A Question of Ethics: IC & Animal Research...

[icnmgrjill]

Okay.... I want to ask for some opinions here. Many of you may not be aware that my first degree was in Pharmacology with a goal of doing drug research. However, once I got into industry I was SHOCKED & HORRIFIED by what I saw in industry labs.... animals being tortured and killed all to test cleansers, makeup and, of course, new drugs. The event which led to my giving up the career was an interview with the inventor of the birth control pill who admitted that they took dogs.... pets who were lost.... to do their research on. Worse, he said that they made no attempt to find their owners... these were dogs who were literally stolen from the pound within an hour of arrival... for what I consider to be completely immoral purpose. I saw it.... it happens.

I walked away because I love my animals... always have, always will. I remain so greatly horrified by what I still see happening in the USA and around the world. In fact, tonight on PBS, they had a NOVA show on it.. that had me sobbing. I'm so ashamed that humans would deliberately hurt an animal... and not pain care, or comfort.... arrrghhhh!!! I'm ready to strangle those researchers right now.

So, on the ICN, I've really struggled with my absolute disdain for animal research .... yet have discussed some of the research to help educate you about what we've learned. I don't want any of our research money going to labs that mistreat animals. I don't want any of our research money being used to deliberately destroy a cat or monkey's bladder just so that they can see what happens. Damn... those animals suffer.

I would like to make the ICN a cruelty free zone site where we encourage compassionate research...What do you think???

This makes me so ashamed that humans, in our great search for intelligence, can so blindly ignore the suffering of an innocent dog, cat, monkey... etc.... can so blindly ignore their screams of pain.... all for the sake of developing a product that will, at it's core, make someone rich. I urge you all to only use products (shampoos, lotions, conditioners, detergents, etc... that say "cruelty free.")

I am so frickin angry about the animal videos that I saw in this documentary on NOVA. We should be better than this... We could be better than this.

Jill :cat:

[debi1112]

Jill -
I completely agree. I have never understood testing on animals and have made an effort to avoid all products that do so. They test products on animals because they are like people, then why mistreat them? Are those things they would do to a human? I appreciate you sharing your experiences with it - it really makes me sad that so many animals have been harmed for our own good.

[lalarainbow]

I agree with you.. It is down right crime how animals are used in that way!
~~Pam~~

[Ginny]

So sad. I agree 100%.
Ginny

[jen_dahling]

I am more conflicted than absolute when it comes to animal research. I definitely draw the line with products that are only meant to be used for cosmetic purposes, so don't get me wrong, but what about the research that WILL eventually help people? I believe that for the most part, THAT is the core of research. Not all research ends just with only the gradification of someone becoming rich from it. Some research actually benefits humans. Like it or not, most people are comfortable with the sacfirice of animals for the betterment of mankind. I am currently thinking of breakthrough heart operations, transplants, diabetes, cancer, etc. In my opinion, the sacrifices that were made in the name of research has benefited millions of people.
On the other hand, I have never been in a research lab or seen first hand the abuse of animals for research. I think that this is a very tough ethical issue that is best left up to the individual. If research is being conducted for the treatment of bladder conditions on animals I think that you will probably get a mixed reaction. Many of us suffer to the point that we would do almost anything to get the research and help that we need. What of next generations? What of our families that have to sit by and watch us suffer? If it were cancer, would everyone still be so conflicted?
Like I said, this is a very tough issue. It's your site and I think it is a decision that is best left up to you. If you will be eliminating important information about the latest research for IC patients, or at the very least omitting the information that you deem unethical, then could you provide us with an alternative to seek the information on our own? Of course, you could always provide a disclaimer with the information stating that nore you nor the parties responsible for this website conduct or condone the abuse of animals for IC research.
P.s. I just wanted to add that I am an animal lover and owner of two very special animals! Monet, my beautiful British Tortie cat & Bailey Goldenbear, our 3 year old Golden Retriever. They are cherished family. :)

[Daniel]

I have a friend who just graduated with a degree in physiology. One of his classes had a lab portion, where he was required to cut open a rabbit, tinker with it's insides, and then kill it.

I personally don't think I would be able to do that.

However, if killing a few dozen rats, dogs, monkeys, etc, will save hundreds of thousands of human lives, I would approve.

[PikkuMyy]

As a vegan, I obviously have strong beliefs about the way animals should be treated. I only use cruelty-free products with no animal ingredients or testing, especially since after something like 1975, they've had all the equipment necessary to do the testing without using animals.

I am strongly against using animals in any sort of medical research. This is partly because I don't feel animals should be treated that way, and partly because much of the ways in which animals react to the medications, don't turn out to be the way humans do. We've had many people die because a medication was safe in animals but turned out to not be safe in humans. It seems to me like much of the testing never really tells us what will happen to humans, but the first years of people who take the drugs are really the "guinea pigs" of the operation.

But when it comes to actual activism, I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to the use of primates in research. Particularly because they often use very-highly intelligent animals in such research, animals who can learn sign language, have emotions just like we do, etc. You should read "Rattling the Cage", by a lawyer, about legal rights for animals based upon their similarities to humans, particularly the primates.

[poetgirl]

"I would like to make the ICN a cruelty free zone site where we encourage compassionate research...What do you think???"

I most absolutely agree. I wouldn't want to make an animal -- who has no choice in the matter -- suffer on my (or others') behalf. As it is, I've been trying to eat less meat and ingest fewer dairy products (it's hard making that transition, but I figure any day I do not contribute to the brutal rearing and slaughtering of animals is better than none.) I know there are free-range options, but regardless, they still have to die, and if you can't find or afford the free-range options, you're subject to all of the hormones, bacteria and pesticides the animals ingest. Which I have to think can't possibly be any good for us with all of the health issues we have...

[Cali girl]

I am 100% with you on this. I wrote a research paper in college on this exact issue. I was completely horrified at what I discovered through my research. It really opened my eyes.

Cali

:puppy:

[sleepyangel30]

You should look at the peta site how they slaugter animals that humans eat. By the way Jill I do agree. That is why I changed my diet, The stuff I saw on the video online just killed me.

[Iris]

I am with you on this one Jill, I used to work in Renal medicine and saw research being done on dogs, and rabbits, my husband used to be in pharmacology and saw research being done on cats, so we have first hand knowledge of what happens. We both were only in the jobs for a short while and glad to be away from that. I only use animal free research products. I know research has to be done to help fight diseases, but surely there must be some way to find out, without animals suffering and cruelty to them. I am definitely 100% with you, Iris.

[SheriG]

Jill, I am with you 100% on this issue. It is a crime what they put animals through.
PIKKUMYY,Please excuse my ingnorance, but what is a vegan? If I am prying into something personal, I am sorry, and you don't have to answer! Peace, and pain free days to all. Sheri G

[sleepyangel30]

Vegan is a vegetarian :)

[icnmgrjill]

::::as she smiles widely::::

I'm sooo glad that others are so deeply concerned about this. As I said by email to Jen, I'm not against animal research persay.... because some of it needs to done for medical research. But, I am firmly against cruelty and unnecessary research. Cosmetics, lotions, soaps, cleansers, vitamins, viagra.... these aren't life threatening needs for humans and nor should cost the lives of animals simply for profit. It's a comfort to ... to see those of you who have had experience like me... to see how upsetting it is too. Man, once you get behind those sacred doors into the labs, it's amazing how "humans" become so "cruel" for the sake of their studies.

So, I think that we should encourage compassionate research... and the use of cruelty free products at ALL times.

Did you know that a critical part of research is something called a lethal dose study. That's where they just give an animal more and more of a medication until it finally dies. They just observe it, watch it suffer... until it agonizingly dies... and that's for something stupid like shampoo.

So, how should we do this??

Jill :)

[tigger_gal]

I agree 100% with you.. I got an Idea...ok this is bad but I am putting it any way.. why can't they test the meds on the prisoners on death row.. like the cop killers and child molesters.... to me that sounds very reasonable..... maybe a bad thought on my part.. but I have no feelings for them and think they deserve to be tortured.....
Brat

[Dixiefireball]

This post made me cry. How awful How could they make an animal suffer like that???
that is so cruel!!! How would they like it if they came back in another life time as an animal and this happen to them? How would they like it if it was them laying there and having to be put threw this?
:yikes:
Yes i know we want a cure for IC but i don't agree with this type of testing what so ever its cruel!!!!
I do understand they are trying to help find crues for all types of dis. but to take an animals life to make them suffer is just unfair.
:rant: :cussing: :headbang:

[Sparky2]

Hi all:

While I am opposed to animal research for cosmetic purposes, as well as any research that could be conducted successfully without relying on animal subjects, I do feel that human beings must come first. It's horrible that animals have to suffer for our benefit, but I value my loved ones and humankind more than animals. Their suffering affects me the most.

As for research EVER being conducted on humans without their informed consent..... that I find abhorrent and barbaric and more than a little dangerous. Do you know that some of the most vulnerable people in our society (such as people with mental retardation and/or mental illness or for that matter, prisoners...some of whom may be innocent) HAVE been subjected in the past to research that was potentially dangerous and never told? Just thought I'd share my two cents.....

Take care,
Lynne

[Audrey Rose]

I agree 100%!! No living thing should be tortured for science or any other purpose.
I think there should be a message on the Main Page of ICN stating that ICN supports cruelty-free research only!! I think that when we get our activism projects going, we should be mindful of where the various organizations put their money and make sure animals are not mistreated in the labs they support. Whenever we write letters to encourage funding of research, we should always include that we do not wish to support reseach that involves harm to animals or any living thing, for that matter. As a nurse, I have certainly, to my horror, seen humans used as guinea pigs too. I think it is all evil. I'd rather live in pain than see an animal tortured.

That's where I stand!!
:tsk:

[gypsyjoy]

I am with you on this 100%.
Joy

[heiwalove]

i am completely with you, jill. i am against animal testing one-hundred-percent.

and yes, a vegan is a vegetarian, but vegans go one step further: they consume no dairy products at all, and nothing that contains any dairy products. may i ask, pikku, how you manage to be vegan with the IC diet? i used to love soy, i was vegetarian for over eight years, and i've just recently (and very begrudgingly) starting eating fish and poultry again (only free range, when i can afford it).

brat, in response to your idea: i understand where it comes from, but i must say i completely disagree. that would certainly fall under 'cruel and unusual punishment' (as does the death penalty itself, i believe, but that's another argument), which is in strict violation of the US constitution. in my opinion, prisoners should have rights too, even those who indeed have committed horrible crimes. keep in mind also, that our justice system is far from perfect and some if not many of the folks on death row are innocent, or at least innocent of the extreme charges that landed them there in the first place. i don't know the exact statistics, but an insane proportion of folks on death row are poor people of color; there is injustice going on here, there is racism, there is classism, there is institutionalized poverty, and enough torture and brutality already occurs in our prisons; we certainly don't need to add more.

just my two cents.

~heather

[blue]

I don't agree with animal research, especiall for make up or cleansers. I am an animal lover, I will pick them up off the side of the road, and take them home. I've literally spent thousands of dollars on these animals.

I don't believe they should be subjected to unneccesary cruelty. But, for some diseases, if there is no other way, then what? I'm pretty conflicted on my opinion here. If it were a perfect world, we would never put any animal through this kind of torture and pain.

[Amanda]

I care for animals and do not think unnecessary research is ever appropriate. I think it can be done in a more humane way if drug companies and universities were made accountable.

On the other hand, though, I think that medical research has its place. If my child (if I had any...) or my mother, my brother, or I had a terminal illness (or most any illness for that matter) I would want everything to be done to try to find treatments to that illness, and that includes research on animals.

I am sorry if I offend anyone here, but this is my belief.

Amanda

[ICNDonna]

I firmly believe animals should not be subjected to cruelty.

That said, there are instances where animals are used in medicine where I don't feel cruelty is a problem. At the hospital where I worked, when the neonatal intensive care unit was opening and nurses were being taught to do procedures on premature infants, kittens were used in the teaching. Those kittens were picked up from the pound, where they would have been killed. They were taken home by nurses and nurtured back to health, then anesthetized for the teaching. Afterwards, they were taken back home by those same nurses as pets. This is one instance where both the animals and hundreds of babies were benefitted.

Donna

[Annie2]

The ethics of animal research is a long-debated topic. As a biologist and an educator, it is a question I wrestled with long ago. Decades ago, in my first undergraduate ecology course, we spent the first week of classes defining the word “conservation”. In brief, the conclusion of that study was that conservation of resources means “wise use”, neither hoarding nor using thoughtlessly. When it comes to animal research, I believe the same principle applies. Though I deplore suffering in all living creatures, it is a fact of nature.

As are many others on this site, I am of the Christian faith. We are taught God gave us “dominion” over all the animals. Dominion can be defined as sovereignty or supreme authority; the power of governing and controlling; independent right of possession, use, and control. With this gift comes the responsibility of using it wisely and humanely as we, who are above all the animals, were given the ability to think and reason.

God despises suffering, yet we Christians believe He gave His beloved Son to us and allowed Him to suffer for our sake that we might be reconciled to the Father. We were not worthy but were made so by His sacrifice.

I believe, when it comes to animal testing for medical use, we must use this wisely. If human suffering can be diminished by the use of animals in our research, isn’t it a worthy cause and wise use? We may love the creatures of this earth dearly, but we sometimes have to sacrifice to benefit mankind and decrease human earthly suffering. We are worthy of that.

The question then becomes one of degree. To me, it is important to encourage labs to use these creatures wisely and with the responsibility that comes with our authority over them.

Annie

[CinSin]

I agree that animals should not be used in research for products such as shampoos, cleansers and the such. But I do believe in animal research for medicine. Many people suffer and die everyday, and if not for medical research with animals there would be no hope of preventing it in the future. It isn't a perfect solution, but I believe it is necessary.

I love animals and have a pet myself that rules our home. I hope I haven't offended anybody.

[MakinIT]

This, like so much in life, is such a tricky and emotional question. I can remember being a child who's older sister had severe brain cancer (yes, she survived..in 1970) and I would get so angry with folks who were anti research. I took physiology in college and had to dissect a cat (already dead) turtles, (living..we added chemicals to the heart to see what would happen..it was anestitized) Frogs, Snakes, Dogs, ourselves (Uh, not dissect, but do experiments on ourselves....lots of urine in my fridge in college, my roommates loved it). I often got a feeling that those who complained tothe prof about a lab based on "conscience" were trying to get out of the lab. AND I AM IN NO WAY SAYING YOU ALL DON'T REALLY FEEL THE WAY YOU DO! As I've aged, I guess my feelings have softened, that is.....I would like to find different ways for kids to do this without destroying a life. But I also feel I would like my doctor to have the experience of many times practicing feeling real muscle tissue, and practice dissecting it!!!!

I sure respect you all on a tricky topic. It is harmful. I love animals and I did not enjoy those experiences although I learned much and will never forget it. Believe me, my puppy, kitty, guinea pig, and fish keep us busy.

Take care.

[darlene]

Am I the only one to notice Dr. keays is working on developing an animal model for testing the effects of APF, and new treatments to neutralize its damage? No drug company would risk trying new drugs on people before testing on animals. Think law suits! If we ask that all testing that hurts animals cease, we won't see new treatments! People expect new drugs and treatments to be as safe as possible. Those of us that are older, might remember thalidomide, and the horrible birth defects it caused. I thought long and hard about writing this post. Some members will hate me for telling the truth. My earlier ideas about keeping personal feelings about religion and politics out of health support groups, didn't go over very well. I think I was on the brink of being asked to leave, and felt I was disliked from then on. This all came from my years as a support group co/leader for the Crohn's and Colitis foundation of America. Our group never discussed religion or politics, so as not to offend others with different views. We were also very aware that drug research really is a business, and that no new treatments would come without first testing on animals. Some of the tests, by their very nature, would be painful, but necessary. No one is happy about hurting animals, but sometimes, there is no other way. So I again put my neck on the chopping block, and hit submit reply!

[SharonA]

No, Darlene, you are not the only one who noticed the report on APF that Jill put up on the IC Announcements Board. I have been off the boards for about 1 week, so I read both that report and Jill's post on this thread at the same time. I thought is rather odd that so many posts were in favor of both issues.

I am also an animal lover and have had many pets over the years that I loved immensely. When it was their time to pass on, I grieved. I also grieve when I read or hear about cruelty towards animals.

But I grieve even more when I read reports about diseases, like ours, that cause so much harm to humans. When I read posts from those of us here at ICN who have the horrible, unrelenting pain of IC and cannot find relief, the emotion I feel is so way beyond grief. I actually find myself feeling hatred for what this disease does to so many people. How so many lives are changed for the worse. How so much of life is taken away because of a disease that has, for now, no cure.

Even with those strong feelings, I remain hopeful that one day, in the very near future, a cause and a cure will be found. The big question here, it seems to me, is...without animal research, how will this happen? How will the cure for any disease be researched without using animals? Certainally, there is no one on these boards who would seriously suggest that human experimentation be used.

As in all debates, there are two sides...pro and con. But, in real life issues, there are always three sides...pro, con, and compromise.

[MakinIT]

It is kind of funny. I recall this conversation with my oldest daughter when she was, mmmm...12 I think. Only problem with argueing with a preteen is their lack of empathy towards other perspectives. You are either an "****" for believing it or cool for not. Funny how I always imagined my conversations with children to go....calm, intellectual discussions!!!!Ain't nuthin' like that. The older one sits on the couch with her arms crossed, brows down, lip out, eye liner running, waiting for me to inhale, then she screams in my face. Where Have I gone wrong? She is a sweet kid but very moralistic at this age and,although it is slowly changing, most stuff is very Black and White for her. (We won't even go into the 8 year old, hereafter known as the terror.)

Basically folks, you are going to have to accept whether you want physicians trained with computer models, or on living tissue or with a combination. I prefer a combination but when it comes to surgery or research those folks need a living system because a living system is SOOOO confusing. You get down to the cellular level...lord knows what will happen. There is absolutely NO reason for these creatures to live in miserable or unheallthy environments. They need vets all the time and access to exercise and food/water, plenty of room, and interaction with humans and each other...if possible. some of the research is so DUH it is completely unnecessary it gives animal research a bad name.

Good Bye...I hope no one is angry...I just know it saved my sisters life....possibly mine as well. The rest if us can "thank" them for vaccines,ect.....

you are all awesome and your arguements are very intellegent,thought out.

Tracey

[icnmgrjill]

You know, I have two huge buttons which upset me greatly... and one is the unnecessary suffering of an animal. That documentary on Nova reminded me yet again that we can be so much better than we are. When employees joke that animals can't experience pain.. when they are screaming... infuriates me. When a doctor told a mother that a child with IC can't experience pain, when that child cries out every night... infuriates me. Sometimes it just seems as if we have blinders on.... and just can't "see" the forest for the trees.

I'm not against all animal research... because I spent a few years doing animal research and it gave me a first hand view of that world. I believe that animal testing is necessary in the development of drugs. But I am against unnecessary research OR research that is brutal. I think that doing research on an animal's bladder is fine... AS LONG AS the animal is anesthesized and not screaming in pain. It's the deliberate cruelty in some labs that has me the most concerned. It really REALLY upsets me.

In any case, I loved all of your responses. I think I'll always have nightmares about what I witnessed in industry labs ... and that has changed my viewpoint forever. I could never live with myself if I worked in a lab that had a callous approach to animals... and because humane labs seem pretty few and far between, I gave up that career. I'm also proud to say that I never caused the death of an animal except for one small rat that I had to humanely put to sleep. The studies that I participated in were done VERY compassionately... and with great caring to the animals. As one of you said earlier, they SHOULD be treated compassionately.. with vet care, food, water, companionship... etc. etc. Babies shouldn't be taken away from mothers ....

And, Donna, I loved your story about the kittens. That's really the best outcome of all.

Jill :)

[scubagrrrl]

actually, a vegan is a strict vegetarian who rejects eating any animal products. vegans do not eat eggs or cheese. vegetarians may eat eggs and cheese. vegans eat nothing from animals at all including gelatin (jello, pill capsules, etc...are made from ground up animal hooves) and sometimes honey (made from bees).

i am also vegan. i have been vegetarian (mostly vegan) since i was 14 in 1976 and 100% vegan since 1999.

i truly believe that we need to consider animals in all our life choices. yes, animals are cruelly tortured for medical experiments. BUT MANY MORE ANIMALS ARE TORTURED FOR FOOD and a vegan diet is the only truly humane and animal friendly diet.

a great movie called Peaceable Kingdom (see www.tribeofheart.com) shows the torment farm animals endure as they are raised for food. it's sheer brutality how animals are raised for food.

if you see this film, you'll think twice about ever eating cow, pig, chicken, turkey, goat, veal (baby cow), eggs or drinking milk ever again.

unfortunately, the movie does not address the fishing industry (since it's a farm movie) but we all must remember that fish also suffer greatly and commercial fishing is unsustainable and depleting our oceans of turtles, dolphins, whales, sharks, etc.... in pursuit of tuna, shrimp, etc...

if someone ever says they are vegetarian because they don't eat red meat (common for people to say this) but they only eat chicken and fish, please remind them that chicken and fish are not vegetables, therefore they are not vegetarians.

i have a few bumperstickers on my car: "Love Animals, Don't Eat Them" and "If you love animals called "pets," why do you eat animals called dinner?"

i'm extreme for most people, i know, but i also believe that crying over animal cruelty while still eating animals makes us guilty of that cruelty we refuse to take responsibility for.

for the bible folks: dominion doesn't necessarily need to be interpretted as "domination over" or "control over." it could mean "responsible for" in a compassionate sense.

the bible also says (and i'm not religious) that "i have given you every fruit and seed bearing tree and that shall be your meat" or something similar to this...and i do not believe that if jesus came back today, he'd be eating food from slaughterhouses.

today, in the modern world, with the availability of such abudant plant based foods, jesus would most definitely be a vegan, showing the highest of compassion.



peace,
amy

[MakinIT]

Veggie girl: Well thought out reply, and I admire your ability to stick with it although I'm sure at this point the thought of eating any animal product is just nauseating . Does the soy bother your bladder?

Tracey

[mayray518]

I dont eat a lot of meat but I see nothing wrong with it. There used to be a woman who was a vegan at work (and eveyone is entitled to their own opinion) but she carried a real leather purse all the time. That totally defeated the purpose.

[blue]

Amy, I amire your devotion!

mayray, the lady must have been an idiot!

[mayray518]

No she was just a hypocrite. She gave up eating meat she just didnt want to give up nice purses.

[MakinIT]

AH...people will never change...do what makes them comfortable without seeing their own hypocrisy, I'm sure there are some thing I have unfornuate hypocritical traits about. I give lots of advice (asked for) on parenting with disable children yet I find myseof getting as frustrated and angry with my disabled sister as I did prior to any specialized training. My logical brain says one thing but my emotional runs the show. However, any of my students act up I can be very standoffish and set my emotions aside until crisis over. I think the the "vegan" with the purse can't let go of her remaining last bit of Nordstromitistis. "sigh" I can relate. I don't understand still how vegans with IC can eat soybased products. I try to eat it for the high protien and because my stomach sometimes churns at meats. My bladder will freak for days.

Take care all!!

T

[mayray518]

I am laughing about your comment about Nordstrom, my favorite store. you are so right

[scubagrrrl]

LOL about nordstroms...
there are vegans who wear leather. some may see it as hypocritical. and some may see it as a better option to pleather (especially shoes) which do not breathe and are petroleum based and not biodegradable and don't stretch. some folks can't wear plastic shoes. leather has big issues including toxic dyes in the tanning process. we all do what we can along the continuum of caring for animals to whatever degree we are conscious and concerned about their suffering. personally, what makes me more angry than vegans wearing leather is folks who think only cats and dogs deserve humane treatment and think nothing of the suffering of food animals or animals tortured in vivisection. it's all the same suffering. so, we all do what we can at whatever level we are at. but if animals were not eaten, there would be no leather biproduct and comfy shoes would have to be made with plant-based materials. that would be ideal. no meat, no leather.

[scubagrrrl]

makinIt...
to me, animals are not food. so it's not a matter of sticking to it. i just never even consider that animal bodies are something edible. so, it makes it easy. those poor carrots though. i just love ripping their heads off !!

[crystilclear]

I am sorry to admit that I really didn't realize how bad that animal testing is here. I have 6 cats I rescued and 1 dog too. I love all my babies and can't and don't want to mimagine the cruelties forced upon their helpless little bodies. I am torn on this subject. I wish that if there absolutely had to have testing done that it would be in the most humane way as possible with the proper care, and facilities for the aniamls. It does make me so sad but I value human life so much also.For the people whose loved ones have been saved by some new drug or treatment can you really look at them and say that their loved one should die so that animal testing can be completeloy erraticated? I always think what if it were my child? My husband? My mother? So many contriversal subjects. I am more of an advocate for the little lost souls of unwanted children who are destroyed every 5 seconds in such a nonchallant way. How can there be such strong advocate's for animals and not for human life sometimes! There are always going to be opposing sides. I have had to learn to pick and choose my battles wisely because nowadays everyone is stretched way too thin as it is. I take awesome care of my animals and I do what I can. I am not perfect whatsoever and neither is this world. There is just so much pain, sadness, and destruction everywhere and it doesn't exclude any living creature. I think we should all keep in mind that it is ok to agree to disagree. Everyone's views should be respected and realize that we all have things we are passionate about. If we all were devoted to the same things so many other significant issues would be overlooked and neglected. In our diversity we can help many more than if we were all single minded. We are all friends here no hard feelings. We all ultimately want the same things just have different ideas on how they are achieved. I hope everyone has a wonderful day and can manage a smile or two too! Even though there are horrible things in this world it is so important to remember the good things too. Take care all - Chris

[PikkuMyy]

I don't have any problems with soy except that it makes me gassy, so I don't eat too much of it. And I find that I eat a very healthy diet (healthier than most) without animal products or much soy.

And in terms of the leather, it may have been a purse she bought before she became vegan, or that she bought used. I have some leather shoes I have from when I was younger or that I bought at the Salvation Army - thus supporting a good human cause while lengthening the life of the product that cow died for. So you can't be quite so quick to judge - unless she really just was a purse-aholic, and there are some hypocritical vegans just like with every ideology.

The best book that I have read about animal issues is called "Dominion" by Matthew Scully - who is a Christian writing about how since God gave us dominion over the animals, it is our DUTY as humans to care for the earth and all it's creatures. As Veggiegrrl said, responsibility. One thing I found very interesting was that Scully used to be a speechwriter for George W. Bush. It is not a book I would expect from someone like that but he is EXTREMELY eloquent and a wonerful writer and has done a better job of explaining this whole issue than anyone else I've read.

Back to the IC issue - Because this issue of my vegan lifestyle is so important to me, I'm willing to do whatever it takes to follow it despite my IC. So if my diet has to be more boring than I'd like, or I have to work harder to have more interesting food, then it is worth it for me. Obviously everyone has to draw the line somewhere. I take birth control pills, which are important since I'm not ready for a baby yet, and because they help my IC. They have lactose - milk sugar. But there aren't birth control pills available without lactose that work for me, so I take them anyway. But whatever I can control, I do. If I have to take medicine that comes in capsules, like my daily low-dose antibiotics, I transfer the medication into a vegetarian capsule before I take it. A little more work than just picking up the pill and swallowing it, but worth it for me.

Each of us has philisophical issues that we make important in our daily living. This happens to be one of mine, and so I include it in everything that I do. I think that people automatically assume that people who are vegetarian or vegan, care more about animals than humans. CrystilClear mentioned that above. Who said I didn't care about babies who were aborted? Or people who were starving? I do. I care for any creatures that have suffering thrust upon them. However, I have to pick some battles to work on, and veganism is something that I can do everyday to combat cruelty towards animals, the environment, and all of the humans involved in the slaughtering trade (the MOST dangerous jobs in the US.)

[Andrew_J]

Firstly, I oppose unnecessary suffering--whether of animals or people. What I don't understand is all the concern for these animals when, as you read this, boys and girls are being sold as slaves in Africa; in Burma anyone with AIDS is executed; in the Sudan, the gov't is murdering people by the thousand; the Chinese are still committing terrible crimes in Tibet. Where's the conern for these human victims of things far worse than a little shampoo in the eye? I don't understand how people can look at the suffering of fellow humans dispassionately and yet melt when they see an injured or tortured animal.

Necessary animal research (including suffering and death if needed) I fully support. And I say that with a clear conscience. If my daughter were ill, , and the only way to save her was to kill every chimpanzee on Earth I would do it. No hesitation. No regrets. If it would save my little girl's life.

I think Jill is conflating two wholly separate issues--at least in my mind.

The first is medical research. For example, the drugs which AIDS patients take to stay alive and, in many cases, return to functional lives.

Without research chimps with HIV these drugs could not have been developed. Without this research, which continues as we discuss this, people with AIDS and perhaps the entire continent of Africa are doomed.

We absolutely have to inflict this suffering and death upon these animals. It's ugly. But so is war. So is capital punishment. These things are terrible, but the vast majority of us recognize not just their utility but the need for them. We have no other choice.

And I seriously doubt the people of Botswana care a whit for this vicarious philanthropy at their expense. You see, despite all its political and economic progress, one third of Botswanans have AIDS and will almost certainly die without retrovirals or the "vaccines" currently under testing.

We cannot simply abandon people to torment and death because certain consciences are too tender to behold the methods behind the drugs which save my grandmother's life everyday and the drug which keeps my father from suffering the full effects of his high blood pressure and the drugs which help me to keep my pain down to a liveable level.

Some people I've met have a disdain for human suffering and falsely elevate of animals to having "rights." And I get the feeling that my great aunt's suffering from Parkinson's matters not at all to this certain type of person.

To keep my grandmother and father on this Earth, it bothers me not at all how many cats, dogs, rats are used in keeping her alive and healthy. If you really wish to help stray or abandoned animals, set up a shelter for them, a sanctuary. It would really help animals; really and actually stop their suffering and deaths--without condemning people to illness and death.

The second issue which, in my opinion, Jill's piece conflates with the above is that kind of testing best illustrated by the now imfamous "Draze test" where things like perfume, shampoos, conditioners, cosmetics were--by Federal law it must be added--rubbed into the eyes of rabbits despite the lack of any evidence that the test did anything to advance consumer safety.

There's also the issue of the drug Premarin. This is produced by keeping mares constantly pregnant so that estrogen can be extracted from their urine collected via the mare's catheterized bladder. (And every IC patient should be cringing and doubling over at the mere thought!) I find this absolute disgusting.

These two examples are totally unnecessary animal testing; and I oppose it. If the research is real and scientifically viable, I support it. If its for frivolous reasons, then no.

Of course, Jill is perfectly within her rights to decide how she spends her own donation money and any collected moneys--as long as her parameters for research are clearly understood. But I don't understand how Jill can support new drug research; NO drug can be sold to patients in the US with the animal testing phase. So, if I understand Jill's position, she can no longer support any drug research at all--because it all uses animal testing/research.

Thus, now that I know that IC-Network will not support animal research, I will not be able to donate money to IC Network for that purpose. I will, however, be donating for the purposes of website upkeep and education.

Research without animals is impossible (and legally necessary to develop any new drugs for IC). The "computer" models organizations like "PETA" tout as a replacement are a joke. Our knowledge of human anatomy, let alone other species, is really in its infancy. No computer model, at this time, can possibly replace animal subjects. It's just that simple.

Thus I cannot donate money for constraints on research which violates my conscience.

There's not a single major development in the history of scientific medicine (from the 18th century on) that could have been achieved without the use of animals in research. Literally tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of humans, would die each year without these breakthroughs.

Not only that, but animals themselves often benefit from such research. Drug makers often sell to the veterinary market. So to posit animals as solely victims in this scenario doesn't fit the facts.

To those who oppose animal research, would you really condemn hundreds of millions of people to death and suffering because YOU are uncomfortable with the methods used to create them? This to put it starkly, but the choice is clear. Without animal research, people will die.



For me this is NOT an abstract issue. Alzheimers runs in my family. My mother's uncle and aunt were both killed by it. Her father died young (59), but he too was beginning to show signs of Alzheimer’s. On my mother's side, she also has an aunt who has Parkinson's. We also recently found out that my mother-in-law may have MS as well possible colon cancer. So animal research may become absolutely vital to her survival.

So, even beyond IC, animal research is necessary for me and my little girl and my wider family. Terrible disease lay in our genes. To simply abandon the only effective tool we have and allow people to die the awful deaths Alzheimers and Parkinson's inflict--while doing nothing--would be a moral offense of the highest order.

If, as individual, one objects to animal research, I respect that. If one wishes to use "cruelty free" products fine. But one has NO right to force death and suffering on another for the sake of lower life forms. Animal research is indispensible.

The abuses in animal research are just that, abuses. And they should be stopped; those responsible should be held accountable. The legal tools exist to end the unnecessary suffering and death of animals. Laws, such as the one mandating the Draze test, can and have been changed.

My best friend’s wife supervises drug trials involving animals and humans. Her company does not use cruel or useless tests for no reason. But their job is to help get drugs to market to help people (and animals) by make sure they are safe and effective. Without the efforts of people like her, the modern pharmaceuticals that improve our lives could only exist by Nazi-like experiments on humans. And I don’t think any of us wish to return to the days of doing research on prison inmates.

Too often these days, discussions of contentious issues disintegrate into name calling and bad feelings. Thanks to Jill for bringing it up civilly and without the vituperation that so fills our politics these days. (I apologize if I offended anyone. I’ve edited and parsed this post relentlessly to try to remove any such thing.)

AJ

PS: If you've read this far, thanks. I'm sorry it was so long but it's not an issue I can condense, intelligibly, to a few paragraphs.


_______________________________________

(By the former Pain_Man)

[heiwalove]

i know this doesn't address all the issues that have been brought up (all very excellent and thought-provoking, by the way), but i really don't understand: how can one be vegetarian on an IC diet? for those of you who are, is soy not an irritant to your bladder? for vegan folks, how do you get your protein? (for me, soy and certain beans and nuts are major irritants, unfortunately). i was vegetarian for nine years and would love to someday become so again. every time i eat meat i cringe (and yes, i eat meat every day; though i still refuse to eat red meat), but at this point i know of no other way to injest adequate protein.

thanks,
heather

[crystilclear]

I just want to clear something up here. I was not directing my comments to anyone specifically. PikkuMyy how did you come to the conclusion that I was talking to you? I never said or implied to anyone here that they are one way or another. I was speaking for myself and was generalizing my statement not trying to infringe my way of thinking on anyone here. You are greatly misunderstood. I never even mentioned vegans or vegitarians in my post and I have looked over it again. I never said you didn't care about babies or anything else for that matter.I I am upset because you are putting words in my mouth. There are no hidden "read between the line" comments in my post. So where did you come to that conclusion? I think you got on the defesive because maybe it is something that's bothering you. I have friends that are vegitarian. When they come over I do the best I can to make something suitable and pleasing for them. I was expresing an opinion. I do not want to be misquoted and like I said in the post: How can there be such strong advocate's for animals and not for human life sometimes - Just to say that there is far more human suffering in the world too. Did I mention anyone's names there? It wasn't directing anything to anyone anywhere. Well now that it is clear I hope that we can keep a clear head and realize that we are all on the same side here. Have a nice day and please like I said before no hard feelings. - Chris

[icnmgrjill]

Andrew!

That's a well thought out response. First of all... the ICN does not fund research nor do we take money for research. If you read one of my earlier responses, my focus is on the unncessary research that you mentioned so passionately in your post. I completely believe that animal research must be done for some medications.... because that's what my degree is in. I didn't invest five years and many thousands of dollars for something that didn't make sense.

What frustrates me, though, is when some labs are deliberately cruel... not for the sake of the research... but for the poor values of the staff who choose to take the easy way out. Case in point is the research that requires sperm. Chimpanzees can be taught to masturbate to generate the sperm for studies.... very very easily. But, some researchers would rather apply an electric shock to that animal's testicles while he's strapped into a chair screaming his head of with each jolt.

That's what I saw on the Nova video. And, when the staff laugh and say "If anyone saw this, we'd be shut down in an instant" and "It doesn't hurt them" despite the fact that it's arching off the chair held only in place by the medieval neck brace... it chills me to the core. If that staffer were strapped to that same chair, I think he'd be screaming his head off.

We, as humans with our advanced intellect, sometimes just can't see the unnecessary pain that we inflict. I, for one, would hope that our researchers could aspire to the highest of ethics and care, rather than the lowest common denominator. To that end, I will say that I've never seen an IC researcher behave this way... nor do I expect to. But, if I do, you can be damn well sure that I'll protest.

Jill

[SharonA]

Since the Bible was brought into this discussion, I thought I might relpy with what the Bible actually says about "dominion" and "meat". I am not doing this to be argumentative or superior. I realize that there are different beliefs and I recognize your right to believe the way you choose. I hope you do the same with me. I just feel that, as a Christian, it is my duty to stand up for the Word of God. I am not insisting that anyone believe the way I do. That is what makes this country so great. We can enter into a debate without getting angry over anyone else's point of view. We can all learn from each other.

I am using Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible"...the Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary and the Bible as my references.

Genesis 1: 26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule (dominion) over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

dominion - 7287-radah-a prim. root; to tread down, i.e. subjugate; spec. to crumble off: - (come to, make to) have dominion, prevail against, reign, (bear, make to) rule. (-r, over), take.

Genesis 1:29 Then God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be (meat) food for you.

Genesis 9:3 "Every moving thing that is alive shall be (meat) food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

402- 'oklah - food: -consume, devour, eat, food, meat.

As far a Jesus choosing to be a vegan...I do not think He would do so because He would not go against the Word of God. "For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given me commandment, what to say and what to speak." John 12:49

God told Noah that He gave every moving thing that is alive for food. What was good in Noah's time was still good when Jesus walked this earth and is the same for today. Jesus ate meat. His meat was raised to be eaten. When it was time to have meat on the table, it was slaughtered and cooked.

Jill, I so appreciate that you have allowed this discussion to continue. I think this is very important. We, individually, need to know where we stand on this issue. :)

[MakinIT]

This is a passionate subject and I think everyone needs to search their heads, objectively, and examine all the arguements. Then set back and see how you feel. I know that I can't agree with cruel and inhumane research. That goes against everything I know is right. As I stated before, there is no reason, other than shoddy research strategies, to treat the animals poorly!

[icnmgrjill]

I'm going to close this thread now... because I'm concerned that we'll have a religious debate. I think that we all agree that unnecessary and deliberately cruel research is sad... and that there is a place for animal research that is done compassionately and professionally. Thank you all for such an enlightened and enlightening discussion! You all made some very excellent points!