A friend sent me this link to the results of a John Hopkins study that’s been having success shrinking and even eliminating cancerous tumors by using bacteria. It sounds promising, although it seems far too far away to be of help to my boy John, but I was struck by the researchers’ description of the decade-long work so far, beginning with mice, advancing to dogs and now, on a limited scale, humans.
Then there’s Priscilla Feral, of Friends of Animals, and her organization’s objective of banning all drug testing on animals. Here’s the little lady now:
The idea that scientists ought to have non-human primates at their disposal
relies on finding some ethical borderline between humans and all other
Regulating drug dosages and the training of handlers does not mitigate the
ethical concern about treating other animals as instruments – animals who,
once conscious of their lives, have individual value unto themselves.
Implicated here are deeper questions than university administrators or the
U.S. Department of Agriculture can reach. Monkeys are caged, and they die,
at UConn and elsewhere, during experiments that follow the USDA protocols.
Tidying up these experiments isn’t enough. It’s time for humanity to evolve
beyond the habit of using other animals as little surrogate people.
Friends of Animals
Copyright 2007, Hartford Courant
Far be it from me to wish ill on Priscilla Feral or anyone who donates to her organization, but I do hope that if they ever develop cancer, or stroke, or need to undergo open heart surgery, that they will eschew any drugs that were derived from animal testing, and will insist on heart surgery without the aid of a heart- lung machine. And if, God forbid, one of their children develops a childhood cancer, that they’ll insist upon treatments available only in the good old days, when 75% of such children died, rather than the 80% who survive today as at the result of drugs developed by testing on animals.
I’m all about principle, and I do so admire those who stand by theirs.