Figure 1: Roman physician and philosopher Galen
French philosopher Rene Descartes then used Vesalius findings to support the idea that animals were “unthinking unfeeling machines.” This allowed for the continuation of animal experimentation without remorse of harming a creature similar to humans. However, French philosopher François- Marie Arouet de Voltaire disputed Descartes point by stating that vivisection actually “uncovered organs of feelings in animals” proving that they weren’t machines. Two different sides on the topic of animal experimentation quickly developed. British philosopher Jeremy Bentham complicated the matter even more by posing a different question. “The question is not, Can they reason? Nor, Can they talk? But, Can they suffer?”
Throughout the course, we’ve been challenged to not only stand outside ourselves and see how our reactions have affected other earthlings but to try and place ourselves in the position of those animals that are so often mistreated in order for the human race to achieve a medical or scientific advance of some sort. But are the experiments performed considered essential for the betterment of mankind, is the use of animals even really necessary? These questions constantly crossed my mind throughout the course especially when considering that we, as humans, try to separate ourselves from animals, why is it then that we try to find out about ourselves through the use of creatures that are different from us. Animal research is an established practice done all over the world that many believe is beneficial to advancements however it is also a horrible experience for the animals partaking in the procedures.
During the nineteenth century, a new found awareness of animal welfare led to organized efforts in the fight against animal cruelty around the world. In December 1875, Frances Power Cobbe, founded the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection (later, the Victorian Street Society), the first organization to campaign against animal experiments.
Figure 2: Founder of several animal rights organizations, Frances Power Cobbe
Over the years that followed, various animals’ rights groups would continue to form and try to outlaw cruelty practices, these groups would help pass several pieces of legislation including the Pure Food and Drug Act that passed in 1906, after a series of injuries, sicknesses, and deaths. The extensive use of animals in human products caused several side effects. Doctors lobbied for a crack down on drugs and personal products sold that contained any by- product from animals. It wasn’t until after the death of nearly 100 people that enough pressure was put on Congress to strengthen the original PFDA. In 1938, the Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act passed stating that animal testing would be a requirement for all products. As time progressed the testing requirements were “gradually amended to include different species and to last for longer time periods.”
In the 1960s the movement resurged when Pepper, a Dalmatian, disappeared from a family’s backyard. The discovery was made shortly after that she had been sold to a hospital that conducted an experiment on her and euthanized her. People wanted new legislation that protected animals and would be monitored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) were brought forth. Congress passed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 making it necessary for animal dealers to be licensed and laboratories regulatory. In 1970 the act was renamed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and covered all warm- blooded animals, a year later rats, mice, and birds were excluded. In 1985, the act was amended again to require that researchers minimize the animal’s pain whenever possible through the use of anesthesia, pain killers, and humane euthanasia. In 1990, the act was extended to farm animals.
Figure 3: A book cover on Ryder's speciesism idea
Around the same time Richard Ryder, coined the term speciesism referring to a “widely held belief that the human species is inherently superior to other species and so has rights or privileges that are denied to other sentient animals […] can also be used to describe the oppressive behaviour, cruelty, prejudice and discrimination that are associated with such a belief.” Ryder, after years of inflicting pain on animals through research, began to work against the evils done to animals by humans. Like many others before and after him, he used his sympathetic imagination to understand the animal’s experience. We too must use our sympathetic imagination. We must reflect on the fact that we are alike; we are harming a part of ourselves by inflicting pain on animals for research purposes. We are taking part in passive cruelty- “the observation of a cruel act in which the observer neither participates nor intervenes.” We must take action to protect all earthlings.
While a good deal of work has already been done regarding the treatment of animals there is still so much left to do. We realistically cannot get rid of all animal cruelty at once; smaller steps must first be taken. The implementation and enforcement of laws has already begun with the help of older generations; now, we must ask ourselves what will we do. The small group of dedicated young men and women in class can have a major impact on the treatment of animals right here on campus by getting students informed about the research lab apart of UT and the things we can do to get rid of it.
Figure 4: Map for location the ARC
Built in the summer of 1977, the Animal Resource Center was originally a 50,000 square foot facility capable of housing 10-15,000 laboratory animals per year. Claiming to be "Seeking progress for all species through research" and located on 2701 Speedway, the “centralized facility permits the most efficient and up-to-date environmental control for sanitation and animal health monitoring. It also has access to a diagnostic laboratory, two complete animal surgery suites, several darkrooms, controlled environment rooms, and a necropsy room.” Users of the center include faculty and students from several departments on campus. Since its construction, a 20,000 square foot extension was added. Fifteen part and full-time animal attendants and technicians, an administrative associate, a facilities manager, compliance and training manager, and the director whose specialty is lab animal medicine assist researchers in their tasks.
Figure 5: Experimenter giving animals drugs
The activities performed in the center are pre-approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee whose mission is to “oversee the provisions for the care and well-being of animals used for research and educational purposes at The University of Texas at Austin. The IACUC is also committed to serving the public by ensuring conformance to all legal and ethical standards regarding the use of animals in research.” While not much is made public about the projects conducted and several rules and guidelines are in place for researchers to follow, dreadful things still take place daily. Information on previous and ongoing projects is hard to find, the secrecy the surrounds the center makes me wonder why so much privacy is necessary, even getting into the location seems difficult. The facility is not open to everyone, to get into the center you must first fill and print out the ARC record, have it signed by your PI (Principle Investigator), obtain a proximity card from the ID center located in the FAC ID, and take printed form and ID to ARC front office to get card activated. “ALL visitors must register at the front desk of the ARC prior to entering the animal care areas.” It is almost impossible to go into the center and comfortably walk around much less inquire about anything within the center.
A limited amount of information regarding the ARC is posted online and few even know that the location exists on campus. These two factors lead me to believe that UT officials are aware of the uproar that would occur if students knew. To get the ARC, and the atrocities that go on inside of the building, removed from campus we must first inform individuals about the situation. School officials have intentionally or unintentionally kept the center out of sight and mind for students, even for those who pass it every day after all there is no sign with its name brightly displayed as is with other buildings on campus. The next step would be to approach organizations geared towards protecting animal’s rights, they would be a great core group to start spreading the word about trying to remove the ARC from campus. With these organizations we would start a petition that we can later take to school officials. The plan of action from there would be to host a rally in the West Mall and further distribute information. This would help reach all the people not involved in animal rights organizations and encourage more people to sign a petition. We would also recruit people who have been inside the ARC either as observers or as assistants in projects to testify about their experiences.
Figure 6: Along with several other students we would talk to people in the Main and West Malls about the ARC
Being that it is already April, there is not enough time to continue all the way through our plan we will need to wait for the upcoming semester and in the mean time focus on keeping students motivated about getting rid of the ARC. It would give the core group time to research and find out as much information as possible about the center and the steps necessary to get it removed from campus. Holding social gatherings during the summer break would allow us to keep people interested in our plans for the semester while keeping them up to date on what we are learning. At the beginning of the fall semester, we will make sure that all the information needed is obtained and again hold a rally in the West Mall. We would also push for The Daily Texan to write an article on the ARC. They would be able to do research and develop an expose story that would make anyone who picks the paper up aware of our intentions. Also, they would also have access to school officials that could be interrogated about the projects that take place in the ARC. It can be assumed that school officials would be reluctant to talk about the matter, this would then cause more support within the community and help enable a stronger voice against the ARC.
Figure 7: We must always think of the reprocussions of our actions
A protest rally, outside of the center would be the next step. It would show the complete disapproval and encourage those who work there to be a bit embarrassed. In mid October, we would talk to SG officials to see if anything could be done about presenting a piece of legislation to the campus which would call for the removal of the ARC which could then be taken to President Powers.
Figure 8: The UT tower should be a sign of power not of cruelty
Considered one of the top schools of the nations, UT is thought of as an example to many. To help lead the fight against animal cruelty would encourage other campuses to do the same and cause students to become informed about the laboratories and experiments that take place on their campus. Just looking out for animals can make a big change “In everything you do, try to educate others, stop cruel behaviors, and bring about a revolution in human consciousness.” We must stop being selfish and consider those that are harmed daily for no other reason than to answer a question. They are not at fault for the lack of answers and should be treated with more respect. With a few simple changes in ourselves, afterwards our community, and later the world all earthlings can live a peaceful life never worrying of any harm coming their way as many animals who live in fear about being abducted do today. “Animals, as part of God’s creation, have rights which must be respected. It behoves us always to be sensitive to their needs and to the reality of their pain."
WORD COUNT WITH QUOTES: 1,980
WORD COUNT WITHOUT QUOTES: 1,709
Bibliography
“Animal Facility Access Policy .” UTARC. http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/access.pdf (accessed March 29, 2010).
Bentham, Jeremy. “The Principles of Morals and Legislation, 1789, Chapter VII, Section 1 .” In E379NF Animal Humanities VOlume 2 . N.p.: n.p., n.d.
“General Information .” UTARC . http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/facility.htm (accessed March 29, 2010).
“IACUC Mission Statement.” Office of Research Support . http://www.utexas.edu/research/rsc/iacuc/about.html (accessed March 29, 2010).
Linzey, Andrew. Why Animal Suffering Matters: Philosophy, Theology, and Practical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Merz-Perez, Linda, and Kathleen M. Heide. Animal Cruelty: Pathway to Violence against People . Walnut Creek : Altamira Press , 2004.
“The PETA Practical Guide to Animal Rights .” In E379NF Animal Humanities Volume 1. N.p.: n.p., n.d.
“Research Animals- History .” Libraby Index . http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2180/Research-Animals-HISTORY.html (accessed March 29, 2010).
“Speciesism .” Richard Ryder . http://www.richardryder.co.uk/speciesism.html (accessed March 29, 2010).
Figure 1: http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/hommedia.ashx?id=10957&size=Small
Figure 2: http://www.navs.org.uk/media/uploads/normal_pages/abyy2t_francespowercobbe.jpg
Figure 3: http://pense-bete.org/references/imgs/couv-Joan_Dunayer-Speciesism.jpg
Figure 4: http://www.utexas.edu/maps/main/buildings/arc.html
Figure 5: http://www.osaka-med.ac.jp/Global/information_about_omc/laboratory_animal_center.jpg
Figure 6: http://txtell.lib.utexas.edu/stories/media/m0002-3.jpg
Figure 7: http://www.shac.net/news/2009/February/images/28b.jpg
Figure 8: http://collegeprowler.com/images/standard/1595/the-tower-at-ut.jpeg
No comments:
Post a Comment