gnommi: (Default)
gnommi ([personal profile] gnommi) wrote2006-06-02 02:34 pm

Pro-test

I've decided to write to my MP (Alan Whitehead), in order to ask him if he would consider signing this EDM, pertaining to the regulation of medical research involving the use of animals and addressing the spread of misinformation and intimidation by anti-vivisection groups.

[identity profile] fisle.livejournal.com 2006-06-02 02:46 pm (UTC)(link)
Go you!

You don't see the nutbars protesting against pet shops selling pet rats to careless children who never clean them out to the extent that they get abcesses etc…
Also, they never seem to contemplate the ethics in terms of biomass either. I.e. taking their stance that everything on earth has an equal right to live, we are sacrificing (without specific prejudice or malice to the organisms involved) a relatively small amount of biomass in order to sustain the life of a much larger lot.

That's obviously a tad simplistic, but no more so than the "they've done nothing to us, why should they suffer for our medicines" stance taken by a lot of anti-testing campaigners.
Shockingly enough, I used to hold this viewpoint in my naïve teens.

[identity profile] squidflakes.livejournal.com 2006-06-02 04:15 pm (UTC)(link)
Ahhh, excellent!

I've never really understood the anti-research crowd's position. They tend to be ok with harming humans, as long as no animals suffer? If ever there was a counter-survival instinct, that is it. If instead, they used all that time, energy, and money supporting human causes, we'd be that much further ahead of the curve. There might be one less oppressive regime in power, there might be that much more tolerance for differences in religion, race, class, ect. Hell, with all the medical research these groups target, we might just have found an AIDS cure, or some nifty tumor busting pharma, but no...

I've gotten in to it with a couple of groups before, but strangely, never over my research. I fully believe this is because cephalopods aren't offically on the "cute" list.

[identity profile] elseware.livejournal.com 2006-06-03 11:42 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not impressed with the BBC's coverage this morning. A scientist was calling for testing on great apes not to be banned legally. They made it sound like he was saying we should start testing on them, but what he was saying is that the door should not be shut and bolted because one day there may be a medical situation which requires it. It should be considered a last resort, but not outright illegal.

Hmm. They didn't make it very clear.