From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: animals in research
Organization: WP Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:40:36 GMT

Greg Popken writes:
gp> Excerp from UNC Daily Tar Heel (Jan. 24, 1990) 
gp>    "We are opposed to ALL animal research." said Jon Tracy
gp>     spokesperson for the national organization People for the
gp>       Ethical Treatment of Animals. (Stress on All is mine.)

In article <Bx8A99.DuL@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
rl> Your quotations seemed convincing to me.  Be that as it may, I 
rl> decided to contact PETA for confirmation.  I faxed a copy of 
rl> your article to them yesterday afternoon, but haven't received a 
rl> response from their public relations officer.  

From article <1992Nov5.161931.21697@samba.oit.unc.edu>, by itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken):
gp> I'm sure you will inform me of the reply.

At this point, I'm no longer expecting a reply.  I've faxed 
similar documents to PETA in the past, and I've received answers 
on a few occasions, but not always.  In particular, I recall a 
posting from rec.pets.dogs wherein a dog breeder claimed that 
PETA had been implicated in several murders.  I faxed the posting 
to PETA, but didn't receive a reply.  The breeder, however, 
received a letter from PETA's lawyers demanding either proof of 
the claim or a retraction.  The woman never did retract her 
remarks but instead argued that PETA was "suit-happy".  This 
resulted in a deluge of flames from people on both sides of the
animal rights issue, and she subsequently disappeared from usenet.  

rl> I have three questions:
rl> 
rl> 1) Do non-human animals have any personal worth that ought to be taken
rl>    into consideration?  Or, are they merely "automata", as many 
rl>    behaviorists still believe?

gp> I'm not sure which behavioralist you are refering to?  Nor what 
gp> you concider personal worth.  I'll ask a tougher question.  Let's 
gp> not fuck around.  Do animals have right's?  Every day in the 
gp> world millions of animals "in the wild" further their own chances 
gp> for suvival through the use of other animals.  (If you have a 
gp> problem with Darwin E-mail me, and we'll talk about it) In the 
gp> same in the same way I use other animals to benifit human and 
gp> non-human health.In the wild there are no "rights" Rights are a 
gp> human concoction.  Why should we apply them to non-human animals.  

Please explain why humans ought to have rights.   (Let's hope you don't
have a problem with Darwin).

rl> 2) Would you be inclined to support any use of animals that satisfies
rl>    some human need or desire, eg for fur, food, amusement, etc?

gp> As long as the need is legitamate and can not be obtained 
gp> adiquately by other means, yes.  

How do we define "legitimate" needs?   Do Miami socialites really
need mink coats?

rl> 3) Among the many thousands of projects that your cohorts have proposed
rl>    over the years, have you come across any that you would consider to be
rl>    wasteful in terms of animal suffering?

gp> Boy, that's a loaded question Russel.  What sort of 
gp> Frankensteinish experiment are you going to pull from 40 yrs ago.  
gp> Present day research is such that I could confidently say no.  
gp> But, I can defend anchent scientific history.  The guards and 
gp> review proccesses in place today prevent funding of "wasteful" 
gp> experimentation.  In addition, there is simple not enough money in 
gp> research to be throughing away on projects the that are not 
gp> scientically justifiable.  

When I have time to root through my newspaper archives, I'm going
to post several media accounts dealing with LSU's cat shooting 
experiments which ended in controversy not too long ago.

The AMA strongly defended the project and praised the researcher 
as a scientific hero, yet the GAO (and a host of critics with 
impressive credentials) claimed that the experiments were 
wasteful, redundant, and cruel.  PCRM physicians, as you might 
expect, testified against the project.  

gp> Please note (this means you Russel) no personal attacks at the end of this
gp> arguement.  Well, except this one.

My hat's off to you.

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