PETA complaint alleges mistreatment in UW research

[Darat]

Actually the other thing to be confirmed is the accusation by PETA that the tests are "useless".

...snip..

I sort of skimmed over that as just part of the hyperbole they used to draw attention to something they have strong disagreements with (similar to describing the post-mortem procedure as a "decapitation"). But you are right that is a claim and one that they do not substantiate.

 

[Darat]

I would like to hear PETA explain exactly WHAT regulations are being violated?

...snip...

If they allege that laws are being broken, they should be able to explain how the law is being broken, which requires a discussion of the law and not just calling the researchers meanies.

To be fair they don't make that allegation.

(ETA: hit the wrong button when going back to the article to grab a quote.)

What they say is "...for likely violations of federal animal welfare laws.... " which I assume has been checked by their legal bods and falls just shy of making such a claim in a way that would open them up to legal action.

 

[pgwenthold]

The Animal Welfare Act.

In what way do the actions violate the Animal welfare act?

 

[mumblethrax]

In what way do the actions violate the Animal welfare act?

I'm not aware of the specific allegations PETA is leveling, but it will probably at least involve something along the lines of "inadequate care given to test subject post-surgery". I'm also not aware that there are federal laws in place other than the Animal Welfare Act governing the use of laboratory animals, so if they're urging federal inspectors to get involved, it's that or nothing.

The USDA cited UW for 20 violations of the Animal Welfare Act in 2009, some of them quite serious (things like letting a dog suffer after surgery, and letting a monkey die of malnutrition, if I remember correctly). UW has had many institutional problems with animal care in recent years, so I wouldn't be surprised if this program was also in violation of the AWA.

It's true, as Segnosaur says, that being a skeptic means following the evidence. But it's also true that being a critical thinker means reserving judgment, something that isn't emphasized strongly enough. There's no reason to make a determination right now, given that more information is almost certainly forthcoming.

 

[One Skunk Todd]

Some information about the related research: http://www.news.wisc.edu/21046

Edit: Oops, sorry, just saw Octavo's link to this same info.

 

[Cain]

Actually the other thing to be confirmed is the accusation by PETA that the tests are "useless".

They're creating jobs, providing families with incomes, so it's not completely useless. Why on earth spend so much time and energy doing something completely useless? (not counting PETA.)

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

PETA's biggest fallacy is dismissing the fact that humans are animals.

Is.

Every animal should look out for its own interests. If a symbiotic relationship is possible then so be it. If it comes down to one animal vs. another, why should any creature lay down and die and let the other one win?

If it would save just one human life I would be fine with the consumption, testing, killing or even extinction of any animal.

Should we maximize our ability to be symbiotic with as many forms of life as possible? Sure. But humans come first. Always.

Ought.

Happy to clear that up.

 

[shemp]

Canadians are humans.

A damnable lie.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

A damnable lie.

They are mountain kittens!

 

[AvalonXQ]

When crazy people make claims, I typically ignore those claims until non-crazy people corroborate them.

In other words, when PETA says it, I ignore it. If it's real, someone with credibility will come along and then I'll listen.