Guinea pigs, remains and where to draw the line (A bit gruesome)

[pamziaw]

I don't know if many of you have heard of this case recently, its been on the news in the UK a lot. A breeding farm for guinea pigs was blackmailed by animal rights activists in the last couple of years. These people were breeding guinea pigs for medical experiments and the activists blackmailed the owners by graverobbing and stealing the remains of the owners deceased mother in law. The owners closed the farm and are now appealing for the remains to be returned and four people have been arrested for blackmail. Now i'm not disputing that experimenting on any animal is nothing but cruel but it occured to me today, where do you draw the line? An eye for an eye? Or was it called for? What is everybodys opinion? Where does it end? Any thoughts?

[Giplet]

Animnal testing is very much a grey area. But it is necessary in medicine. I don't agree with it one bit for testing make-up or things like that, but animal testing for medical reasons can be justified. This sort of testing has saved millions of lives, and you never know, but it might just save your life in the future, or the life of someone close to you. I agree that there should be regulations and that the animals should be subjected to as little pain as possible, which mostly they are. The media tends to make it sound bad, but if you dig enough, you'll find out that the animals feel very little pain.

I live in England and I did see the story on the news, along with a clip of some of the guinea pigs. I felt very saddened, but I know how good the cause is. I think the people who work with the animals are very brave and are doing something that everyone may benefit from at some point in their life.
I could never do the work, I wouldn't be able to handle it, I couldn't even watch the drama that was on on channel 4 recently, about the guy who tested with animals. But I still think that it is necessary work.

There are many sides to the argument and I don't think it will ever be resolved, but if an illness touches your life, that is cured by a cure developed through animal testing, if you don't already understand it, you will then.

[Hansel]

That crosses the line in my eyes. I think that there are a lot of activists out there who will "take an eye for an eye" and will put their own lives in danger for proving a point. I think the most important thing to ask "Is doing an act worth dealing with a lawsuit or possibly going to jail?" To some people I think its ok in their eyes.

Myself personally will write letters and voice my opinion on things, but I am not willing to put my life in danger or dealing with anything legal.

Giplet, I posted at the same time you did, but you raise a good point. Some of usmay not be here today if it werent for animal testing. Its really a catch22 in my eyes. I think its horrible and I wouldnt want an animal to be subjected to something I wouldnt want to go through myself.

[pamziaw]

I don't know. You see I used to think animal testing was ok, then 2 things happened. I went to london and walked past an animal rights activists stand with a load of pictures of animals that had been tested on, it was one of the most sickening things i'd ever seen. Then still seeing if its justafiable i watched a star trek voyager episode called scientific method. Its about how aliens, sneak onto the ship, make themselves invisible then perform deadly and mutalating experiments on the crew. It dealt with the whole thing of, 'how would you feel if it was done to you?' and did it very well.

[Hansel]

A person did a persuasive speech while I was in high school about animal testing and had some pretty bad pics. I really would rather not think that it happens, but I know that it does. Its sad that so many of us here prodive our pets with SO much, big cages, healthy diets and lots of love, but then there are SO many animals in labs getting totured.

Look as the human race on a global level. Im sure most of us here have the amenities of a roof over our heads, food in our houses, money to get by on, etc. Thats great for us, but what about the people living on the streets? What about people in third world countries that die young and suffer because of the lack of economy and no medicine? Or just not being able to afford it?

I guess my point is that we dont want to see animals suffer but be in good homes which they should be. Sometimes times I think it just comes down to the luck of the draw. Some animals end up in great homes, some dont. Some people end up being able to be successful and provide for themselves and their families (and pets )and some are born into much worse situations.

I dont think m trying to make a point here, its all just rather depressing.

[Susan9608]

There was another thread on this topic quite awhile back ... but I don't mind stating my opinion twice.

Since this farm closed down and is no longer breeding guinea pigs for experimentation, I think the ends entirely justified the means. I think there is no comparison between a one dead corpse and hundreds of living, breathing, sentient beings - no comparison at all.

No one was injured. Oh sure, the family of the corpse can claim that they were emotionally injured, but again, their emotional distress vs. the lives of hundreds of living, breathing sentient beings is no contest in my book. I choose the living, breathing sentient beings.

This is a very interesting topic, actually, because people get so up in arms over the "terrorist-like" tactics of animal rights activists. What's interesting about the whole subject is that no one in the US has ever been killed due to a "terrorist-like" animal rights attack; rather, it's the animal rights activists who have been harmed. Dian Fossey was murdered in her own cabin after starting a program against gorilla poaching. Chico Mendes was murdered while trying to protect the Amazon jungle and all the animals it contains. George Adamson and his wife were both murdered, George by animal poachers. It's just ironic, all the accusations made against animal rights activists for their violent activities when they are the ones being killed.

What a screwy world.

[enchantingcavy]

I've been following this case for the last few years and the animal mrights activists fought their hardest for these guinea pigs and their welfare and to be heard for so long...
Something should have been done long before they did what they had to do to win this case. An extreme measure had to be taken in an extreme situation I'm not supporting digging up a dead body but I'm completely supportive of their case and how strong they stood for so long to win it. These people were breeding these guinea pigs for 30 years or so before they were caught out I hate the thought that it was going on that long beforehand...
This wasn't about animal testing or whether it was right or wrong...this was about animals being kept and being mistreated inhumanely for years on end.

I'll put the links below they have a website.
Warning though the images and videos and content on the website is very graphic.

http://www.liberation-now.org/moredeath.html
http://www.liberation-now.org
http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news509.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/4176094.stm#

*~jess~*

[daftscotslass]

I really don't know how I feel about the grave robbing incident, though I'm leaning towards Susan's view.

This is the 21st Century. A century of animal testing has confirmed the safety of many drugs. However, it has yet to find us a cure for cancer or many other possibly preventable diseases. Chimpanzees are tested on in their millions - I don't see how they can possibly justify that over a human being. The guinea pig is a prime example - had we relied on animal testing here, we would still be of the thinking that humans would drop dead after having it administered.

Anyway, back to the Newchurch piggies. So they're closing the operation. Brilliant. Are the protesters going to take all the animals home with them? I bloody hope so. Breeding sows, worthless for the medical industry will probably be left to rot. There is no sign that they will be released to UK rescuers (though we're ready and waiting). THAT is the next step.

[Giplet]

Just so you know, a research lab have actually come up with a cure for cancer. They did something with something and something (not quite sure), but it ended with a mouse being totally immune to every kind of cancer. They just are not quite sure what they did and are doing extensive tests to figure it out. But that is a huge step, because now we know that we can cure cancer. And the amount of people cancer affects - 1 in 3 people will get it, and it won't just affect those 1 in 3, but it will affect everyone close to them as well.

My friend once said to me, instead of testing on animals, why don't we do the tests on murderers and rapists and peadophiles. But the same issue may arise; human rights. But then there is animal rights. Why should we test on animals for the sake of our own species. If we are finding cures for our own speices, the best tests would surely be carried out on our own species.

This is all part of my psychology A-level course and I have written an entire essay on it. In it, I concluded that there is just no right answer.

[daftscotslass]

I did a module on ethics during my degree. As psychologists we worked with humans and animals on a regular basis and had to write extensively about it (though certainly not invasively!). I pretty much came to the same conclusion as you did.

At the moment I'm most concerned about the future of those piggies.

[zambonigirl]

Graverobbing is unsanitary. The robbers put their lives on the line as well as the lives of anyone who may have come in contact with the body. Great revolutions are made by illegal behavior, yes, and the illegal behavior often becomes legal afterwards, but what did the breeder's grandparent do? They were an innocent victim just as much as the guinea pigs were.

I'm glad that the farm was shut down, but there had to have been another way. As Eddie Izzard said, "Kick the door down, say "Look, we'll pay for that." I mean, have a revolution, just budget for it."

[Susan9608]

I'm glad that the farm was shut down, but there had to have been another way

What other way would you suggest? These animal rights activist tried for many years to have that farm shut down; their efforts didn't work. So they robbed a grave, and lo-and-behold - they met with success. If your focus is on the animals, then it's pretty damn hard to argue with success.

but what did the breeder's grandparent do?

Who cares? What the corpse did or didn't do while living doesn't really matter. That grave wasn't dug up to punish the person in it, the corpse was dug up to send a message to those still living.

[zambonigirl]

Originally Posted by Susan9608

What other way would you suggest? These animal rights activist tried for many years to have that farm shut down; their efforts didn't work. So they robbed a grave, and lo-and-behold - they met with success. If your focus is on the animals, then it's pretty damn hard to argue with success.

From an article cited above: "And in particular the desecration of a woman’s grave. Save the Newchurch Guinea Pigs refused to condone this action and no link to the campaign has been proved. Despite numerous arrests no-one has been charged for the grave robbery. Every attempt has been made to blacken the animal rights movement with the tag of irrational terrorism, as the corporate media line up to march in time with the pharmaceutical industry."

Obviously, even the activists don't condone this behavior. They are willing to do many illegal things, but desecrating a grave is something that they will not stand for. It's not difficult to argue with success, not when something this disgusting has happened. Again, the robbers put their health and the health of other's in danger by robbing a grave. Exhuming a body is something that trained professionals in biohazard gear should do, not amateur activists. Also? Clearly, the graverobbing is not the sole cause of the farm shutting down. Other illegal activities were cited, though not named (probably the media and local government's wish that other activist groups not see what those actions were). The graverobbing may have been the last straw, but there is every reason to believe that other methods were used that were just as successful.

Who cares? What the corpse did or didn't do while living doesn't really matter. That grave wasn't dug up to punish the person in it, the corpse was dug up to send a message to those still living.

Perhaps it doesn't matter, but to many people, the act of burial is sacred, particularly to the deceased person. It is a childish prank at best, and it sends the wrong message. People who do not want animal testing are trying to make a statement of respect for living things, in living *and* death. Exhuming a body shows a great lack of disrespect for that particular person and send out the message of "we don't care for anyone BUT the animals."

[homeschoolmama]

(sigh)
I think that stealing someone's deceased ancestor is wrong. I feel the same way about mummies that have been dug up. Put the person back. There must have been another way to get someone to listen to them.

Now animal testing is a huge issue. I absolutely cannot support animal testing for cosmetic type products, but animal testing for medical devices & medicines is needed. I know someone that works on medical devices, and they recently made a very good point. When an animal is used for medical research, they tend to come out of the testing better than when they went in. Yes, there are horror stories about injecting an animal with a disease to see how to cure it, but there are just as many companies that only work on animals that are ill to start with... and work towards curing them.

Once enough research has gone into a device, it must be tested on a human anyway. Using animals simply cuts down on the number of human "losses" that happen during the development of any new product. No, I'm not terribly comfortable with the concept. But when I ask myself if I'd rather have an implant that's already been tested & has a known rate of success or be the first to try it, I KNOW I don't want to be the "medical guinea pig" myself!

[muffin]

Dear all, I read this thread and I have to say something on the subject, being from the UK and all. I feel that in this country animal rights protesters often do stuff that turns public sympathy against them and does more harm than good for animal rights, no matter how good their intentions. A couple of examples, FIRSTver here everyone was absolutely disgusted and shocked by the grave-robbing. It's utterly wrong and contradicts what the protesters ought to stand for. Peaceful but persistent protest wasn't working, yet, but if they had stuck at it people wouldn't have ended up hating the grave-robbers. Medical research on animals is unfortunate but necessary, and I think everyone would change their mind if someone they loved dearly could be saved from serious illness by medicine developed in this way. Just think carefully about it, could you really refuse their cure? SECOND: I wanted to adopt some spent battery hens to give them a peaceful retirement in my field with my other hens (spent battery hens are a year old and considered no longer productive and usually get slaughtered for dog food after living their lives in tiny cages). Problem was that no battery farmers were willing to help me because they were scared I might be an animal rights activist and would raid their farm. THIRD AND MOST RECENT: in England wild boars were released from a farm by activists, no-one knows why. It makes no sense because they are farmed for their meat and kept in good conditions like cows, sheep and pigs. Because they are so dangerous and destructive they all had to be hunted and killed, so the people who released them obviously had no idea of what they were doing. It's the ignorance of animal rights protesters that does the damage. I suspect a lot of them just use the cause to rebel against the government and authority. If any of you saw what the G8 protesters were smashing up you might agree. There's even an argument that fox-hunting isn't as cruel as they make out, and I only say that because foxes have no natural predators, most of them get away, and all the dogs kept for the hunts have had to be put down because the organisers of hunts can no longer afford to keep them. So is it right to kill those dogs? If they were wild they would hunt the fox and anything that came their way, are we not just restoring the natural balance through hunting? By the way, I've never been on a hunt, and I wouldn't try to revive them, but the poor dogs. A fox and it's cubs killed all fifty of my neighbour's chickens in one afternoon, just teaching its cubs to hunt, killing a bird, leaving it, and then going on to the next one. What about the suffering of those chickens? Fowes aren't the kindest of killers, nor are many prey animals. People should really read up on stuff beofre taking action. Battery hens suffer more than foxes in a hunt. Millions of hens for every fox. What's fair?