Science

The Human Cost of Vivisection: The Public Needs to Understand

| by

Shannon Morgan and I initiated the following communication with vocal vivisectors and their spokespersons about the injuries and deaths incurred by people as a direct result of animal experimentation. Unfortunately, answers will never be offered by the parties in this communication without a public outcry.

 

From: Shannon Morgan & Camille Marino

To: “Tom Holder” <[email protected]>, “Jackie Calnan” <[email protected]>, “Dario L. Ringach” <[email protected]>, “J. David Jentsch” <[email protected]>, “Frankie Trull” <[email protected]>, “Richard W. Bianco” <[email protected]>, “Earle M. Holland” <[email protected]>, “Paul M. Browne” <[email protected]>, “Thomas Mattia” <[email protected]>

The multi-national pharmaceutical companies in conjunction with the animal experimentation industries, who euphemistically refer to their  business as “medical research,”  refuse to discuss the true nature of  the horrors to which lab animals are subjected. Typically, any question  is answered by citing the Animal Welfare Act which regulates allowable pain, injury, and death (i.e., torment which is statutorily defined as “humane”) for 10% of lab animals and  conveniently excludes 90% of all test subjects from any form of  protection. It is futile to pursue this line of questioning.

But, since vivisection largely profits from taxpayer-funded NIH  awards, the public has a right to understand exactly what they are directly financing. There are countless human tragedies that result from the industry’s insistence on extrapolating results from animal models and attempting to apply them to people. We regularly hear about new class action law suits resulting from the human experiments that begin after  animal-experiment-approved products are marketed. For example, there is a wealth of research available citing dangerous medicine or a myriad of other disasters.

The vivisection networks spend billions of dollars to keep us — the   public — ignorant and powerless. They must ensure our  moral   acquiescence or risk an absolute loss of public support and taxpayer money. A  standard catch-all industry response is that animal torture in labs is  “humane” and  necessary to advance medical science and, as far as we know, the first rule  of medicine is  “do no harm.”

Yet, people are routinely injured, maimed,  poisoned, left in  vegetative states, and killed. The consequent law  suits are simply a  cost of doing business — it is not a function of  medicine or science.  Simply put, vivisectors, their spokespersons, and  assorted  animal-experiment enthusiasts murder for money. They murder animals and they murder people. They all  profit  while we pay for these atrocities with our taxes and, therefore, we must demand an answer to a single question:

If animal experimentation is necessary and  effective, why are so many people consistently injured and killed? It appears to us that human and nonhuman casualties are simply a negligible operating cost.

We have addressed this email to several vivisection lobbyists,  spokespersons, and activists and included a brief bio for each person below. We are hoping that by publishing our letter in a public forum, one of these people may be compelled to  addresss this serious, and deliberately shrouded, issue — the human cost of  vivisection.

The public is funding these experiments. The public demands and is entitled to answers.

Warm regards,

Shannon Morgan (Co-President, Animal Connection of Texas) &

Camille Marino (Founder & Senior Editor, Negotiation Is Over)

Brief Bio of Each Recipient:

Frankie Trull – [email protected]
Founder & President, Foundation for Biomedical Research; Lobbyist
promotes “public understanding” yet she has no education or experience in medicine or science

Richard W. Bianco – [email protected]
Associate Professor of Surgery, University of Minnesota
To help Trull manipulate “public understanding,” Bianco believes that “if we could get a celebrity, that would change everything.”

Jackie Calnan – [email protected]
President, Americans for Medical Progress (AMP)
Multi-national corporations that profit from vivisection (e.g., Pfizer, Abbott Labs, GlaxoSmithKline, Wyeth, Charles River) comprise the Board of Directors; they award fellowships to lay people who in turn become vivisection propagandists.

Earle M. Holland – [email protected]
Vivisection Public Relations, Ohio State University
Sits on the AMP Board of Directors
Holland excuses the violations, torture, and murders of hundreds of animals at Ohio State and the NIH rewarded those crimes with $34 million from taxpayers.

Tom Holder – [email protected]
Spokesperson, UCLA’s Pro-Test for Science
AMP paid Holder to move from U.K. and financed the inception of Speaking of Research (the public relations arm of UCLA Pro-Test)
Like most paid industry spokespersons, Holder has no scientific education or knowledge. He claims that he advocates animal abuse “for my health.”

Paul Browne – [email protected]
Sits on the Speaking of Research Committee
He is a science blogger who joined this group of vivisectors because he was “tired of seeing the half-truths and misinformation” going “unchallenged in the press”. Here is the second opportunity I am offering him to fulfill this goal.

J. David Jentsch – [email protected]
UCLA Vivisector, Co-Founder of Pro-Test for Science
addicts animals, including nonhuman primates, to illegal narcotics
the NIH awards Jentsch/UCLA hundreds of thousands of our tax dollars annually to repeat and refine his methods of creating insanity and physical debilitation in his victims.

Dario L. Ringach – [email protected]
UCLA Vivisector, Co-Founder of Pro-Test for Science
the NIH awards Ringach/UCLA hundreds of thousands of our tax dollars annually to restrain, blind, and murder animals which would explain his vocal position: “I fully support and defend the use of animals (including primates) in responsible biomedical research.”

Thomas Mattia – [email protected]
Chief Communications Officer, Yale University
Yale’s vivisection spokesperson has no scientific background. But, in 2007, the Coca-Cola executive brought them a wealth of information about soft drinks.

.