From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: PETA in hot water
Organization: WP Group
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:12:37 GMT

From article <mhulsey-171292145858@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>, by mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey):
> In article <BzDGnL.18F@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
>> I've truly enjoyed your hand waving demonstrations, but the fact 
>> remains that the Maryland State Court of Appeals overturned 
>> Taub's conviction when it ruled that state anti-cruelty 
>> statutes don't apply to federally financed animal experiments.
> 
> The fact, that you & PETA falsely deny, is that the conviction was
> overturned for *more* than a jurisdictional technicality.  The appeals
> court explicitly upheld Taub's claim that he did not mistreat his animals. 

According to an article on the Taub affair published by the 
_Washington Post_, the conviction was overturned on a jurisdictional 
technicality.  Can you corroborate your claims to the contrary without 
resorting to the bombastic handwaving demonstrations that you often 
employ to prove your points?  

>> [various legal arguments deleted]
>> 
>> Are you an attorney, Martin?  The reason I'm asking this question is
>> that you've led us to believe that medical doctors aren't 
>> qualified to publicly offer their opinions on nutritional 
>> matters, yet for some strange reason you seem to think that a PhD in 
>> "nutrition science" has qualified you to expound your opinions in 
>> such diverse areas as law, medicine, history, etc, etc.  How
>> come?  
> 
> Again, doofus, this is Usenet.  On Usenet, I may "expound opinions" on any
> topic. 

Of course, you may.  And you're also free to announce a press 
conference to explain your views on the alleged nazi "animal 
rights" philosophy, on the legal merits of the silver spring 
monkey case, on the philosophical foundations of the animal rights 
debate, and on nutrition policies...  presuming, of course, that 
the media would take you seriously.  

If they don't take you seriously, perhaps you could explain that 
you have a "PhD" in nutrition science from the University of 
Georgia at Athens whereas Benjamin Spock, Frank Oski, and Neil 
Barnard -- the individuals who conducted the PCRM press 
conference -- only have "MD" degrees.  When someone reminds you 
that Benjamin Spock has written umpteen books on child care and 
that Frank Oski is the Director of Pediatrics at Johns Hopkins, 
you can tell them about your medline citations dealing with
rat feeding.  

> Some medical doctors are eminently qualified in matters of nutrition. 
> Barnard is not one of them.

How do you know?  How much background expertise is required to evaluate
the scientific data on the hazards of dairy consumption?

[...]
>> > I have no law degree, and yes, it is irrelevant.
>> 
>> Then perhaps it's irrelevant whether or not Neil Barnard has a degree
>> in "nutrition science".
> 
> No.  Nutrition credentials are important for those who formulate or suggest
> modification of dietary recommendations.  They are unimportant here in TPA.

This doesn't make sense.   Would you care to explain???

Your pretense that nutritionists ought to have a monopoly on the 
discussion of the medical impact of dietary regimes doesn't make 
much sense to me.  

> 
>>[...]
>> > Gerone apparently accepts Pacheco's account of events.  I do not.  I do
>> > agree that the incident has heightened awareness on both sides of the
>> > issue.
>> 
>> Do you think you're better informed on such matters than the director
>> of the Delta Regional Primate Center?   In deference to your proof-by-
>> credentials line of reasoning, are your credentials better than
>> Gerone's?   Have you had any hands-on experience with the Silver
>> Spring Monkeys, BTW?   
> 
> I am not aware of Gerone's credentials, nor are they relevant.  He offered
> his opinion and I offered mine.

And Dr. Benjamin Spock offered his opinion.  And Dr. Frank Oski offered
his opinion.  And Dr. Neil Barnard offered his opinion.  

> ...  
> Be specific when making such charges.
> 
> You are guilty of the following "hypocritical intellectual standards":
> 
> 1.  Repeatedly insisting that I post my credentials while refusing to post
> yours.

I'm not a hypocrite, Martin.  I'm merely expecting you to meet the
same standards of proof that you've applied to your opponents.  If/when
you address the pertinent facts and arguments of the discussion without
resorting to credentials, then I'll be happy to forget that you don't
have advanced degrees in medicine, in law, in philosophy, in history,
etc, etc.

> 2.  Insisting that I answer your questions, less than 30 hours old,
> "without further delay" when you repeatedly avoid my questions for weeks.

I consider your list of questions to be, either irrelevant to the 
specific topics that interest me at the moment, and/or downright 
stupid.  On the other hand, if you were to state that a particular 
thinker has an "ABYSMAL PUBLICATION RECORD" [your caps], it's 
neither irrelevant nor stupid for me to ask you to present the 
evidence that you ALREADY have at your disposal.   Surely it doesn't
require any homework for you to prove your point.

>> > When Taub left for a three-week vacation in 1981, he thought that his
>> > laboratory and animals were in good hands.  After all, in addition to the
>> > normal staff of two animal caretakers, there was Alex Pacheco.  Pacheco
>> > falsely represented himself as a person interested in learning about
>> > research.  Taub's only fault was trusting Pacheco.
>> 
>> So you say.  Have you got any proof?
> 
> When Pacheco applied for a position in Taub's lab in May of 1981, he told
> Taub that he "thought that he wanted to become a laboratory scientist."  He
> did not tell Taub that he was president of PETA (CFAAR Newsletter, op.
> cit., p. 3).  

Having affiliations with groups like PETA and PCRM doesn't belie a man's 
claim to have interests in scientific research.   You yourself have
admitted that Henry Heimlich is a scientist of significant repute, yet
he has strong ties with PCRM.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals