From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Silver Spring monkeys
Date: 7 Jan 93 20:41:13 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1993Jan7.160704.1546@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins) writes:
>
>Short of trial transcripts (!) where can I find an account of the Taub/
>Alex monkey business.  I hope it's not in Singer's Animal Liberation,
>the copies at our library are all "missing," library parlance for
>"stolen."

Hasn't Bob Black recently been posting extensive details about
the trial, quotations & references etc? Surely there is plenty
there to look up? Perhaps I am bit lazy, but if Bob has recently
been posting all these details then I am a bit disinclined to
come up with a bibliography of my own.

>Paul, I am particularly dense and stupid.  Sometimes I need to hear
>the obvious.

Yes, me too. Frequently, anyway.

>I am open to a number of possibilities, including that Alex is a
>modern-day hero for exposing substandard care of these particular
>monkeys resulting in improved conditions for the lab animal community
>as a whole.

This is pretty much how I see it.

>I believe that it is possible that Alex could have worked with Taub
>to address his (Alex's) concerns; alternatively, called in authorities
>"from day one" who would have taken the accusations of sub-standard
>care very seriously. 

Fair enough. However, I don't believe either of these.

>                        I realize in this latter case Alex and Taub
>would not have been able to continue working together and Alex most
>likely would have surrendered his job.
>
>At my university, if radiation safety gets a call indicating misuse
>of radioactivity they swarm, immediately, over to the lab.  Same thing
>for accusations of animal mistreatment; they've got an office, titles,
>everything, staffed by people directed to investigate, report, enforce
>and oversee.

Well, I suppose I am just more cynical than you about this. I think
it much more likely that in cases of accusations of animal mistreatment,
what often happens is a coverup and a whitewash, plus efforts to
discredit the accuser. Maybe this isn't the case at your university,
I hope it isn't. 

>Maybe Taub had lax oversight.  Your blanket assumption that authorities
>would have done nothing intrigues _me_.
>
>Finally, I asked you, and you edited out, my question of whether
>given superstandard lab conditions you would have permitted Taub's
>research program to continue.  Care to comment, I am curious.

Well, let me look through my position papers (rustle, rustle...)
No, I don't seem to have a position on what I would allow in this
hypothetical situation. I guess I would need to know how much, if
any, suffering would still be involved (or are you hypothesising
conditions so perfect that there is, by definition, no suffering
whatsoever involved?), and what the prospects are for anything good
coming out of the research.

I am not sure what relevence my view on a hypothetical experimemt
has to the facts of the Taub case. If you mean "am I absolutely
oppossed to all animal experimentation?" then the answer is "no".
I think it has to be considered case-by-case. In the Taub case, I
am against it.

Paul
Xref: sparky talk.politics.animals:10922 alt.peeves:18922