From: mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey)
Subject: Re: animals in research
Followup-To: talk.politics.animals
Organization: Dept. Foods & Nutrition, Univ. of GA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:59:56 GMT

In article <Bz46GK.2Ho@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
> 
> You're entitled to your opinions.  I've decided to prepare a list of 
> "unanswered martin hulsey questions" that I'm going to post from time 
> to time in response to your "unanswered russell lawrence questions".

Is this supposed to scare me?  You are pathetic.  *Please* give me another
opportunity to answer ANY question of yours that I have not addressed.  My
news reader has mysteriously lost a few posts here & there, so I might not
have seen them.

Meanwhile, I hope that you will do me the courtesy of finally answering my
questions below that you have REPEATEDLY evaded.  Also, I would like to see
the references and chronological evidence, respectively, that you have
promised for weeks regarding the "cat-shooting" and "beagle-drowning"
experiments that you attempt to vilify.  Until then, you have not proven
that these experiments are truly questionable.

> Perhaps your responses will help occupy your time when you're not patrolling
> the streets of downtown Athens, Georgia, looking for a first-rate job in 
> "nutrition science".  

I already have a job.  If you think that "patrolling the streets" is the
best way to find a "first-rate job," then you have much to learn.

Have you accomplished ANYTHING in your life outside of UseNet?  Is UseNet
your occupation?  What does the "WP" in "WP Group" stand for?  Word
Processing?  Wombat protection?  Wanton paranoia?  Waffling prevarication?

> > The only person whose credentials I questioned was Dr. Neal Barnard.  I do
> > not consider him an opponent, although I do wish that he had the
> > inclination to become an opponent by appearing here and defending his
> > pseudo-physician's group.  
> 
> So you say.  Yet you haven't explained how/why you consider yourself
> qualified to question Dr. Barnard's credentials.  Do you have a degree
> in medicine, BTW?

I have stated numerous times that Barnard is probably a fine psychiatrist. 
I am not questioning his medical credentials.  As a person with credentials
as a scientist (8 peer-reviewed publications) and as a nutritionist (Ph.D.,
1991), I am questioning his credentials in these areas, for they are
lacking.  I repeat, HE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO CREDENTIALS IN NUTRITION, AND AN
ABYSMAL PUBLICATION RECORD.  If Barnard will simply stick to his area of
expertise when making press conferences, he will have no more complaints
from me.  If Barnard decides to appear on UseNet, I will welcome his
opinion on any matter.  In fact, I and others might have a few questions
for him.

I think that you should be able to distinguish the difference between
falsely proclaiming that dietary recommendations should be altered in a
*press conference* and posting to UseNet.

+++++++++++++++++++  Russell's unanswered questions  +++++++++++++++++++++

[some questions rephrased or extracted from points Russell avoided in
previous posts]

How would you modify the _status quo_ to simultaneously protect the
interests of human and non-human animals?

Would failing to perform a critical experiment be worse than performing one
that proved trivial?

Do you propose that Christian Scientists refuse medical care because they
believe the information is tainted?

Did you visit Athens, Georgia last Spring (April 28, 1992) during the PETA
debate?

Would you, for some period, allow heart patients to die for their
"stupidity" rather than sacrifice a few pigs or dogs to develop a new heart
valve, etc?

Can you provide evidence that the actions of other species are not
"self-serving?

What do you feel to be the relative intrinsic value of a dog as compared to
a human?

Do you see the importance of John Orem's basic electrophysiological studies
of the neural regulation of sleep?

What evidence do you have to suggest that Heimlich published his 1981
reference before the "early 80's beagle-drowning" experiment that you cited
was proposed?

What if the "alternative" tests fail to detect a hazardous physical
irritant in your toothpaste?  Wouldn't this result in human suffering?

Have you considered the suffering of the mouse or rabbit that is ground up
by the thresher that harvests your wheat?

How do you propose that the Ames test of bacterial mutagenicity can serve
as a test for ocular irritancy?

If a product's raw materials are tested on animals, and, if animal tests
are cruel, how can the resultant product be called "cruelty-free?"

When purchasing cosmetics, should people care more about their eyes than
those of a rabbit?

Precisely where did I say that I consider myself "qualified to judge the
credentials of whomever I please?"

--
mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu                      Society for Neuroscience
Martin G. Hulsey                              National Rifle Association
Dept. Foods & Nutrition      Society for the Study of Ingestive Behavior
University of Ga.    North American Association for the Study of Obesity
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals