only in the sense that kings supposedly have some kind of bloodline superior to the commoner.
And that's why I think the Oedipus analogy actually supports my stance more than it counters it. Oedipus should never have been king. He should have been elected, and there should have been a parliament or something to that effect. Atrocities are what ALWAYS happen when there is too much of a centralized authority and not enough oversight.
I think you missed my point.
You said it's the apathy of the people that is heinous and sick instead of the doctors. You said it's the people's apathy that is the problem and not the war criminals. Because a regime allowed them to do those things and we "allowed" that regime to exist, we hold responsibility and punishing these criminals would be revenge? You said punishing them would be removing ourselves from responsibility. I disagree.
You said it's the apathy of the people that is heinous and sick instead of the doctors. You said it's the people's apathy that is the problem and not the war criminals. Because a regime allowed them to do those things and we "allowed" that regime to exist, we hold responsibility and punishing these criminals would be revenge? You said punishing them would be removing ourselves from responsibility. I disagree.
Yes, that is correct. Holding war criminals responsible for their actions creates a false sense of finality.
I'm going to use slobodan milosevic as an example. He went to jail for being responsible for such terrible things as genocide, ethnic cleansing..etc.
But, it wasn't until Clinton needed a diversion from the Lewsinky trial that the US actually did anything about it. The bombing of Kosovo was a NATO operation, but it was predominantly a US led effort.
So, with that in mind, if it were not for Monica Lewinsky, Milosevic would have continued for years as the head of a mass murdering organization.
And this small detail is easily ignored because "justice" was carried out. Milosevic went to jail, and everybody felt better. If putting Milosevic in jail is necessary to disable the regime, then obviously it's a great idea. But, if it's just for the sake of punishing, then I think all it does is open the world up to more acts of genocide. This is because nobody really understood what the problem really was. The problem was that his acts of war crimes went on with the world's full knowledge, but was not dealt with until it served a political purpose for a world power. That is the real crime.
First on pets...have an old 17 year old Mutt I got from pound when he was a pup...I'm thinking he's had an incredible life....yea I don't know that to be a fact...I didn't castrate him as I thought that was inhumane...but of course poor fella's still a virgin...now if we stop having pets...wouldn't most breed of dogs go extinct as they can't fend for themselves? Do you support that. Second, are you a vegetarian??? I've thought of this allot....but somehow feel its okay for me to eat meat as I am on the food chain and am a carnivore. I dooo love animals and force myself into denial and justify it.
thanks
No I am not a vegetarian. I tried going veg for awhile, but it was difficult to find the protein that I needed. I know it's possible to find protein without eating meat, but it's just easier for me to throw a chicken breast on the grill.
Anyway, I'm not trying to preach. I'm not saying people should stop eating meat. I'm saying that's where we're going.
You picked up your pet from the pound. That differs from buying him at the pet store. When you pick up a pet from the pound, you are not contributing to the breeding problem.
Also, I think the more humane thing to do is to fix it. This is because being in heat is not a really enjoyable experience for the animal.
As for the extinction of breeds...I think a lot of those breeds are a result of man's creation. I'm not an expert on canine origins, but I think if it were not for man, a lot of these breeds would not exist. So if they go extinct, then so be it.
That was just a speculation of mine. If not the outright discontinuation of pet breeding, then there will probably be a law mandating that before a person can purchase a pet at a pet store, then that person will need a note from the local animal shelter stating that a suitable pet was not available. We just have to assume that the breeding problem will be dealt with in some form or another.
Yes, that is correct. Holding war criminals responsible for their actions creates a false sense of finality.
I'm going to use slobodan milosevic as an example. He went to jail for being responsible for such terrible things as genocide, ethnic cleansing..etc.
But, it wasn't until Clinton needed a diversion from the Lewsinky trial that the US actually did anything about it. The bombing of Kosovo was a NATO operation, but it was predominantly a US led effort.
So, with that in mind, if it were not for Monica Lewinsky, Milosevic would have continued for years as the head of a mass murdering organization.
And this small detail is easily ignored because "justice" was carried out. Milosevic went to jail, and everybody felt better. If putting Milosevic in jail is necessary to disable the regime, then obviously it's a great idea. But, if it's just for the sake of punishing, then I think all it does is open the world up to more acts of genocide. This is because nobody really understood what the problem really was. The problem was that his acts of war crimes went on with the world's full knowledge, but was not dealt with until it served a political purpose for a world power. That is the real crime.
I see your point, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.
Comments
are there other ways the researchers could have induced stress? I don't know. The hard part with human and animal research is trying to make it clean and limit the other factors. And I'll concede it sounds barbaric, but at the same time is it any different than putting a halo on someone who has a cervical fracture? It doesn't hurt to have it in and it looks barbaric to have 4 holes in your head with metal coming out. If you know more about this method of testing than the person who's conducting it, by all means, I'm all ears. But if the PETA literature (sorry, i saw it wasnt A.L.F) says it's mean I don't put a lot of stock in it. but we're not here to debate the merits and methods of this persons work. do you have any references for the electrocution and ejaculation claim? I'm sure they used electrical impulses to induce ejaculation b/c it is a neural response and if you fire the correct stimulus you'll get the desired response...which is not electrocution.
I AM saying that humans are more valuable than animals. I'm not saying animals aren't important and we should abuse them, I"m not saying that at all...but I'm also not saying they are on teh same level as humans. Furthermore, I believe since we are better than animals, we have an obligation to make sure we protect them. I'm sure that there cases where animals are abused in scientific work, I'm not naive. But I'm also fairly sure those instances are very few and very far b/t. You were able to give me enough information to find 4 researchers with questionnable procedures. There are thousands of people who do lab based experiments on animals and they dont do those things.
You're asking me what the difference is between someone needing a procedure and someone not needing a procedure, but still receiving that procedure anyway because he/she doesn't have a choice and is thought of as a good experiment candidate? You're asking me what the difference is?
I could be wrong, but I would think that a person who just came out of surgery probably needs pain meds. Are these primates getting these pain meds? If so, do they enjoy being on pain meds? Do they enjoy being kept in a cage? You wouldn't think that whole experimence to be unquestionably traumatic regardless of whether or not the primate feels any serious pain?
I was thinking of primate-electroejaculation, which I guess is not actually electrocution now that I've looked it up. I heard it being discussed on am radio, and it sounded like someone was simply hooking up a couple of clamps to chimp's ballsack. It's actually a probe that is inserted into the rectum and adjacent to the prostate. The probe stimulates the prostate via a slight electric current. The question is whether you'd want your own pet being subjected to that kind of procedure. If not, then it's torture.
I am going to assume for a moment that this oversight body does enforce criteria that would be considered "humane". And you've acknoweldged that there is a portion of research that is done that is not humane.
What I'm getting at that without this oversight board, who knows just how inhumane it would really get. And would you then still call these researchers sick and heinous? How about the inhumane research that is being done? Are those researchers sick and heinous?
And that's why I say that nazi death doctors were not sick and heinous. They were given the opportunity to do what most people would do if they lived in a society where a certain race of people were thought of as animals.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
I was assuming that pain and the barbaric appearance of the apparatus was your "sticking point" and I can see why that is a concern. Someone who has just had the surgery is on pain meds. I do not know if the primates are getting pain meds; if there is an issue with pain and treating the pain doesn't interfere with the dependent variables, i would see no reason why they wouldn't have them, but then again, i'm no neurologist. I don't think the primates enjoy being in a cage; i'm sure if they had their druthers (do animals have druthers?) they'd rather be out in the wild. I'm not trying to say that the experiment isn't traumatic b/c there is trauma involved, but the reason we have animal oversight committees is for this exact reason so animals aren't just toyed with and injured.
If I signed my pet up for this I'm sure I'd come back after one day and he'd be smoking a cigarette saying "thanks"
That's a fair assumption b/c that's their job. And yes, I acknowledge that I'm sure there is unethical research being conducted, even with the tightest regulations.
Yes, if those researchers are being unethical and being cruel to the animals w/o cause (some could argue some human research is cruel, but with informed consent that sort of makes everyone feel a little better about it) then they are sick people.
I see where you are going with saying hte nazis were not sick and heinous...we are just going to disagree on whether the person is sick and heinous..but we'll agree that the acts are.
and with that...i'm out; it's late.
I just think that there will be a time in the future when all animal testing will be outlawed, all meat eating will be outlawed, and maybe even pets will be outlawed (as I think that pet breeding is inhumane). And we'll look back and say wtf were we thinking.
And it's of course hard for me to think that nazi death doctors were normal people. But, I also think it would be too much of a coincidence if they were actually mentally imbalanced. Dr. Mengele was not alone. Other doctors rotated between experiments. If they're sick, then where did the nazis come up with these guys? Were there other candidates who refused when offered that job?
It's just too much of a coincidence that a whole nation could suddenly go psychopathic overnight. I think it's just what happens when there is a police state.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
Couple questions for you...
First on pets...have an old 17 year old Mutt I got from pound when he was a pup...I'm thinking he's had an incredible life....yea I don't know that to be a fact...I didn't castrate him as I thought that was inhumane...but of course poor fella's still a virgin...now if we stop having pets...wouldn't most breed of dogs go extinct as they can't fend for themselves? Do you support that. Second, are you a vegetarian??? I've thought of this allot....but somehow feel its okay for me to eat meat as I am on the food chain and am a carnivore. I dooo love animals and force myself into denial and justify it.
thanks
I think you missed my point.
You said it's the apathy of the people that is heinous and sick instead of the doctors. You said it's the people's apathy that is the problem and not the war criminals. Because a regime allowed them to do those things and we "allowed" that regime to exist, we hold responsibility and punishing these criminals would be revenge? You said punishing them would be removing ourselves from responsibility. I disagree.
naděje umírá poslední
Yes, that is correct. Holding war criminals responsible for their actions creates a false sense of finality.
I'm going to use slobodan milosevic as an example. He went to jail for being responsible for such terrible things as genocide, ethnic cleansing..etc.
But, it wasn't until Clinton needed a diversion from the Lewsinky trial that the US actually did anything about it. The bombing of Kosovo was a NATO operation, but it was predominantly a US led effort.
So, with that in mind, if it were not for Monica Lewinsky, Milosevic would have continued for years as the head of a mass murdering organization.
And this small detail is easily ignored because "justice" was carried out. Milosevic went to jail, and everybody felt better. If putting Milosevic in jail is necessary to disable the regime, then obviously it's a great idea. But, if it's just for the sake of punishing, then I think all it does is open the world up to more acts of genocide. This is because nobody really understood what the problem really was. The problem was that his acts of war crimes went on with the world's full knowledge, but was not dealt with until it served a political purpose for a world power. That is the real crime.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
No I am not a vegetarian. I tried going veg for awhile, but it was difficult to find the protein that I needed. I know it's possible to find protein without eating meat, but it's just easier for me to throw a chicken breast on the grill.
Anyway, I'm not trying to preach. I'm not saying people should stop eating meat. I'm saying that's where we're going.
You picked up your pet from the pound. That differs from buying him at the pet store. When you pick up a pet from the pound, you are not contributing to the breeding problem.
Also, I think the more humane thing to do is to fix it. This is because being in heat is not a really enjoyable experience for the animal.
As for the extinction of breeds...I think a lot of those breeds are a result of man's creation. I'm not an expert on canine origins, but I think if it were not for man, a lot of these breeds would not exist. So if they go extinct, then so be it.
That was just a speculation of mine. If not the outright discontinuation of pet breeding, then there will probably be a law mandating that before a person can purchase a pet at a pet store, then that person will need a note from the local animal shelter stating that a suitable pet was not available. We just have to assume that the breeding problem will be dealt with in some form or another.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
I see your point, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.
naděje umírá poslední