UCLA OTR: Animal Rights Activists Protest Coast to Coast

Animal Rights Activists Protest Coast to Coast

Posted by Candy Crook 07/09/2008 12:30 PM
Category: Tags: violent activists, UMDNJ research, animal liberation front, UCLA protesters, animal rights activists

Although the notoriously liberal Cal students are still carrying on the tree-hugging tradition, the Animal Liberation Front has forces "fighting" throughout the nation. They've tried more pacifying methods of protesting but have been disappointed with their results. By resorting to tactics common to anti-abortion activists, animal lovers are bringing their picket signs to scientists' front doors to show that this time, it's personal.

At UCLA, one of the country's biggest research facilities, protesters have set a university van on fire, attempted to set off a firebomb in a professor's car, and flooded another professor's home with a garden hose. One scientist swore he would not longer perform animal research after they targeted his whole family.

UMDNJ (University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey) has also received criticizing remarks from an animal rights group that disagrees with the school's use of live pigs which supposedly violates the Animal Welfare Act.

And at UC Santa Cruz, a breast-cancer researcher received unwelcome guests at her daughter's birthday party when activists pounded on the family's front door and threw a punch at her husband.

The Animal Liberation Front are showing no mercy as they fight back harder than ever. One spokesman from the ALF even told The Associated Press that he does not enforce violence, but "if you had to hurt somebody or intimidate them or kill them, it would be morally justifiable." Yikes.

+ 37 comments

Anonymous says,

Thank you for your interesting post on concerns regarding the treatment of animals in laboratories.

Animal experimenters may want to do a reality check before whining over demonstrations conducted outside their homes and slogans scrawled in chalk on sidewalks in their neighborhoods: it is the experimenters who are producing a body count, to the tune of over 100 million animals every year in the U.S. alone.

Animals in labs endure lives of deprivation, isolation, stress, trauma and depression even before they are used in any experiment. While regulations governing treatment of animals in laboratories represent minimal standards of care and only a tiny fraction of the tens of millions of animals killed in U.S. laboratories every year are even covered, a 2005 federal audit concluded that experimenters are failing to extend even these basic considerations to animals in their care. Sick animals go without veterinary care, animals used in invasive surgeries do not receive sufficient pain relief, and extremely sick animals are denied humane euthanasia. Nearly a third of oversight committees are failing to ensure that experimenters have looked for alternatives to painful procedures on animals, as they�re required to do.

It is a particularly tragic day for California taxpayers when the UC system responds to public outcry over the suffering of animals by proposing to curtail free speech and to limit access to records on animal use. It would be more useful for UC to deal with the problems within its laboratories.

UC officials need to stop pushing for legislation that curtails freedom of speech and information and focus instead on fixing the mess created by the arrogance and carelessness of its animal experimenters. To learn more, please visit stopanimaltests.com. For free stickers and information on what you can do to help, visit peta2.com.

Alka Chandna, Ph.D.
Laboratory Oversight Specialist
Laboratory Investigations Department
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) Posted 07/08/2008 2:36 PMReply

Anonymous says,

I agree with the previous comment. These "researchers" are torturing animals. In one case the research was funded by Philip Morris, which doesn't care about human health. Please read more about this issue than what is presented in that AP story. Posted 07/08/2008 2:43 PMReply

Anonymous says,

40,000 animals are currently caged and being exploited for the most esoteric, non-applicable, and downright frivolous research at UC-Berkeley. Check out the Stop Cal Vivisection website, the "meet the vivisectors" section has more information on the research protocols:
www.pixelexdesign.com/stopcalvivisection Posted 07/08/2008 3:25 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Your article claims:

"At UCLA, one of the country's biggest research facilities, protesters have set a university van on fire, attempted to set off a firebomb in a professor's car, and flooded another professor's home with a garden hose."

If everything you allege actually happened how you do explain that there are no arrests and convictions for any of these alleged incidences? � very shoddy reporting.

Peter Muller,
Chair,
Equal Justice Alliance Posted 07/08/2008 4:06 PMReply

Anonymous says,

The Animal Welfare Act does NOT protect these innocent animals from any type of invasive procedure, no matter how horrific. "Scientists" are allowed to do whatever they want, in whatever manner they choose to these animals, who are often sliced and diced with no anesthesia - only restraint. This is typical. Many former employees of labs have infinite horror stories to tell, and terminate their positions because they are so disturbed by the heinous abuse - which most of these sadistic torturers actually enjoy. There are videos on YouTube of undercover investigations depicting laughing while torturing animals and the worst abuses you can imagine.

Imagine this: You live in a tiny, barren cage, alone with nothing to do, no one to be with, living in your own filth and the only time you get out is for a torture session. You get no pain relief and no veterinary care. You get to die a slow and lingering death, or on the table.

There are dozens of alternative tests available that do not involve the routine torture of animals, and that actually yeild ACCURATE results in humans, unlike animal experiments. (The UK uses them, but hey, they aren't a multimillion dollar a year profit for corporations and universities). Would you go to a veterinarian if you were ill or needed surgery? Would you take your dog or cat to your internist? What is the difference? The difference is that rats, dogs, cats et al are NOT little people and the tests done are miserable failures. They harm and impede medical progress.

Power to anyone who fights to stop this atrocity. We are surely the most barbaric of species. Posted 07/08/2008 4:37 PMReply

Anonymous says,

If the FBI had any intelligence within their organization, they would realize that their "terrorism" campaign against animal rights activists only forces activists to go underground i.e. the Animal Liberation Front. No amount of protesting, pleading, letter writing, phone calls or emails is even acknowledged. What do they expect? Some people in this world have compassion - AND brains. Some people don't simply buy everything the media shoves down our throats like "every medical success relied upon animal experiments". Every medical FAILURE was a result of animal experiments. Do people actually think that drugs aren't tested on people after the animal tests are completed? What about all the deadly side effects of medicines? Is that success? Medical error and drug reactions are one of the main causes of death right next to heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer. I don't call that progress. The new alternatives are inexpensive, accurate and quick - not years of the decades old tests that are known failures. Splenda killed over 12,000 animals of every species they experimented on. Where is it now? On the shelves. Vioxx tested safe in lab animals. It killed over 60,000 people. There are new drug recalls every week because they're deadly. Have you ever actually LISTENED to the laundry list of horrid side effects on every new drug advertised on television? We need to wake up and put the health of PEOPLE before the profits and grants for animal research.

Corporations are the new government. Wow, now I feel safe. Posted 07/08/2008 4:47 PMReply

Anonymous says,

please--no offense, but if your kid has diabetes would you give him or her insulin?
why aren't you guys on the fly labs, how about the fish or the yeast or the nematodes?
\you guys are the worst kind of hipocracy Posted 07/08/2008 4:52 PMReply

Anonymous says,

A lot of us have seen the horrible films and photographs of lab animals undergoing procedures that look - well, horrible. But what the animal rights activists don't understand is that most of those images are 20, 30, 50 - even 60 years old. Many were taken in other countries. Even the few that are relatively modern and American in origin don't show that the animals recieve pain medication during invasive procedures. But most of the activists wouldn't care, even if they did know the facts - they don't want animals used for research (or anything else, including companionship), period. The fact that they are willing to use violence to force their minority views on the majority makes them terrorists, pure and simple. Posted 07/08/2008 5:44 PMReply

Anonymous says,

What film have you seen that is 60 years old? I am not aware of these films. Perhaps you could send a link to them. The films we have are not decades old, and the employees themselves have said and do say these are not "isolated incidents"; on the contrary they are DAILY occurences. Don't be a sheep, use your head.

They do, however, perform the same old tests they have for the last several decades, time after time. I mean, how many time do you have to test cleaners on the eyes of animals? (The Draize Test). How many times do you have to hook up a funnel to inundate a puppy's lungs with concentrated cigarette smoke to find that it is addictive, and damages organs. How about instead of spending the BILLIONS of dollars in useless animal testing, we put that money into health care and education? Other countries do it and are more successful overall in preventing that which is killing our population, and draining us dry in medical costs, which means we can't afford insurance. Could our government get any more stupid? Oh that's right, it isn't stupidity as much as it is greed. The FDA is NOT your friend. Check into it.

As far as insulin, in case you are not aware, insulin of today is not porcine insulin, nor any other animal insulin. Unfortunately, the FDA requires testing on ALL medications. You call us hypocrites, but no offense? I supposed you say you love animals. Everybody does. But, you no doubt eat them, supporting the most abusive treatment of all; factory farming. But hey, the only animals that count are dogs and cats, right? Now who's the hypocrite? Posted 07/08/2008 7:13 PMReply

Anonymous says,

The witch that runs PETA is against use of animals for medical and drug development. Or she was until SHE needed the results from that process. But that was an EXCEPTION. Ain't she special.

Wanna talk hypocrites! Posted 07/08/2008 7:50 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Boy this article struck a nerve of the animal rightists who are now trying to justify their crazy views by so many of their comments on this article. But alas, the more they speak, the more normal people realize how truly crazy they all are! They don't want any animal use at all including companion animals or food animals. And PETA kills 97% of all companion animals they take in saying they will try and find these poor animals a new home - talk about hypocrites! Posted 07/08/2008 8:29 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Animal Welfare or Animal Rights?
Here are some of the differences:

As animal welfare advocates. . .

� We seek to improve the treatment and well-being of animals.

� We support the humane treatment of animals that ensures comfort and freedom from unnecessary pain and suffering.

� We believe we have the right to "own" animals -- they are our property.

� We believe animal owners should provide loving care for the lifetime of their animals.

As animal rights activists. . .

� They seek to end the use and ownership of animals, including the keeping of pets.

� They believe that any use of an animal is exploitation so, not only must we stop using animals for food and clothing, but pet ownership must be outlawed as well.

� They want to obtain legal rights for animals as they believe that animals and humans are equal.

� They use false and unsubstantiated allegations of animal abuse to raise funds, attract media attention and bring supporters into the movement. (The Inhumane Crusade, Daniel T. Oliver)
www.naiaonline.org Posted 07/08/2008 8:45 PMReply

Anonymous says,

7 Things You Didn't Know About PeTA

1. PeTA has stated repeatedly that their goal is "total animal liberation." This means no pets, no meat, no milk, no zoos, no circuses, no fishing, no hunting, no farming, no leather, and no animal testing for lifesaving medicines.
2. PeTA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals.
3. PeTA funds the misnamed Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine an animal-rights organization that presents itself as an unbiased source for nutritional information and has links to violent animal-rights groups called SHAC and ALF.
4. PeTA has used their contributors tax-exempt donations to fund the North American Earth Liberation front and the Animal Liberation Front, FBI-certified domestic terrorist groups responsible for fire bombs and death threats.
5. PeTA regularly targets kids as early as elementary school with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda. They are totally opposed to traditional farming methods.
6. PeTA spends less than one percent of its $13 million budget actually caring for animals. PeTA kills animals.
7. PeTA has repeatedly attacked groups like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, for conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases.
source: www.consumerfreedom.com Posted 07/08/2008 8:46 PMReply

Anonymous says,

7 Things You Didn�t Know About H$U$
(The Humane Society of the United States)

1. H$U$ does not operate or have direct control over any animal shelter. Buried deep within H$U$'s website is a disclaimer noting that the group "is not affiliated with, nor is it a parent organization for, local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal care and control agencies.� When H$U$ merged with the Fund for Animals they acquired some animal sanctuaries but those are usually full when someone tries to send an animal there - unless the animal comes with a big check.

2. Since its inception, H$U$ has tried to limit the choices of American consumers, opposing dog breeding, conventional livestock and poultry farming, rodeos, circuses, horse racing, marine aquariums, fur trapping and medical research.

3. H$U$ raises enough money to help finance animal shelters in every single state, with money to spare, yet it doesn't operate a single one anywhere. Instead, H$U$ spends millions on programs that seek to economically cripple meat and dairy producers; eliminate the use of animals in biomedical research labs; phase out pet breeding, zoos, and circus animal acts; and demonize hunters as crazed lunatics. H$U$ spends $2 million each year on travel expenses alone, just keeping its multi-national agenda going.

4. While most local animal shelters are under-funded and unsung, H$U$ has accumulated $113 million in assets and built a recognizable brand by capitalizing on the confusion its very name provokes.

5. The current president of H$U$, Wayne Pacelle, is a former officer of PeTA.

6. H$U$ is currently under investigation by the Attorney General of Louisiana in regards to the disposition of Katrina funds. H$U$ has been under investigation by the FBI for their links to domestic terrorist organizations such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). One of their current officers, John P. Goodwin is a former member of ALF and a convicted felon for acts of terrorism related to animals.

7. H$U$ consistently jumps on the bandwagon of any animal issue to raise funds even if they are NOT directly involved. Most recently they used the Michael Vick case as a major fund raiser, even though H$U$ had nothing to do with the investigation or care of the Vick dogs.

Sources:
www.consumerfreedom.com
www.pet-law.com
www.naiaonline.org Posted 07/08/2008 8:47 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous:

Because the criminals do not want to be caught? Posted 07/08/2008 10:21 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Use of animals(mostly mice/rats)in research is not done without oversight and guidelines as to care and use. Research is necessary. The use of animals in research is necessary and critical to saving lives of people as well as other animals. Much of the research done benefits animals as well as people. I haven't seen any animal rights hypocrits in PETA, HSUS or ALF turn down life saving procedures which were developed with animal tests. Research is necessary and well regulated. My support goes to the reseachers, and my thanks. Posted 07/09/2008 06:06 AMReply

Anonymous says,

I wasn't aware that PETA opposed companion animals? They have a whole blog and website which deal heavily with how to properly and lovingly care for companion animals. What an amazingly unfounded statement, CCF guy. Posted 07/09/2008 08:50 AMReply

Anonymous says,

People always defend the practice of using animals in laboratories, but few among them research the documented rate of abuse of animals in laboratories -- as posted by the federal government. To say that these animals are treated fairly, given care and respect, etc. is simply to buy into what you're told by public relations staff representing the industry.

Did you know that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture reports the number of documented illegal acts in laboratories yearly? These personnel failures directly affect how animals live (and slowly die) in laboratories. The report is available online thanks to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request here: http://www.all-creatures.org/saen/res-usda-aphis-viosum2006.pdf .

Note that the over 20,000 violations affecting over 453,000 animals only accounts for what USDA inspectors notice and in no way addresses what is going on for the several hundred days each year that no inspectors visit these labs. Animals ARE tortured in labs, whether maliciously or through simple error, and there is no excuse for this. Posted 07/09/2008 09:01 AMReply

Anonymous says,

animals need thier rights. They should not be abused in any way. But unlike PETA I beleive that we need to provide them with a kind and loving home. Yes, I own my little ones. I am also their mommy. I think research can be done without the use of animals. That is pure abuse. The people that make a living this way should be in jail. It is just the abuse of animals. Posted 07/09/2008 10:09 AMReply

Anonymous says,

Unfortunately research relies on the use of animals (indeed if there are alternatives then they must legally be used instead of animals). Where do you think the vaccines that ensure the health of your child come from? Meningitis Vaccine, Polio Vaccine, TB Vaccine ..... all through animal research.
Tom Holder
www.speakingofresearch.org Posted 07/09/2008 10:22 AMReply

Anonymous says,

PETA's out in full force. ASK PETA about Pete Singer, the 2nd founder of the current animal rights movement. I hear PETA backs Peter's views of human with animal sex. Or ask Peta about the first founder of the animal rights: a German, the year 1933. THE WHOLE WORLD CALLED HIM EVIL BUT PETA CALLS HIM A HERO. Posted 07/09/2008 12:44 PMReply

Anonymous says,

You guys are morons. Posted 07/09/2008 12:47 PMReply

Anonymous says,

I have been deeply suspicious, if not outright antagonistic, to gun nuts, NRA lobbyists, and the like all my life. Yet the time has come for biomed reserchers to consider seriously acquiring a shotgun or the like in case a pack of animal rights loonies appear in their driveway. By any sane standard, what these jokers are up to constitutes harrassment and extortion that no citizen ought to endure passively, especially those who (despite the batty assertions of the ALF, SHAC, and their gullible buddies) are engaged in work that is indispensible to the health and indeed the survival of a vast number of human beings. The next time a pack of masked idiots turns up crying "Murderer" on a researcher's front lawn, they ought to be assumed to have the intent to perpetrate violence, and they ought to be dissuaded by a couple of rounds of birdshot or the like. They are the real murderers.

I write as the father of a kid who, 15 years ago, survived a childhood cancer that, 20 years before, was nearly always a death sentence. Fortunately, by the time she was diagnosed, a host of treatment protocols--pharmolgical and radiological, as well as surgical, had been developed which made an outright cure easy and close to certain. Each of those techniques required, without question, the use of countless animal subjects in the relevant research.

My kid is now the mother of a two-year-old, with a new baby just about to be born. If the animal-rights nuts think that I would have traded the life of my daughter (and her kids) for the lives of the thousands of lab animals necessarily used in the research that healed her, merely on the basis of their muddleheadedness, they have a hard lesson to learn. I would literally kill anyone I ran into who was engaged in trying to stop, by violence or sabotage, research like that which saved her. It's the least I owe to an honorable profession that has done so much for me and for millions of others. Posted 07/09/2008 6:27 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Tradition, legal protection, and profit do not defend the practice of animal experimentation from these stark facts: it's a waste talent and money, and it�s morally indefensible. Tortuous animal experimentation persists in toxicity testing and in biomedical research spite of its poor predictive ability in humans because it provides a reliable legal sanctuary for the chemical and pharma industries; results are easily publishable; tests can be used to �prove� a pre-ordained result (e.g., animal studies have �shown� that cigarettes both do and do not cause cancer); it generates research grants and conveys status; it is a lucrative business; it appears �scientific�, and because researchers needn�t consider their moral duty to a beagle in the lab as they do to a beagle in their home. But systematic studies reveal that animal experiments do not sufficiently predict human outcomes. Medical historians can vouch that animal studies stalled proper warnings and regulations because animals failed to respond as did humans to cigarettes, asbestos, x-rays and nuclear waste. Animal studies failed to produce cirrhosis through alcohol consumption and falsely indicated the transmission mechanism of the polio virus, misdirecting preventive measures and delaying development of tissue culture methodologies. Animal experimenters cannot point to significant changes in morbidity and mortality rates in this country, only to published papers and paychecks. So please consider this: protestors are actually working to protect both human and nonhuman animals when they cry out against this horribly cruel practice of these profit-maximizing, exploitative businesses.
On the "Center for Consumer Freedom", It is instructive to look at one leading PETA detractor, the Center
for Consumer Freedom. From Sourcewatch. org:
"The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"

Over 40[%] of the group's 2005 expenditure was paid to Rick Berman's PR company, Berman & Co. for "management services. As part of its operations CCF runs a series of attack websites.

It continues:
"In a 1999 interview with the Chain Leader, a trade publication for restaurant chains, Berman boasted that he attacks activists more aggressively than other lobbyists. We always have a knife in our teeth,' he said. Since activists drive consumer behavior on meat, alcohol, fat, sugar, tobacco and caffeine,' his strategy is to shoot the messenger. ... We've got to attack their credibility as
spokespersons.'"

From http://www.vegsource.com/articles/berman release.htm, we learn that Berman paid to himself about 79% of all the charitable donations raised [in 1998] by his "Employment Policies Institute", which fights against raising the minimum wage.

In summary, this organization is steered by an unscrupulous PR firm that admitted to "shoot[ing] the messenger" and is funded largely by the meat industry (again, see www.sourcewatch. org). That is what a shill does, and the aim is to shift blame from those causing the injustices to those fighting the injustices. Posted 07/09/2008 8:10 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous: Let's not go by PETA. They and The HSUS wanted Michael Vick's dogs killed after the trial. All but one were placed with rescues and sanctuaries and now most are well on their way to rehabilitation while the rest have already been placed and are huge contributions to their people. And yes, it's sad that Ingrid Newkirk believes that companion animals are better off dead than waiting to be adopted. So let's leave PETA out of this arguement when Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (pcrm.org) is a much more credible soursce for anti-vivisection.

<p>Don't kid yourself into believing that using animals in the laboratory is going to save your life. If that were true, most diseases would now have a cure. And you know what rats say - 9 out of 10 scientists cause cancer.

<p>Enid
<p>The Queenie Foundation, Inc.
<p>Manchester, CT Posted 07/09/2008 9:02 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous:
You are so DEAD WRONG. So called "animal care" regulations are so pitiful, they amount to nothing more than an attempt to keep the helpless victim alive for one more excruciatingly painful experiment. If not for PETA and other AR organizations, you wouldn't have this article on which to comment at all. The disgusting, hidden and well protected (legally) dungeons of torture are a shame and a disgrace, a horrid reflection of the consuming public's selfish desires and insatiable perceptions of their supreme power. Beware of Man! Posted 07/10/2008 05:54 AMReply

Anonymous says,

Every time I meet a Peta or HSUS insider I find something from their background that makes them transfer anger and resentment felt as a child onto the care takers of animals. The most common factor is that most of these people have felt some abuse, abandonment, neglect, etc., from someone who also cared for animals. Hence thier felings of betrayal are transfered onto animals and thus the animals must be being misstreated also. That seems to be on a subconcious level the mainstay for 99 percent of the true animal liberationists. The reality that they are not allowing their concious minds to see is that it was they who were denied or mistreated and that they are seeking revenge angainst anyone with animals.
These folks do not care about labratory mice anymore than they cae about Pit Bull which they are seeking to eliminate completely.
Peta's one shelter puts to death mnore animals of those they take in than any other shelter. Therefor it is not a shelter, it is a death or sterilazation camp. less than 3% are lucky enough to escape alive and without their organs.
Needless to say, they ahve also discussed the earth without human inhabitants as though their self hate wishes human extinction.
The problem is that these special interest groups have been gandering funds under false pretense and the public is not aware of their true agendas.
Next stop the plague.
The world without medical research, over run by feed lab rats. That would suit Ingrid Newkirk just fine... as a rat is a pig is a boy... and the world left without human is just fine to her. Posted 07/10/2008 12:06 PMReply

Anonymous says,

This isn't animal rights it's human rights. It's a socialist group where Nazi's jumped the fence into the socialist movement. It's nothing but a front for a take over by the communist party. The longer they go unexposed the more alarmed the public will be when PETA or HSUS shows up with their assult rifles to kill anyone with a animal. Look around you its allready happening. Posted 07/10/2008 1:59 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ <You want the world to go backward in time when there was no treatment no cure no hope for cancer, copd or any of the problems animals have helped get rid of. The studies are not just for humans but for animals too. Dogs are living a longer then normal life expectancy due to the treatments now available. I suspect you dont give a rats ass about animals you are only concerned about how much money is in your pocket from screaming " ANIMAL CRUELITY." Why dont you come down to earth. Money cant buy you a pain free life. You arent fooling anyone, you are about" me,myself and I.

a href="#c18316">Anonymous</a>: Posted 07/10/2008 2:06 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous: Who are you fooling the Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine has PETA 's leader sitting on the board. That group is PETA and her paid off ELF's.... None of them care about animals only money........@ Anonymous: Posted 07/10/2008 2:17 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous: Without research your pet animals would live half their life span. You nor your pet would be able to take a asprin. All animal reasearch first helps animals then it helps man. Without research you would be old at 39 ever think of that. Posted 07/10/2008 2:21 PMReply

Anonymous says,

Animal reasearch has become a comodity, not a necessity. The animal model has eliminated many potential drugs and has put on the market a plethora of dangerous drugs. It is wrong, it is unethical and need to be at least curbed if not completely eliminated. People who think this is a necessary evil, including the beaurocrats that continue to push for this obcenity, have no clue what animal "research" entitles. Some of us, who have seen the abuse, the inherent cruelty in all procedures involved (including life inprisonemnt) are considered lunetics. We are only guilty for standing up and voicing the outrage that all poor creatures subjected to research cannot do. Posted 07/10/2008 8:39 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous: animal research is A NECESSITY. The artificial heart came from animal research. All drugs used in antiboditics came from animal research. I have seen animals in research labs. They were well cared for. Are you telling me your Darwin views allow you to look inside a animals brain and know what he's thinking? Or are you in kin to animals and can read there MINDS? Lunetics, backward thinking inbreds(the animal rights people) get a LIFE STOP SPREADING YOUR PROPAGANDA. Posted 07/11/2008 11:29 AMReply

Anonymous says,

Yes animal research is a necessity! And human life is more important than animal life, no questions asked. ELF and ALF are terrorist organizations and PETA is just one in the making. How long will it be before animal rights activists take to the streets and try to hurt or kill innocent people who they see as doing wrong by eating meat or walking a dog or stupid crap like that? There are already people committing local and federal crimes to this matter. The only good solution is to get tough on the people who commit crimes such as extortion, arson, production of bombs, use of bombs, death threats, etc. and have them do hard time. The minute an ELF/ALF terrorist takes an innocent person's life over this stupidity, the death penalty should be strictly enforced on those responsible, there should be no mercy shown. These wastes of life do not need to be filling the public's minds with their brainwashed rhetoric.

"if you had to hurt somebody or intimidate them or kill them, it would be morally justifiable." ------------- That is a very disturbing comment! More evidence on how psychotic these individuals truly are. Posted 08/26/2008 12:23 PMReply

Anonymous says,

@ Anonymous: Hey guess what? John P. Goodwin is actually Vice President & Treasurer of The Procter & Gamble Company. Nice job, moron. Don't trust anything that comes from from Center of Consumer Freedom. Posted 01/29/2009 04:21 AMReply

Anonymous says,

The amount of cr@p I've read in some of these comments almost outweighs the load of cr@p in the article itself. The only people who support vivisection are those who don't know enough about it, or those who make money from it. Buy products that aren't tested on animals. Your dollar is your democracy in today's society. Posted 01/29/2009 04:41 AMReply

Anonymous says,

The Center For Consumer Freedom (CCF) is a FRONT GROUP that encourages drunkards getting behind the wheel and the exploitation of women and animals. Do a little more RESEARCH before quoting anything from them. Their pockets are stuffed full from Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds, so you'd be better off not listening to what they say. PS I'm a smoker, but I still don't trust anyone paid off by big tobacco, INCLUDING UCLA. Posted 04/24/2009 02:05 AMReply