Monthly Archives: November 2000

Research on Sea Squirts Might Aid Infertility Research

Posted on by
Reply

Animal rights activists like to claim that medical research on non-humans is pointless since non-humans are too different from human beings. While there are massive differences, which researchers take into account, it is amazing just how much human physiology has in common with something as tiny as the tiny sea squirt. Specifically, the sea squirts reproductive system is very similar to that of human beings and researchers at Newcastle University are hoping that studying the sea squirt might reveal important clues to better understanding human reproduction and, more specifically, some of the causes of infertility.

In this case researchers are examining how the sperm of sea squirts fertilizes eggs. Researchers hope that they will be able to isolate the protein present in the sperm that initiates the fertilization process. Surprisingly there are still very large unknowns about how this process proceeds in human beings.

One of the problems with studying the problem in human beings are legal and ethical issues in experimenting on human eggs and sperm, as well as difficulties in screening human sperm and eggs for any number of diseases that might affect the results of the experiment. “We think we have nicely circumvented all those problems by going after the sea squirt activating factor first,” Dr. Keith Jones told the BBC. “We are hoping that we can identify the factor within a couple of years, and hopefully we can come up with the human equivalent within a matter of months.”

Source:

Sea squirts aid fertility research. The BBC, November 23, 2000.

Researchers Cure Type I Diabetes In Mice

Posted on by
Reply

Researchers at Yonsei University in Korea and the University of Calgary in Canada recently announced they had developed a gene therapy cure for mice suffering from type I insulin. In type I insulin, which afflicts millions of people, the body doesn’t produce enough insulin because the insulin-producing beta cells within the pancreas are destroyed.

The genetic therapy cure involved injecting mice with a virus that contained a gene designed to spur insulin production. After receiving the treatment, the animals’ blood sugar levels remained stable for the eight month period of the study.

Because of differences in mouse and human physiology, there are still enormous obstacles that would have to be overcome before such gene therapy could be a viable treatment option in human beings. It is an important first step in that direction. It wasn’t too long ago that proof that genetically modified cells could be made to produce insulin was heralded as an important step forward. Now by demonstrating that complex organisms such as mice can be successfully treated in this way provides enormous hope that this century will likely be the last in which type I diabetes is a significant health problem.

Jerrold Olefsky of the University of California-San Diego, in a commentary on the research published in Nature, wrote that, “Despite these issues, the paper represents a good example of how basic research can applied to problems of clinical significance.”

And also a prime example of why basic research on animal models must continue.

Source:

Gene therapy used to cure rodents with diabetes. Reuters, November 23, 2000.

Fur Farms Banned in Britain

Posted on by
Reply

The bill to ban fur farming the Great Britain is essentially a done deal. The 13 fur farms left in Great Britain will have to shut down by 2003; though the bill provides ample compensation for the remaining few fur farms. Ironically the ban on fur farming comes at a time when fur is making a comeback on the world fashion stage including in the United Kingdom.

In fact, the thing that comes through loud and clear about the use of fur is that animal rights activists have had almost no impact on the world fur market. Take mink, for example. In 1980, 22 million mink pelts were produced worldwide. After a boom in the 1980s that saw almost 42 million pelts produced in 1988, mink production crashed to an all-time low of 20.4 million in 1993 — due in large measure to the world-wide recession of the late 1980s. By 1997, however, world mink production had climbed back to 26.3 million pelts (although economic downturns in Russia likely lowered world production in 1998-1999).

As Richard North points out, the reality is that fur and fur farming is important only to a relatively small portion of the public. In large measure that is because the animal rights activists in their campaign against fur are inevitably forced into what Adrian Morrison calls the “muddled middle.” An editorial in the Daily Telegraph put this problem succinctly.

In singling out fur-farming for destruction, Miss [Maria] Eagle [the sponsor of the anti-fur farm bill] is trying to distinguish mink from cows, sheep, pigs and all the other animals that are farmed and slaughtered in this country. There is no real distinction: we eat or wear body parts from all these animals. … By all means let animal rights activists search out extreme brutalities in any farming process — and fur farming is no more brutal than other livestock farming — but it is wrong to demonise a particular process because of some perceived wrong in the people who wear the product.

As their noble lordships put on their cowhide shoes today, tied the cocoons of a thousand silkworms around their necks and arrange the fur of that norther stoat — the ermine — above their collars, they might do well to consider why the mink gets off so lightly.

Sources:

Fur should fly. The Daily Telegraph (London), November 13, 2000

The question for all dedicated followers of fashion: can they stomach the rage for fur? Mary Braid, the Independent (London), November 4, 2000.

Fur and Freedom: in defence of the fur trade. Richard North, Institute for Economic Affairs, January 2000.

PETA and Undercover Operative Sued by Veterinarian

Posted on by
1

The last year has seen a dramatic turnaround in the case of New Jersey veterinarian Howard Baker who was originally convicted of animal cruelty charges only to have his conviction vacated by an appeals court. Now, Baker is turning the tables on his accusers by suing People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and one of its undercover investigators for defamation.

The imbroglio started when Michelle Rokke was hired by Baker to work at his veterinary clinic. Rokke is a career animal rights activist who has worked with PETA on a number of hidden camera exposes. Rokke was involved, for example, in a recent undercover investigation of Huntingdon Life Sciences.

In that case Huntingdon sued PETA and Rokke after Rokke, among other things, stole over 8,000 documents from HLS. Eventually the two parties settled that lawsuit out of court with PETA agreeing to stop claiming that Rokke turned up evidence of animal abuse at the laboratory.

Rokke claims she went to work at Baker’s office simply to learn how to care for animals, but it didn’t take her long to start smuggling a hidden camera in to work in a purse over a 10-month period looking to collect evidence of animal abuse. The videotapes she made while working for Baker eventually formed the core of a case of criminal animal abuse that resulted in Baker’s conviction.

That conviction was thrown out by a New Jersey appellate court, however, and Baker charged that not only did Rokke lie about what happened in his office, but that she and PETA selectively edited the videotapes to hide the context of his actions (whether or not this is true in Baker’s case, PETA has a long history of selectively editing such videotapes.)

Now Baker has filed a suit against Rokke and PETA saying that PETA defamed him. This isn’t the first time that PETA has faced such a lawsuit. Animal trainer Bobby Berosini won a judgment against PETA after it distributed videotapes of him disciplining orangutans that were part of a live Las Vegas act. That judgment, however, was later reversed by the Nevada Supreme Court.

Baker’s case is different in one important point from the Berosini case — the Nevada Supreme Court essentially held that Berosini was in a public place and had no expectation of privacy. Rokke, however, taped Baker inside a private office and New Jersey’s state constitution explicitly recognize a right to privacy.

Neville Johnson, an attorney who advised Food Lion in its landmark win against ABC’s “Prime Time Live” for using hidden camera investigators, told the Bergen Record that the cases are very similar. “. . . You cannot commit a crime to expose wrongdoing, because then you would have these people assuming police or quasi-police powers.” Johnson went on to add that the case could do a lot of damage to PETA. “This kind of stuff, done with the approval of PETA management, could bankrupt PETA. This could be the end of them.”

Especially since courts and juries are likely to be less sympathetic to a political activist group than they would be to a legitimate news agency such as ABC News. Not to mention being more grist for the mill for any potential Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization suit against mainstream animal rights groups.

Source:

Secret agent for animals draws veterinarian’s suit. Mitchel Maddux, The Bergen Record, November 24, 2000.

PETA: Save the Turkeys and Stop the Rodeos

Posted on by
Reply

No Thanksgiving would be complete without People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals urging people to forego the turkey in favor of tofu. This year, the animal rights group faxed letters to the top 50 Fortune 500 urging them companies who give employees turkeys to offer tofu substitutes for their vegetarian employees. The only problem being few if any companies still give employees turkeys for Thanksgiving. Several corporations contacted by the Associated Press about the fax said simply they don’t give their employees food — and most large companies already have vegetarian options on the menu in their cafeterias.

The National Turkey Federation told the Associated Press it estimates that about 45 million turkeys will be eaten this Thanksgiving. So far PETA isn’t making any dent in the consumption of turkey at Thanksgiving.

Meanwhile on another front, PETA continues its streak of sexually risque billboards with an attack on rodeos. The billboards were to have featured a voluptuous bond with text saying, “Nobody Likes an Eight-Second Ride. Buck the Rodeo.” Unfortunately, when PETA wanted to place the billboards in the Tucson, Arizona area to mark a rodeo there, it couldn’t find anyone willing to sell it space for the billboard.

PETA must employ a cadre of 13 year old boys to write these stupid ads.

Sources:

PETA asks big companies to give employees meatless turkeys. Sonja Barisic, The Associated Press, November 14, 2000.

“Nobody Likes an Eight-Second Ride” Ad Was to Target Desert Thunder Pro-Rodeo. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Press Release, October 10, 2000.

Washington Anti-Fur Initiative May be Challenged; Oklahoma Anti-Cockfighing Petition Rejected

Posted on by
Reply

A few weeks ago animal rights activists in Washington state successfully passed an initiative that not only bans the use of steel-jawed leg-hold traps, but also bans outright the sale of fur and certain poisons in the state. The Inland Northwest Wildlife Council is considering challenging the ban on fur and poison as unconstitutional. An initiative that Washington voters passed in 1999 was ruled unconstitutional because it tackled too many issues. The initiative approved this year went so far as to ban a poison, sodium fluoroacetate, which isn’t even registered in the state — anyone using it would be breaking the law already.

In Oklahoma, meanwhile, a petition drive calling for an initiative to ban cockfighting failed when the Oklahoma Gamefowl Breeders Association demonstrated that more than 40 percent of the petition signatures were invalid. By comparing the signatures on the petition to a statewide database of registered voters, a large percentage of the petition signatures were demonstrated to have been forged, registered more than once, or came from people not registered to vote in Oklahoma.

Sources:

I-713 violates constitution, council says. Fenton Roskelley, The Spokesman-Review, November 15, 2000.

Invalid signatures prove need for reform, cockfighters claim. Brian Barber, TulsaWorld.Com, November 15, 2000.

Harper Warned by Judge

Posted on by
Reply

On November 20th I mentioned that animal activist Josh Harper, who was indicted for failing to appear before a grand jury, had sent out a couple e-mail messages to animal rights activists that contained some pretty strong language. According to an Americans for Medical Progress e-mail newsletter, U.S. Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel was not pleased with Harper’s e-mail missive and warned Harper that, “I think it comes dangerously close to asking people to
commit violent acts.”

AMP went on to report that,

Although Harper’s attorney argued the activist was within his constitutional free-speech rights, Hubel said that if Harper incited, encouraged or publicized his approval for crimes, it would violate the
conditions of his pretrial release and land him in jail.

Why Josh Harper Won't Testify to Grand Jury

Posted on by
Reply

On Friday, November 17, 2000, animal rights activist Josh Harper was scheduled to be indicted in Portland, Oregon, for refusing to testify before a grand jury. Harper has in the past claimed to be an innocent conduit of information from other, anonymous, activists who have carried out terrorist attacks on animal enterprises. Although apparently not a target of any investigations himself, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Harper to testify before a grand jury investigating such attacks. Prosecutors likely believe that Harper has direct knowledge of who is carrying out Animal Liberation Front/Environmental Liberation Front attacks.

Harper’s own behavior makes it seem likely that he has such knowledge. Harper has repeatedly told animal rights-friendly audiences that he has no idea who is behind the ALF attacks, but refuses to appear before a grand jury and say, “I have no idea who is behind the ALF attacks.” Why?

If you believe Harper, its because his way of protesting the oppressive state. If you read between the lines, however, Harper’s got the best reason in the world for not testifying — he almost certainly does know who was behind the attacks and if he testifies otherwise he would open himself up to later perjury charges.

A recent statement by Harper seems to indicate he knows more than he claims. According to Harper,

This is a first in our movement, and will set a precedent that could be very harmful. The government is essentially saying, “Snitch on your friends or go to jail” Failure to cooperate with a grand jury is going to start costing people years of their lives.

If, as Harper claims, he has no knowledge of who committed several prominent ALF attacks, why would he be forced to snitch on friends before the grand jury? It might come as a shock to animal rights activists, but generally “their my friends” is not considered a good reason not to testify about criminal actions of acquaintances.

Sources:

Don’t Let Harper’s Jailing Go Unnoticed. Frontline Information Service press release, November 15, 2000.

Josh Harper Statement: Increase the Momentum. Frontline Information Service press release, November 11, 2000.

No-show spurs FBI to arrest Eugene activist. Mark Larabee, The Oregonian, September, 29, 2000.

Josh Harper Statement. Frontline Information Service press release, October 2, 2000.

Animal Rights Activists Claim Some Persons Left Out of Census

Posted on by
Reply

Animal rights activist Sarah Whitman wrote an op-ed for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer arguing that the 2000 Census missed a significant undercounted class of persons — apes. Whitman is the campaign director for the Great Ape Project’s Census 2001 campaign which aims to count, as she puts it, the “many complex individuals still to be counted, including some 2,000 to 3,000 nonhuman great apes.”

Whitman writes,

Nonhuman great apes — orangutans, chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas — share the qualities that define “people,” including intelligence, sensitivity, complex social systems and the ability to suffer. Because of these qualities, nonhuman great apes should be formally recognized, protected and respected.

By “formally recognized” Whitman means that chimpanzees should be considered persons with inviolable rights. In New Zealand, The Great Ape Project got surprisingly far in its campaign to have that country’s constitution amended to recognize non-human primates as persons. Whitman and other activists leave out plenty of evidence that non-human primates are very different cognitively from human beings; the activists typically use controversial data gleaned from non-human primates under less-than-rigorous scientific conditions (for example, activists claim that it is a fact that great apes are self-aware, when the evidence for this claim is paltry at best and based largely on unrepeatable experiments with apes who lived most of their lives with human beings).

The goal of the Census 2001, Whitman writes,

…is much more than a headcount. It stands as a challenge to currently accepted practiced and situations imposed upon our fellow great apes.

…Despite their complexities, the law treats nonhuman great apes as things — pieces of property. Sentience, family bonds and community-based lifestyles are ignored as they are subjected to pain, isolation and fear. Even in instances where protective laws apply, the laws can be totally ineffective.

To be sure, the way great apes are treated is often appalling and some institutions do not do enough to comply with the law regarding care and treatment of such animals. But the system as improved dramatically since the 1980s and is on the right track. Meanwhile, although they play a much diminished role in medical research thanks to advances and refinements in techniques, non-human primates are still extremely important in some avenues of medical research such as AIDS/HIV.

Source:

Census isn’t complete until great apes are counted. Sarah Whitman, Seattle Post-Intellignecer, November 5, 2000.

Activists May Ask for Re-Count in Massachusetts Greyhound Initiative

Posted on by
Reply

Florida is by no means the only state having difficulties with counting ballots. In Boston, Massachusetts, election workers recently discovered 30,000(!) ballots that had simply not been counted. The ballots only affect initiatives, however, and not candidates for elective offices.

Since the initiative to ban greyhound racing in Massachusetts lost by only 65,000 votes, there is some speculation that animal activists might ask for a recount of ballots across the entire state.

The error was discovered when it was realized that in precincts where thousands of people had voted, not a single vote had been cast for any of the ballot initiatives. One explanation being offered is that election officials simply misread the voting machines and didn’t properly record the number of votes for and against each initiative.

A recount would require activists to file at least 1,000 signatures on a petition, unless the margin of defeat for the greyhound initiative turned out to be less than one-half of one percent in which case a recount would be automatic.

Source:

Galvin cites concerns, orders Boston recount. Steve Wilmsen, The Boston Globe, November 10, 2000.