Animal Writings

I recently participated in an anti-circus protest. Most of the attendees held up large placards showing some aspect of circus brutality, such as trainers viciously beating elephants with bulhooks to make them learn tricks. My sign had a picture of Tyke, the circus elephant tragically shot to death on the streets of Honolulu after trying to escape 20 years of bondage. (Scroll a few posts down to read her story.) There were also two persons handing out flyers about circus cruelty.

For the most part the circus-goers were polite. Many had a look of disgust on their face as they viewed the pictures of animal victims of circus brutality. We handed out hundreds of flyers.

A few people had unkind words or gestures for the protestors. None of those people looked at the pictures or read the flyer. They turned away from the line of placards. If anyone in their party took a flyer, they grabbed it and threw it on the ground. What do you make of that?

Yesterday animal activist Billye Thompson wrote a stirring editorial in the Activists Against Factory Farming discussion group. I'd like to repeat part of it here:

On this day the owners of factory farms are going to church to worship their Lord, and promising to Him that they will follow His word and obey His laws. Following that service, they will sit down in their perfectly cleaned houses to a lovely family gathering of food and drink, and they will be at peace.

However, it's just too bad that factory farmed animals are still in their filthy miserable conditions, who, if they can reach it, are forced to eat a concocted substance that is so gruesome that you wouldn't find anything in a landfill that would compare.

These animals know no holidays. They know no peace, and they can't tell the world in a language we understand that we shouldn't be treating them in this fashion...

If I could put some photos in this spot I would. [I've added some.] Photos of the crammed filthy cages with drugged up genetically altered innocent creatures staring out, begging someone to come and help them, to free them, to release them from THEIR burden.

Photos of agonizingly miserable egg-laying hens that are crammed for years into wire floor cages, in order to provide eggs, which took up to 37 hours to lay, for a nation of uninformed moms and dads so they can be dyed and hidden for fun and games. Or for an item on a plate that could have just as easily been an item that was NOT brought about by suffering.

Photos of what that Easter ham being used as a morbid centerpiece started out to be.

Photos of terrified shackled birds hanging upside down awaiting their turn, while seeing, hearing, and smelling the death of those who went before them...

Photos of animals who would surely take their own lives if they knew how, and would definitely wish to not be born if they had to live this way.

These animals "would surely take their own lives if they knew how." Or wish they had never been born. That's our legacy. Ten billion tortured souls on the killing floor — the culmination of our selfishness and small-minded brutality.

Ms. Williams is correct. There comes a point where life is so unbearable, so hopelessly miserable, that death is desired, the only way to make the suffering stop.

Jesus said, "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you." How would you want to be treated if you were a piglet or a chick just born? You would want the warmth and comfort of your mother. You would want to take your first steps under her watchful care. You would want to feel the soft earth under your feet and the sun on your skin. As you matured you would want to play and discover the world. You would learn how to forage for food, clean yourself, and prepare a comfortable place to sleep. You would develop the skills of your species. The chickens would take flight. The pigs would root in the ground and cover themselves with mud to keep cool and ward off flies. The cows would graze in the field. All would develop close bonds with others and be part of a group.

But how do we actually treat them? The chicks are born in an incubator. The hens never spread their wings. They stand on slanted slatted floors. The dairy cows are hooked up to an electronic milking machine and their udders are swelled and infected from hormones. The veal calves are stolen from their mothers and fed an iron-deficient formula that makes them so weak they eventually forget how to stand. And what about the pig? The ham that dominated your table yesterday at Easter? Imagine that you have been in a tiny steel prison for months. Every natural desire is thwarted. Every attempt to fulfill deeply-held instincts is denied. Life is worthless. And your life is considered worthless by the humans just waiting for you to die. They are doing to you what they would loathe. They are doing to you what they pray not be done to them.

"This ham is to die for." And be to beaten back with a metal rod when you rattle your cage door. To be forced to stand still when your legs want to run, until you become so lame you cannot walk a step. To be kicked and rammed when you fall down. To be in constant physical pain. To be defeated at every turn until you give up. To want mercy but receive ridicule. To seek friendship but be shoved into isolation.

Whoever knowingly partakes of the products of such torture is worse than the people who commit it. You won't even look the suffering victim in the eye. Because it is upsetting to you. You know it is wrong but instead of stopping it you pay someone else to do it. Your hands are clean but your soul is stained with blood. Greed is a deadly sin. The pig died for your sin.

It is bad enough that we ruthlessly kill so many animals; that we breed them just to slaughter them a year later, or, in the case of broiler chickens, just seven weeks later — a fraction of their normal life span. But the real shame is that we treat the animals so miserably that death — or not being born — is the kinder alternative.

"To ill-treat animals and make them suffer without reason is an act of deplorable cruelty to be condemned from a Christian point of view." -- 1966 Vatican newspaper.

To all who eat animals: When you were five years old, you treated animals nicely. You may have a had a favorite pet. Or you were delighted by Winnie the Pooh and Piglet. The animals were your friends. They're ready to be your friends still. But you won't let them. You torture them instead. Visit an animal sanctuary or an animal shelter. Resurrect the kindness that you had for all creatures when you were five. They're as wonderful and mysterious and communicative and good-natured as they were then. They haven't changed; you have. Do unto them as you would have them do unto you. Don't eat them. As God gave you life, and you are created in God's image, give them life. The rewards are immense.

This Sunday, like many other days, most of us will give thanks to God for letting us eat the corpse of a horribly mistreated animal. The notion that God approves of our forcing lifelong suffering on farm animals because we like the taste of their flesh is perverse. God preaches love, mercy, and humility. He prescribed a vegetarian diet and filled the earth with sufficient herbs, grains, and seeds to allow us to fulfill that mandate. He put souls, feelings, desires, and His own breath in every animal. They're not tools; they're lives with their own interests. They seek happiness but suffer unendingly at our hands. They're raised in the most inhospitable, confining conditions and killed by methods more brutal than you can imagine. If we wanted to make God cry, this is how we would do it. We shouldn't be thanking God when we make a mockery of His Creation; we should apologize.

---

This next article is from PETA. I would imagine that some of you, especially casual surfers temporarily marooned on this site because of a search engine, were not planning on reading PETA material on Easter weekend. But as long as you're here, please read on. I think they did a fantastic job of exposing the incongruity between celebrating the Prince of Peace and dining on the products of extreme violence.

The entire article is here, and contains useful links to sites that offer vegetarian holiday food and recipes. But I will reprint most of it below, since PETA has a no-copyright policy:


Ask yourself: does it make sense to celebrate Jesus, who embodies goodness, by putting animals through Hell?

---

This article is from www.episcoveg.com. A small and not-very-still voice within the Christian Community is recognizing our obligation toward all God's creatures, not just one species. The voice is just a whisper so far, but its truths speak volumes. In our treatment of animals, especially the ones hidden in factory farm sheds and cages outside public view, we have sinned terribly. We have not shown the slightest mercy towards gentle creatures who only want a normal life but instead know nothing but agony. The beauty of redemption is that we can make amends and forge a more harmonious relationship with Creation at any time — including today. The rewards would be glorious. Give it a try.

---

Lent is nearly over, so perhaps this comment is for next year. But maybe not. For Lent, consider giving up something which is wrong in and of itself. It doesn't have to be a food, by the way; it can be a habit. Doing without chocolate is easy. Doing without prejudice or selfishness is profoundly more meaningful and directly benefits those around you. Doing without meat spares innocent creatures from a painful and joyless life. When Lent ends, you don't have to resume the harmful behaviors. Each Lent, you can permanently improve yourself by discarding aspects of your life that hurt people or animals — God's Creation. Eat all the chocolate you want. (Especially dark chocolate, which is the only kind of chocolate that does not harm animals.)

---

You can start the next step in your spiritual growth at Easter dinner.

---

Part of a conversation I heard between my friend Marcy who is vegetarian, and her sister Carrie, who is not.

Marcie:	So what are you having for dinner?
Carrie:	Artichokes.
Marcie:	Is that all?
Carrie:	Well, Chris [Carrie's husband] is having chicken, but I'm not. It is Good Friday, you know.
Marcie:	For me, since I don't eat meat, every day is Good Friday. But I eat a lot more than artichokes for dinner!

---

Have a happy and joyous Easter. Be pro-life and explore some wonderful vegetarian options. Feast without cruelty. God and His Creatures will approve, I assure you.

---

Additional resources:

An Easter E-card.

Dear God: Thank You For the Gift. We Killed Her.

From a PETA article last year:








For tasty, healthful vegetarian alternatives:

Carpé Diem! for a Delectable Easter Meal

Vegetarian Holiday Cooking

Veg Cooking / Easy, Elegant Easter Dinner

The worst part of the Canadian seal hunt will start in a few days. It's a brutal, bloody, and cowardly massacre. Almost all the victims are under four weeks old. They're still babies. They're clubbed to death in front of their mothers. If they try to crawl to the safety of the water, they're shot.

The seal killers, subsidized by the Canadian government, claim that the seals have depleted the cod. False. Seals and cod have co-existed for millions of years. In fact, seals eat many significant predators of cod. Human overfishing and indiscriminate killing of marine life have destroyed delicate ecosystems that allow many interdependent species to thrive. Pollution, habitat destruction, and climate change make the situation worse. We and not the seals are the culprits for the decline in cod populations.

Money talks. If the sealers realize that they can't sell their primary products — cod, mackerel, crabs, and other seafood exports — to the public unless they call off the seal hunt, that may be the ONLY thing, at least in the short term, that brings about change. If you eat seafood or take omega-3 supplements, you can help the seals by boycotting seafood that comes from Atlantic Canada. This page provides useful details about how to determine the origin of seafood products and avoid them if they're from that region.

You can also print and mail this petition, which calls on Canadian officials to stop the seal slaughter on grounds that it is unnecessary and immoral. You don't need ten signatures; one will do.

Two quick answers to common questions from skeptics:


There's strength in numbers. Please let friends, family, and co-workers know about the brutality and scope of the seal hunt. Most people have only a vague inkling that somewhere some seals may be hunted. They don't know that 300,000 of them will be struck on the head with a sharp metal club. They have no idea that up to 40 percent of the seals are skinned alive. They don't realize that the youngest victims are 12 days old and unable to swim. Once people know the ugly facts about the seal hunt, they are disgusted by it and are moved to help end this senseless slaughter.

---

Related resources:

An Activist From Newfoundland

Martin Sheen Speaks Out Against the Seal Hunt

One of my favorite veggie foods is GardenBurger Riblets. They taste like barbecued ribs. I've introduced a number of hard-core meat eaters to Riblets and they all liked it. You can cook them in the microwave but you can also grill them. They're a great thing to bring to a potluck-style barbecue.

Now the Riblet has some competition: LightLife Smart BBQ. This stuff tastes just like pork barbecue. I know because I used to eat it. But just to make sure, I had some carnivores try it. Very close match, they said. They were surprised but I wasn't. You can make soy taste like anything. Think of soy as a substrate that soaks up flavorings. Distasteful as it is to think about, no one eats raw pig or even cooked pig with no seasoning. It's the sauce and spices that give barbecue its distinctive flavor.

I hate to admit it, since I'm such a fan of GardenBurger, but Smart BBQ has a couple of advantages over Riblets. It's extremely easy to cook. Nuke it for about a minute and a half (at least in my microwave, which one person described as merely a "high-powered toaster"), pour it out of the bag. That's it! It also has considerably less salt than Riblets.

I like to fix it North Carolina style: put the Smart BBQ on a bun and top it with cole slaw. As far as side dishes go — the sky's the limit. Give Smart BBQ a try, let me know what you served with it.

You can find LightLife foods in most major grocery stores, e.g., Safeway, Kroger, Ukrops, Publix, Albertsons, Whole Foods. Many health food stores also carry the brand. If your store doesn't have this product, ask. I'll bet it sells well once they stock it.

Attention, non-vegetarians: according to surveys, about a third of you are looking to reduce your meat consumption for health reasons. Welcome aboard! With products like this, you can have the tastes you're accustomed to, but with no cholesterol and much less environmental damage.

Public Service Announcement: You know I must say this because it is of utmost importance to me. Pigs are amazing animals. They're smart, they're friendly, I think they're beautiful in their own porcine way. I've said it here before: you haven't lived until you've rubbed a pig's belly and heard him (or her) snort happily in approval. Pigs have tons of personality — when they're not stuck in a cage! We've given pigs a raw deal. We take the intelligent, playful sow and confine her to a tiny "gestation crate" where she can barely move. She's constantly impregnated. Her piglets are taken away when they're as young as 10 days old, and the sow is re-impregnated. She just goes crazy. We make her life Hell. Transport to the slaughterhouse is a death ride —literally. The pigs are crammed into the truck as tight as possible. Ones who resist are shoved with an electronic prod. They're given no food or water. According to the pork industry's own figures, more than 100,000 pigs die in transport each year and 400,000 are crippled. At the slaughterhouse, because line speeds are so fast — to squeeze every penny of profit from the process —it is impossible to properly stun all the pigs; some are alive and squealing at the top of their lungs as they're dunked into scalding hot water that burns off all their hair and changes the texture of their skin. I know you don't want to hear this. Good. Then make it stop. Enjoy Smart BBQ and the hundred other meat substitutes out there. Good-tasting, filling food, and you don't have to make excuses to your heart or to your conscience; you don't have to drive away troublesome thoughts about where the food came from.

---

Related posts later this month and into next month: Hints on moving away from a meat-centered diet; Are "humane farms" humane?; What motivates people to become vegetarians and vegans?

---

Additional resources:

Vegetarian Food More Popular — more of a press release than an unbiased news story, but still worthwhile.

Factory Pork Production — don't read this while eating. Hope it helps keep you committed to dropping pork from the menu.

These next links are places you can visit, to see happy pigs up close — and rub their bellies!

Mini-Pigs Sanctuary, Culpepper, Virginia

Pigs Peace Sanctuary, Stanwood, Washington

Poplar Spring Animal Sanctuary, Poolesville, MD. One of my highest recommended destinations in the greater Washington, DC area.

Pigs, a Sanctuary, Shepherdstown, West Virginia

Most of the sanctuaries that feature pigs also take in other farm and companion animals. These places are run by good hearted people who can't stand to see any animal being mistreated or abused. Running a sanctuary is hard work and expensive. Please leave a generous donation at the end of your visit.

---

Last but defintitely not least: The Pig Farmer is an amazing story about a man who gave himself and the animals he loved a second chance.

"Their hair stands on end, they urinate on themselves, and they shake, just as we do when frightened out of our minds with the propsect of being hurt or killed."

-- Reason 22 to go vegetarian on Chew On This

Where can I find vegan food?

Safeway.

Are those leather shoes?

No.

What about plants?

Plants have no nervous system. If you eat meat, you kill more plants than if you're a vegetarian. If you care about plants' pain, then the animals' suffering in factory farms must bother you.

What about wool?

Cruel once you know the details.

Where do you draw the line?

Let's draw it as low as possible.

It's impossible to not kill animals; simply by living we kill animals.

The goal is not perfection but making kind choices.

Why should I care about chickens?

Because you're a good person and you have a hand in whether they suffer.

What about humans?

Care about humans and animals. Helping animals helps humans in many ways and makes you a better person all around.

Don't tell me what to do.

I try not to, but if you are contributing to extreme pain and suffering — knowingly or unknowingly — I am compelled to tell you about it. I am obligated to help the victims who have no voice. I prefer to enlighten you and have you decide on your own to do the right thing. But as you know some acts must be outlawed.

Animal rights activists are all rich white kids.

Short answer: irrelevant.

Longer answer: It's basically the same demographic as the human rights activists. Strong representation of women at all levels. Some of the most prominent spokespersons are Alice Walker, Richard Pryor, and top Hispanic models. But look at it worldwide: there are animal rights groups in Spain, Iraq, Israel, India, China, and every place in between. Animals are horribly abused and tortured no matter what my color or ethnicity is.

PETA is an extremist group.

Foie gras is extreme. Battery cages are extreme. Pig gestation crates are extreme. The conditions inside a chicken slaughterhouse are extreme. Spend one hour in there, and one hour in a pig factory farm, and you'll be an "extremist." You want to see extreme right now? Watch "Meat Your Meat."

I don't want to hear about it.

I don't want it to occur.

Why do some people become animal rights advocates? What causes them to connect so strongly with animal victims of cruelty?

What makes them sense the terror and brutality of the animals' final moments when they see a fur coat? What compels them to lock eyes in sympathy with the caged bear, when everyone else walks right past him, amused by his "antics?"

How do they cope with the deluge of commercials for KFC, knowing that every day frightened birds are scalded alive on their way to becoming KFC meals?

---

Why do people who eat animals say "I don't want to hear about it" when you bring up the suffering they know they cause?

Why do meat-eaters who pray fervently for peace ignore the screams of terror in the slaughterhouse? Is it easy to condemn other people's violence but not your own?

---

Why do psychology professors perform maternal deprivation studies on baby monkeys decade after decade? Is it obsessive-compulsive behavior or neurosis? Are they in denial, believing that these contrived exercises actually prove something? Are they sadistic? Who's studying the scientists?

---

Related resource:

http://www.bizarro.com/vegan/vegan_cartoon07.htm

Modern heart surgery is the culmination of centuries of clinical observation, steadily increasing knowledge of the human cardiovascular system, refined techniques, breakthroughs in technology, and occasional serendipity. Animal experiments have been superfluous at best and fatally misleading at worst.

In the 1800s, clinical observations indicated that veins could be sewn to each other or to an artery. Surgeons tried the technique on rabbits, but the rabbits died. Despite the dismal results, physicians retained faith that the operation could be performed successfully on humans; this was finally accomplished in 1897. This surgical maneuver is called vascular anastomosis and is widely used in heart surgery.

Alexis Carrel won the Nobel Prize in 1912 for perfecting the above surgery. He honed his technique on human cadavers. Previously he had experimented on dogs, using transplanted organs, but the dogs' bodies rejected the organs. Carrel acknowledged that his work was motivated by studying earlier surgeons.

In the early 1900s, surgeons surmised that a vein could withstand arterial blood flow. They reached this conclusion from observing that occasionally in the human body there is a connection between a vein and an artery. Subsequent animal experiments "proved" that veins were not up to the task. But observation of hearts in deceased human beings led surgeons to believe that they could remove a damaged portion of an artery and replace it with a spliced-in section of vein. The operation was a success and paved the way for today's bypass surgeries.

A type of operation called the femoral-popliteal bypass was developed in the 1940s. It was delayed by experiments on dogs. In dogs, the replacement vein dilates and an aneurysm forms. Not so in humans. However, the dog data prevented many surgeons from applying vein grafts in humans. Which is unfortunate, since removing a portion of artery is much more dangerous.

In 1929, Dr. Werner Forssman, a German urologist, used his own forearm and veins leading to his heart to develop cardiac catheterization. He experimented on himself despite the fact that his previous attempts on rabbits, using the same method, had been failures. In the decades following, others in clinical settings expanded on Foorsman's precedent. Cardiac catheters allow physicians to monitor blood pressure in the heart, and the amount and rate of blood pumped out of the heart, which are important measurements during surgery. After Dr. Forssman proved that cardiac catheterization worked in humans, his funding for continued experiments was cut off until the concept could be "validated" with animal experiments. Absurd but typical.

Angioplasty — inserting a catheter in a blocked blood vessel — was discovered by accident, by a physician tending to a human patient. After it worked successfully in humans, it was also tested on dogs and pigs. The animal tests were superfluous, but the animal experiment lobby takes credit for angioplasty.

Autopsies showed that humans could survive puncture wounds to the heart; hence the heart was operable.

In the 1930s through 1950s, animal experimenters saw that tying off an artery in a dogs' chest increased blood flow to occluded arteries in the heart. When they tried it on humans, the results were significantly different.

In 1938, Carroll, Lindbergh, and Tuffier created the first heart-lung bypass device, also known as a cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) machine, which enables surgeons to keep blood flowing in the patient's body as they operate on the heart. They tested the device on dogs but not on humans. In 1951 a CPB machine that had been tested extensively on dogs was tried on a human; the patient died. Dr. John H. Gibbon also built a CPB machine. In 1953, based on years of animal tests, he was convinced that the machine was ready for human patients. Two out of three people died. Gibbon abandoned his work on the CPB machine and just gave up. Nonetheless, he is usually the one credited with the invention of the CPB machine.

Dr. Anthony Andreasen noticed that injured soldiers with very low blood volumes could live for a long time. Dr. Walter Lillihei and physicians associated with the Mayo Clinic responded by revising the CPB machine so that it pumped lower levels of blood — directly contradicting the notion borne from animal tests that the machine must make large volumes of blood available. The lower levels of blood were one of the keys that enabled humans hooked up to the machine to survive the operation. Lillihei's initial success rates were poor but quickly improved as he revised techniques that had worked in animals but not in humans. His biographer (another heart surgery pioneer), attributed the surgery advancements to "trial and error [on humans], recognition of unanticipated complications and the development of methods to manage these."

Dr. John Kirklin of the Mayo Clinic further refined the CPB machine. His initial tests had a poor success rate, but experience with human patients enabled him to correct extrapolation errors from animal experiments. Kirklin stated that the operating room provided the knowledge necessary to make the machine viable. In 1957-1958, using the Mayo Clinic CPB machine, which had been constructed based on human clinical trials, not animal tests, he corrected heart defects in 210 children — without a single death.


We use less oxygen when our body temperature drops, unlike dogs, which require more oxygen in the same circumstances. Reduced oxygen flow during heart operations was tried on dogs; they died. Dr. Bill Bigelow rejected the animal lab findings and used the same technique on human patients with success.

The Jarvick-7 artificial heart showed great promise in a calf but was a disaster in humans. According to published reports, the first mechanical heart patients suffered such pains that they begged to be allowed to die. That wish was refused.

A condition called Tetrology of Fallot (TOF) is one of the causes of "blue babies," who have too little blood going to the their lungs. The term derives from the fact that the insufficient blood flow is caused by four defects of the heart. Cardiologist Helen Taussig, Head of the Pediatric Cardiac Clinic of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, suggested a surgical correction to Dr. Alfred Blalock and Vivien Thomas. Blalock and Thomas practiced on dogs, as was the convention at the time. Blalock called the dog experiments "not very conclusive." He and Thomas could not accurately reproduce all four congenital heart defects in a dog's heart. But he proceeded anyway, based on his confidence in Taussig's, Thomas', and his surgical skills.

From Animal Research Takes Lives:


Dogs' propensity to develop blood clots around artificial heart valves delayed the release of this lifesaving technology.

At most of the top medical schools in the U.S., cardiologists in training have abandoned the dog lab in favor of superior, more relevant techniques. Not all of them are high-tech; for instance, students observe actual heart bypass operations. Duke University still uses the dog lab.

In England, surgeons stopped practicing surgery on animals in 1876.

---

This post focused on heart surgery. If we examine stroke and atherosclerosis research and development, we see the same pattern: animal experiments get in the way but its proponents portray them as vital contributors to medical knowledge. The uncritical public usually falls for that. That is a huge problem, but not insurmountable, and I'll discuss it over the next several months.

Ditto when we look at the history of how all the diseases and conditions that warrant the use of cardiac surgery in the first place were discovered. At nearly every juncture, the vivisectionsists take credit for advances in which they played no causal role.

Don't forget preventive measures. It's amazing how much human population studies, such as the long-running Framingham Heart Study, can reveal about the relationship between diet, exercise, habits, and heart health. If you ask me, what's most incredible is the degree to which we can "bypass" most bypass surgeries simply by eating a low-fat, vegetarian diet and increasing our physical activity. The most powerful cure happens to be free.

---

Here is a typical historical synopsis of a class of surgical procedures, as viewed by practicing physicians, nurses,and technicians. This one happens to be published by the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society. You don't have to understand every term in the article. But notice that each achievement is attributed to surgeons operating on and deriving conclusions from human patients. Each new advance in the field was tried on a human heart, human arteries, human anatomy. Outcomes, complications, and patient feedback are the "real thing," not a mock-up on a differently-organized species. Successes, failures, differences between men and women, or old and young patients — all of this is invaluable data that be synthesized by practicing cardiologists to improve surgical techniques and understanding of human disease and individual variations. If a new process works well, that's real information that surgeons can use. It is not like when a technique "works" in a rat and you can only guess if it will work the same in a human. When we need an operation, we don't go to a veterinarian.

---

---

For your thesis, instead of rats, use me. You can't torture me, but I'm willing to endure some stress. I can do mazes, but can also talk about my childhood, relate how I felt during last night's dream, interpret inkblots, and describe my relationships with people and animals.

I may not be the typical person (who is?), but at least I'm the same species as patients of practicing psychologists. Plus, no animals will be harmed in pursuit of your PhD.

I'm in the Washington, D.C. area. You can reach me at info@animalwritings.com.

(Later this week: A suggestion for a thesis.)

You mention in today's "Unconventional Wisdom" column that curious rats with cancer have better prognoses than non-curious rats. You also point out that it's difficult to extrapolate from rats to humans, and that we already have human studies of essentially the same phenomenon. So then why are we studying rats? It seems like a waste of money and unnecessary animal cruelty.

Followup question #1: Who approves these experiments (which are often funded by my tax dollars), and what's the criteria?

Followup question #2: Would it make more sense to, say, make hospital rooms more interesting, or encourage thoughtful interaction between cancer patients, and note the effect of those actions? Aside from eliminating extrapolation problems, the experiment itself would benefit actual patients.

Below, Jonathan Balcombe, Ph.D., and author of The Use of Animals in Higher Education, looks at a small sample of last year's smoking experiments on animals, to see if they added any insight to our knowledge about smoking's effects on human health. The following information is provided courtesy of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.


Often the redundancy of animal studies is admitted right in the study's report. For example, in an experiment where "smoking" rabbits were used to investigate lung disease, the researchers stated that "the data presented here confirm previous studies in humans."

"Confirm?" It doesn't confirm a thing. The answer is already known. If the rabbit data diverges from human data, does it then "deny" what we've thoroughly observed in humans? Does it cast doubt? Of course not. The results are inconsequential. This is not real science; it's psuedo-science tagging along on science's coattails.

Throughout the 1950s and 60s, experiments on a wide variety of animals failed to show a link between smoking and lung cancer, even as millions of smokers were dying from the disease. Does this not suggest that such experiments are useless? How bad does an animal experiment have to be to get rejected? I don't think there's a bottom limit. You would think that the National Institutes of Health, supposedly at the vanguard of science, would — by this time — totally reject any grant request to study tobacco smoke in animals. Instead, they keep funding these studies, year after year. They can't seem to quit.

Decades after the whole world has known that smoking is addictive and causes cancer, scientists are stuffing mice into narow tubes and forcing them to inhale tobacco smoke. How in God's name does one bring themselves to inflict such gratuitous pain on a tiny mouse? You can see with your own eyes that he's suffering. He shivers and defecates and convulses and tries with every fiber in his body to escape his trap. Why are we still conducting these cruel and scientifically pointless exercises?

Everything we know about the dangers of smoking has come from studying humans. In 1990, Surgeon General Antonia Novella stated that "smoking represents the most extensively documented case of disease ever investigated in the history of human research." Yet "researchers" at R.J. Reynolds, the University of California at Davis, Creighton University in Nebraska, and facilities throughout the world continue to pump tobacco smoke into the lungs of mice, rats, and other animals.

What is it like to make a living killing innocent creatures and lying about why you do it? Who are these scientists trying to convince?

Tyke never had a normal life. In the wild, she would be part of a close-knit herd. She would walk by her mother's side until well into her teens. The herd would be her family. She and the other members of the herd would eat, play, and take baths together, and protect each other from danger. They would roam over hundreds of acres of varied terrain, and sleep under African skies. When she got older, she would share in the child-rearing and have a calf of her own.

But Tyke never experienced any of that. She was trapped and taken away from her family when she was a baby. She was shipped to the circus. There, she was confined to a concrete room and beaten over and over, to break her spirit. Circus trainers hit her repeatedly with a sharp metal "bullhook," which made her cry out in pain. They struck her in her most sensitive areas: behind her ears, on top of her toes, in back of her knees, and around her anus. They wanted to hurt her and frighten her so she would be obedient.

She spent most of her time in chains, doing nothing. Her bones ached from no exercise. Her diet was monotonous. She stood in filth and excrement. She was deprived of every aspect of normal elephant life. She hated it.

She was in the Hawthorn circus, which had a track record of animal cruelty violations. In 1988, according to USDA documents, Tyke was beaten in public to the point where she was "screaming and bending down on three legs to avoid being hit." The trainer said he was "disciplining" her. By April of 1993, she had had enough. She tried to escape during a circus performance. She didn't make it. In July she tried to escape again; she was unsuccessful. Hawthorn should have retired her right then and there, as she was an obvious threat to the public. But they didn't.

For the next year she performed in the circus and lived in a barren concrete barn, chained, between shows. The bullhook beatings continued. Her life stank. She vacillated between terror and boredom. She was not really an elephant.

In August of 1994 Tyke reached a breaking point. She had been in the circus nearly 20 years. She was tired of being beaten, whipped, and kicked. She could no longer take the pain and the confinement. She was angry and wanted to be free. At an afternoon performance at the Neal Blaidsell Center in Honolulu, it all came to a head.

At some point during the show, she veered from the script. Circus staff tried to beat her back, but no bullhook or whip could stop the rage that had been building inside her for two decades. She crushed her trainer, Allen Campbell. She attacked two other people. She panicked the crowd. She ran into the streets. It was rush hour. She was disoriented and no idea where she was. She charged at bystanders and smashed cars as she made her way through several city blocks. Onlookers screamed. The police were called out and started shooting at Tyke with rifles.

She slowly fell over, then awkwardly stood back up. The police kept firing. Her head swayed, and her legs buckled. She got up again. The spray of bullets continued. She rocked her head violently from side to side. Her legs gave way once more. She was on her knees and could not right herself. Her eyes were fully open and confused. The shooting went on for several more seconds. Finally, she fell, very slowly, onto her side.

This was Tyke's final performance. The price of freedom from the circus was steep. She was shot 87 times.

---

The dogs are not so much the heroes of the Iditarod as its victims. It would be so much easier if they could talk. They would plead with us: "Please stop this madness. We don't want to be tortured heroes or martyrs. We want to be everyday companions, loved and respected for who we are, not because of how we can be manipulated to feed your obsessions. Take us out for fun runs, not insane long-distance punishment that kills and injures us. Please — end the culling! What an ugly term and horrid practice. Did God create so many imperfections in us that you have to shoot us? Are your standards higher than God's? Please don't twist our loyalty into servitude. Give us a break; we deserve it. Free us from these stinking chains."

But they can't talk, so we have to be their voices. We have to speak up for the overworked racers, and for the kennel dogs that are disposed of because they're too slow.

You are armed with the three most powerful weapons in the Western world: the truth, your compassion, and your wallet. I want to focus on the third item. You may not have as much money as the corporate Iditarod investors, but combined, we have much more. Please let the national sponsors of the Iditarod know that you cannot in good conscience buy any of their products as long as they provide financial support to the race. Corporate sponsors may be ignorant of the injuries and deaths caused by the Iditarod. More likely, they know about the race's cruelties but don't care; they just want the positive PR. Let them know that this strategy is backfiring.

Here are the email addresses for all the national sponsors, combined into one block that you can copy and paste into the "to" line of your email message. Please contact these companies. You don't have to write anything elaborate. Just one sentence can free a dog from a life sentence.

---

customer.service@iams.com; martink@wyeth.com; jhallin@standard.com; info@standard.com; danstrom@landmarkcom.com; investorrelations@rccl.com; deknutson@landolakes.com; feedback@olntv.com; Shareholders.IM@pg.com; jhong@safeway.com; investor.relations@blockbuster.com; contact.privacy@mcd.com; david@wkcpr.org; abuckelew@carnival.com; klane@weather.com; alfred.j.modugno@marsh.com; gmorgenstern@att.com; wford@ford.com; john.devine@gm.com; ombudsman@npr.org; lbremner@npr.org; jking@npr.org; Amy.Sherwood@Yum.com; alice.nathanson@effem.com; Chris.B.Ahearn@lowes.com; Jgilbert@udelhoven.com; myer@phcp.com; brad.bodenman@americanseafoods.com; ir.dcx@daimlerchrysler.com; heyer@na.ko.com; NewsOutback@OUTBACK.com; info@workman.com; investorrelations@wellsfargo.com; marketing@mill-cop.com; kroger.investors@kroger.com; gisx@mindspring.com; ssolomon@dixieline.com; jmenaker@webershandwick.com; pubaffmr@chevrontexaco.com; today@nbc.com; amy_banse@comcast.com; enterprise.comments@exxonmobil.com; leo.kiely@coors.com; chendricks@mcclatchy.com; employment@providence.org; dealersales@highsmith.com; chris.jones@effem.com; wmcalduff@wilmington.k12.ma.us; careers@princesscruises.com; investor_relations@scholastic.com; Customer.Service@cabelas.com; sales@gitsat.com; info@annamaet.com; jdc@eaglepack.com; info@breg.com; info@dogbooties.com; international@grabberwarmers.com; info@blackwoodpetfood.com; redpaw@cheqnet.net; gene@motosolutions.com; steve.yager@nacs.k12.in.us; sales@edmundoptics.com; info@adfinc.com; feedback@amnutrition.com; webmaster@arcticcat.com; investorrelations@gandermountain.com; tim_fitzpatrick@comcast.com; sdougherty@cirrusdesign.com; rstewart@borton.com; info@whs-tools.com; MarkS@IcicleSeafoods.com; wilderinfo@wilderconstruction.com; mboyter@weather.com; publicaffairs@anadarko.com; dawn.mccall@discovery.com; viewer@pbs.org; jmoses@elderhostel.org; gunter.thielen@bertelsmann.de; polson@randomhouse.com; mspring@wiley.com; ecousens@wiley.com;atpinfo@avalonpub.com; jsisk@rowmanlittlefield.com; sdisney@mail.valpo.k12.in.us; mgoad@ctsd.k12.nj.us; info@dhblattner.com; info@adventureunlimited.org; STEVESI@d11.org; rick@unitedrailroad.net; pat@seniorsojourns.com; barsenault@wilmington.k12.ma.us; sales@ophirgold.com; franchising@batteriesplus.com; rputney@grossmanchev.com; info@multi-pak.com; info@royalcanin.us; contact@propacpetfood.com; beaversports@beaversports.com; info@mttravel.com; bill@billhansonattorney.com; ragnar.evensen@afgruppen.no; wear@wolfsongadventures.com; HCC19@aol.com; scottz@PETPLACE.COM; ir@alaskaair.com; wosport@aol.com; info@toofar.com; editor_1@achievement.org; presse@langenscheidt.de; chad.haight@sasquatchbooks.com; jobs@roughguides.co.uk; marilyn.ducksworth@us.penguingroup.com; mstewart@marthastewart.com; emailbag@timeforkids.com; leepinliz@bridgeband.com; juneymoon@email.msn.com; Solutions@ReflectivelyYOURS.com; sales@innisbrook.com; windigo@cheqnet.net; info@coldspotfeeds.com; alliage.com@wanadoo.fr; bob.dotson@nbc.com; leonce@avalonpub.com

(Note: During the 2004 Iditarod race, Iams sponsored Kjetil Backen of "Team Norway." One of Backen's dogs died during the race, apparently from exhaustion. Another had to drop out because of tendonitis, almost certainly caused by the strain of excessive mushing. Undeterred, Iams — a dog food company — has renewed its sponsorship this year.)

---

The Iditarod is not pro-dog; it kills them. Money from sponsors helps finance the giant Iditarod marketing machine — the one that never admits that the race, and all that leads up to it, causes animals to suffer and die. What a horrible betrayal of our most trustworthy companions.

The Anchorage Daily News is one of the Iditarod's chief sponsors, and one of the biggest beneficiaries of Iditarod-related advertising. Their news coverage of the Iditarod is more like a pep rally; nothing negative. Lots of feel-good fluff; how mushers take such care of their dogs and so forth. Where's the investigative report on dogs that get pneumonia, gastric ulcers, and infections — common side effects of the Iditarod? How about a piece on kennel owners that shoot disabled dogs? Imagine what that would do to advertising revenue.

Alaska media outlets that have an interest in the Iditarod's popularity — that would be all of them — repeat the lie that sled dogs in the Iditarod are like humans running a marathon. Human athletes take calculated risks with informed consent, on their own accord. Sled dogs are literally roped into the Iditarod. They can't opt out. Show me a dog that runs 1100 miles over a 9-day stretch all on his own.

Criticism of the race is not tolerated by the Alaska press. Mention the Iditarod dogs that choke on their own vomit, or that die from bleeding ulcers brought on from overmedication, and you're guaranteed to bring on the wrath of the true believers. It's like criticizing a cult. How dare we defame the brave canine heroes and their proud mushers? If we don't like the Iditarod, we obviously don't understand it. This is the same mentality that defends cockfighting as an honorable "tradition", that denies the use of electronic prods in rodeos, and that gushes over the happy circus elephants — kidnapped and in chains. There's no cruelty in the Iditarod like there's no cruelty at Ringling.

One recent column in the Anchorage Daily News talked — glowingly, of course — about a dog that had been in the Iditarod nine times, and used that as evidence that dogs like the event — proving that no illogic is too crazy to be used in Iditarod marketing. I expect to see an editorial in the future about how dogs are dying to run in the race.

Another piece in the same paper lamented the recent death of a sled dog that was stomped to death by a moose. As always, the misfortune was presented as random and unavoidable. As always, not one question was raised about the culpability of the musher. The victim was tethered and unable to flee. He was probably worn out from "trudging" through the soft snow. He may have been cold and hungry as well. The temperature was 50 degrees below zero. More tragedy on the torturous trail.

Going out for a fun run, then coming in to be petted in a comfortable warm house is one thing. The punishing training regimen of the Iditarod is quite another. Yes, accidents do happen. But anyone who would enter their dogs in the Iditarod has shown that they would compromise the welfare of their animals and recklessly endanger their health. These people need to be scorned, perhaps helped, not heaped with adulation. But the local press refuses to acknowledge the considerable risks, and irresponsibility, of making dogs run such an insane distance. The rising Iditarod death toll — the dogs who die from the rigors of the race, as well as the puppies that are killed because they don't make the cut — is largely the media's fault. They're the cheerleaders who heap praise on the mushers year after year, who urge them on regardless of the consequences, who censure anyone who might point out that the Emperor's not wearing any clothes.

Most disgusting is the propaganda aimed at children. It's crucial that the race committee get to kids early, while they're at their most impressionable, in order to ensure continued hero worship and financial support. Iditarod promotional packs, disguised as educational materials, present the race as a giant Disney movie: proud, brave mushers who love their dogs and inspire them to victory. Mixed in with the teaching kits are pitches for Iditarod books and souvenirs. As you might expect, there's nothing in the materials about all the dogs that have died in the race. Nothing about how fluid collects in the dogs' lungs. No photographs of injured dogs limping or falling. Nothing about the effect of long-term chaining on a dog's quality of life. No mention of "culling." Nothing about the abuse and cover-ups that are central to the entire Iditarod enterprise from beginning to end. After all, if the kids knew the truth, they would bitterly complain about the race instead of holding fundraisers.

Attention parents: You don't want your children being lied to so they'll support animal cruelty. Find out if your school is in any way involved with pro-Iditarod activities. If so, please complain to the principal. Let him or her know that the Iditarod would be illegal in 38 states. Copy and paste this text, a first-hand account of Iditarod musher brutality by author Gary Paulsen:

"All the time he was kicking the dog. Not with the imprecision of anger, the kicks, not kicks to match his rage but aimed, clinical vicious kicks. Kicks meant to hurt deeply, to cause serious injury. Kicks meant to kill." The dog died.

---

"I hope there will be plenty of cameras at the finish line so everybody can see pictures of the sled dogs when they limp across the finish line. I'd like the public to see videos of the dogs the day after the race, too. Let the public see for themselves that the poor sled dogs are innocent victims. My heart aches for them.

I want to be remembered as a kid who cares about the Iditarod dogs. My heart aches knowing that this horrible race is going to happen soon. I cannot imagine that any people are happy about it. If falling to my knees and crying a river of tears would make people stop the Iditarod race ... it will be done.

No Iditarod For Me,

Kayla - aka Little She Wolf Warrior Woman"

AKidWhoCares@aol.com