Mark D. Garfinkel
garfinkl at iitmax.iit.edu
Tue Feb 1 11:14:56 EST 1994
mhollowa at epo.som.sunysb.edu (Michael Holloway) writes:
>In article <brownbrd.759900648 at pv0a17.vincent.iastate.edu>
>brownbrd at iastate.edu (Grizzly Adams) writes:
>>The training group I am part of as a graduate student recently met and
>>discussed a small portion of bioethics - specifically that of "animal rights".
>That's disappointing, unless the discussion centered around educating the
>participants about the danger presented by "animal rights" terrorists.
>The only thing that a researcher needs to be taught about it is how to best
>protect yourself from terrorists.
*For the most part I agree. Animal rights activism is, I think,
just one facet of a Luddite anti-human point-of-view that is extremely
shortsighted & dangerous, for a whole bunch of reasons. However, isn't
it a valid point that healthy animals will be better laboratory research
subjects, from which one gets superior data? At the risk of sounding touchy-
feelly, it seems to me that the answer is "obviously, intuitively, yes."
More information about the Bioforum