Medical progress needs transportation

Pleased to report my guest post on the Speaking of research blog called Safeguarding Medical progress means supporting animal transport.

You can find it by clicking the following link. Likewise if you work in transportation or an affiliated industry, it is important to know how you can support initiatives that seek to support the continued transportation of laboratory destined animals. Being familiar with the sources for educated information about animal research is equally as important.

If your company or you as an individual are called targets by animal extremists, do not hesitate and contact the appropriate parties.   Unless of course you support PETA campaigns against airlines.
In which case you support the statements that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on or use for entertainment (think of zoo's and aquaria or other conservation mechanisms).

With more than one million living species described, the animal kingdom is by far the largest on earth. I can't wait to see PETA's first invertebrate campaign in support of  animal rights for Nematodes (agrilus planipennis). After all, despite their threat to agriculture, aren't they all animals worthy figthing for? What about protection for agricultural plant species many of us depend upon for our  diets? Surely using bees for polination puposes is called slavery by some and exploiting their honey equates to animal cruelty! 

What about you? Is medical progress on your mind? Do the right thing and support animal research. Who knows one day you , or a family member, too may benefit from the many medical advances we are used to. Take a look here.


 

HSUS, PETA share $ and resources, Air China stops primate transport

Source Animal Agricultural Alliance

There is a complex interplay going on between animal organizations that involves money and people. No wonder then that there is commonality in targets, strategy and in moving forward against animal use industries. Here's how the Animal Agricultural Alliance describes it:

Radical activist organizations are leading the fight to grant animals the same legal rights as humans. The ideology of the animal rights movement- that animals are not ours to own, enjoy, or use in any way- is a direct assault on farmers and pet owners. Activists often hide their true agenda in order to gain the support of unknowing pet lovers. Here, you will find current updates from the world of animal rights.

In fact talking of targets and opposing animal use,  yet another airline - Air China - has ceased transporting laboratory destined monkeys, as PETA reports a victory against NHP laboratory animal transport:

http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2012/07/31/victory-cruelty-won-t-fly-with-air-china.aspx

Repeated by smash hls

http://smashhls.com/2012/08/01/air-china-no-longer-transporting-monkeys-for-vivisection/

The sad story continues? Not really. Facts and figures show that the majority of laboratory animals consist of rats and mice. Whilst research does need primates, the locations where research now takes place, are simply moving closer to where the animals are.

Should you be interested in where all these charitable donations go to at PETA take a look here: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4314

PETA in FY2011 earned $30,591,252 in contributions, whereas total expenses amounted to $36,869,314 leaving a $-5,057,199 deficit for the year!

Not bad for a registered charity that apparently doesn't run or own shelters and lives of public donations. According to the charity evaluator that leaves them with an overall one star rating out of four.

Free from harm

In previous blog entries I have written about (animal) person hood and the risk associated therewith. Most recently I stumbled upon the works of photograph Jo Anne McArthur or at least as it is described in
freefromharm.org  You can read the article here. I will however quote a part of the article for the purposes of the article in this blog:

the really important theme running through the We Animals project: Each individual animal that McArthur encounters and photographs on her journeys is a someone rather than a something. That may seem like a matter of semantics to some, but the difference is truly a paradigm shift in our relationship with other species. A something is to us an object. But a someone is a person, an individual. The beauty and genius behind McArthur’s work is how she portrays animals in our society that have been objectified to show that actually they are individuals whose individuality has simply been erased from our consciousness. Her images compel us to reconnect to who they truly are—individuals.

I happened to have worked in or with at least two domains where animal use and breeding prevail, namely agriculture and life science research for medical advancement. From as far as I can tell there is no one in either industry that takes pleasure in exposing animals to painful procedures. That doesn't take away the fact that it remains necessary.

Can you imagine creating a strong emotional bond with an animal  to the point where it becomes counterproductive to the very aims of the enterprise because you consider the animal as an individual? Can one actually afford to walk that path? Yes probably but then for a very short period of time and then concluding that what you are about to undertake is absolutely necessary. That the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Asking for person hood is the beginning of the end for both industries and probably much more.

Most of us go to the grocery store to purchase food such as meat, eggs, dairy products, bread, fruits and vegetables. Likewise for drugs at the drug store. We did not have to do a single thing, except for earning money, to take advantage of these benefits. Actually we take them for granted. I did not have to raise an animal, take care of its health, grow it up to an adult stage, provide it with food and shelter, slaughter it, remove its intestines, cut it into pieces etc. And the same stands for all of our other food habits, the medications we take and so many other things we enjoy on a daily basis. Most of us wouldn't even know nor have the most basics skills it takes to be able to do these things I just mentioned.

I actually happen to agree with the web site's title 'free from harm'. May we humans be free from the harm that these people call upon us with the greatest sense of conviction and rightfulness! I for one will blissfully ignore them, go to my supermarket to buy my steak and take my animal tested pills. May those involved in or with animal use industries be free from harm and harassment such as this and this.

No fly policies

When it comes to transporting laboratory animals airlines in general have very cold feet. I have posted several links (in previous posts) that point to AR campaigns which specifically target airlines. The end result of these campaigns are predictively always the same: A NO FLY policy is imposed.
How can airlines positively react to the transportation of laboratory destined animals, when they are flooded by thousands of emails? What should they do when they are being called targets and staff constantly harassed?
Against fur and petition cargo-cruelty-tell-airlines-to-stop-shipping-primates-for-research/
and cargo cruelty tell airlines to stop shipping primates for research

Should all airlines pay and display the 'leaping bunny' logo in order to keep animal rights activists at bay? Will that even suffice when AR groups outright say that they oppose any animal use or until total liberation takes place? Remember airlines are in the business of flying people, animals and other cargo from A to B, safely and securely. 

It has to be said that despite the claims made by AR groups, very few animals are injured, escape or die in transit. This is not happening out of luck. Airlines train their staff towards the acceptance, packing and handling of live animals. The conditions in which the animals fly are the same as those for passengers, except of course animals are in crates and there is no inflight service for most of them. I said most because for some indeed in-flight attendants are present. Shippers too contribute to the successful movement of animals as they have an intimate knowledge of the species they ship and an adequately sized container is used in accordance with airline regulations. So, No they are not crammed into a container, nor are they exposed to cruel conditions in the belly of an aircraft.
Yes there will be noise and occasional fumes but the belly hold is heated and air is being circulated. Usually lights are turned off so the animals experience night type conditions in order to keep them calm.This is after all an aircraft/ airport/ warehouse environment and engines expectedly do make noise and release fumes. International Airline regulations for transporting animals -also contains a chapter dedicated to laboratory animals.

In the end however we all need to realize that transporting animals by air is not what airlines live of. It is a tiny fraction of their revenues. Transportation of monkeys is an even smaller piece, a subset of a subset. And it all has to be done right. None of those involved have an interest in animals that arrive dead, that manage to escape or injure themselves. Airlines do a good job at transporting animals, including those destined for research.

We do have to take this analysis a bit further. What happens when carriers no longer accept transporting animals? The animals end up in other means of transport or worse are smuggled across borders. In this scenario we all loose, except Animal rights groups. Isn't that the goal anyway?
Since indeed animal research is crucial, it is equally crucial to speak up and act in favor of carriers and to let this be known to them.  The time for action is now, the choice of having air transport services is yours to make! Together let's keep logistics working for you and the public.