Bill O\’Reilly and Bridget Chufo vs. Howard Lyman

Howard Lyman appeared on The O\’Reilly Factor on February 26 making the case for vegetarianism. Bill O\’Reilly wondered if simply eating in moderation wasn\’t the key to health and long life, leading to this exchange between Lyman and Bridget Chufo, the founder of Healthy Performance Weight Loss and Wellness Center,

LYMAN: Well, vegetarians live 10 years longer than people on the standard American diet.

O\’REILLY: Is that true, Ms. Chofu?

BRIDGET CHUFO, HEALTHY PERFORMANCE WEIGHT LOSS CTR.: Well, I think you\’re mixing up some confusion here in the sense that vegetarians, right, nine to 10 years longer. But most vegetarians have a more healthy lifestyle in the sense that they don\’t smoke, they don\’t drink, their exercise, they sleep adequately. So just eating in a healthier manner, in a vegetarian way, may not be the single variable that we\’re talking about here.

O\’REILLY: Right, but does Mr. Lyman have a point that eating meat and dairy products and things like that are harmful to you?

CHUFO: I agree with you, Mr. O\’Reilly. Everything in moderation. The fewer foods that you can pick from, the fewer nutrients that you\’re going to get into your body, especially with the kids. The kids need protein. And they\’re not always going to get it from the nuts and the seeds and the tofu and things of this nature, simply because we have to deal with reality.

I have some pretty strong disagreements with Chufo, but she is spot on about the reason why vegetarians tend to live longer than non-vegetarians, with the proviso that vegetarians also likely benefit from increased consumption of fruits and vegetables (i.e, one of the problems with the standard American diet is not that it includes meat, but rather that it does not include enough fruits and vegetables.

Source:

Meatless or Meaningless? The O\’Reilly Factor, Transcript, February 26, 2002.

Share

Is Pain Research Worthless?

Patricia Wolff of New West Research recently posted an e-mail to AR-NEWS about animal research conducted at the John Hopkins School of Medicine which Wolff headlined, \”Painful, Worthless Animal Experiment.\” In fact, while the experiment was, of necessity, painful, it was far from worthless.

The study involved research into whether or not a soy-based diet can reduce pain and inflammation, and was the result of a chance observation by John Hopkins researchers while collaborating with an Israeli researcher on sabbatical in this country.

The Israeli researcher had bred a strain of rats for use in studying nerve injury pain. Some of those rats were sent to the United States. But when he began his experiments in the United States, the rats did not experience as much pain as did his mice back in Israel. After eliminating a number of factors, it turned out that the two sets of rats had been fed different diets. The rats in the United States had been fed a soy-based diet.

John Hopkins researcher Jill Tall and her colleagues set out to discover if the soy-based diet was indeed responsible for the diminished pain. So they took 20 rats, and fed 10 of them a dairy protein diet and the other 10 a soy based diet. Then the rats were randomly injected with either a placebo or an inflammatory solution. The rats who received the inflammatory solution and were on the soy-based diet experienced significantly less inflammation than the rats fed the dairy protein diet.

The rats on a soy-based diet also exhibited a much higher pain tolerance than did the rats on the dairy protein diet.

This is obviously a small, preliminary study but will lead to further studies. Currently Tall and her colleagues are looking in detail at the soy protein trying to get a better idea of what might component might be helping to relieve pain.

Many people seem to think that such pain research is an unjustifiable use of animals. But Tall is a research fellow in anesthesiology and critical care who specializes in pain experienced by cancer patients. The reality is that the advent of safe, reliable anesthetics relied heavily on animal research (anesthetic techniques which are also used to minimize the pain of animals during medical research). Continued progress on relieving pain will also rely on animal research which, by its very nature, unfortunately involves intentionally inflicting pain on animals.

Wolff had it half right — such research is painful, but hardly worthless.

Source:

Soy diet eases pain, animal study finds. Nicolle Charbonneau, HealthScoutNews, March 15, 2002.

Share

Genetically Modified Dairy Cows Cloned in Australia

Australia joined the United States, Europe, and New Zealand in producing its first cloned and genetically modified dairy calves.

A team of researchers at the Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development first cloned several cow embryos. They then inserted an extra bovine protein gene taken from a cow cell into the embryos. The extra gene boosts the amount of protein in milk expressed by the cows, though it will be awhile before researchers learn by how much the protein content is increased.

The same technique, of course, could be utilized to make the cows express other compounds, such as pharmaceuticals, in milk. \”Being able to add specific genes to cloned calves will provide us with the potential to produce milk containing human vaccines and medicines for diseases such as hemophilia,\” said Monash Institute director Alan Trounson.

Such possibilities are still 5-10 years away, however.

Source:

Australia breeds super milkers. AAP, March 27, 2002.

Australia look to milk cow cloning. Reuters, March 27, 2002.

Protein shakes on the way after cloned cows born. Penny Fannin, Sydney Morning Herald, March 28, 2002.

Share

Jean Barnes Just Makes It Up as She Goes Along

Jean Barnes posted an e-mail to AR-NEWS the other day urging animal rights activist to contact the Commerce Club in Atlanta, Georgia, to protest an upcoming appearance by Deborah Insel. Insel is a former high school teacher who is going to discuss her work at trying to increase the number of low-income high school kids who go on to college.

For Barnes and others, Insel is fair game because she is married to Emory University professor Tom Insel, who is the former director of the Yerkes Primate Center. According to Barnes\’ e-mail,

It is doubtful she will reveal her husband Tom has tortured and killed animals for years at Emory.

Deborah, has known for years about her husbands experiments and has failed to take a public position about the cruelty involved. Rather, Deborah Insel has (publically) remained silent and allowed the cruelty to continue. Deborah Insel has financially benefitted from Tom\’s salary at Emory/Yerkes as he tortures and mistreats non-human primates and other animals at Emory/Yerkes. She has participated in cruelty by omission.

Cruelty by omission? Isn\’t that what Barnes specializes in when she conveniently leaves out relevant facts and resorts to outright lies to make her case?

Barnes claims, for example that,

Tom Insel, one of the many vivisectors who has performed experiments on animals, especially primates at Yerkes, has made a career of useless and cruel experiments on animals. As Insel has admitted, Yerkes spent years on AIDS research knowing the experiments were useless and our tax money squandered. Not surprisingly, Insel failed to comment on the pain and suffering of animals he needlessly tortured in his experiments. www.the-scientist.com/yr1999/august/smaglik_p7_990816.html

When Elizabeth Griffin, a Yerkes researcher died, Insel was seen on 20/20 making callous remarks. Yerkes\’ employees stated Insel blamed Griffin for her own death. Emory quickly reassigned Tom to other duties.

Lets look at these claims one at a time.

Has Insel \”made a career of useless and cruel experiments\”? Actually, Insel\’s research in both humans and non-human animals has produced an important body of work in the area he specializes in, neuroscience (Barnes implies that Insel has done AIDS research with monkeys which is simply not true). Insel was the first to show that serotonin uptake drugs were useful in treating some mental disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder.

In animal research, he has specialized in studies of pair bonding in rodents. In 1991, Insel won the Curt Richter Prize from the International Society for Psychoneuro-endocrinology for rodent research demonstrating the importance that the oxytocin and vasopressin pathways in the brain serve in forming social attachments.

More recently, Insel and Larry Young of Emory University became the first researchers to alter the behavior of an animal through the alteration of a single gene. They created a genetically modified mouse that contained a gene from the prairie vole that suppresses vasopressin production. The mice were far more interested in female mice than are normal mice and made them more monogamous.

Did Insel say, as Barnes claims, that \”Yerkes spent years on AIDS research knowing the experiments were useless and our tax money squandered.\” Of course not — that claim exists only in Barnes\’ imagination. In fact what Insel told The Scientist and others is that it had become apparent that chimpanzees were not a useful AIDS model, largely because it takes them so long to develop the disease. This is hardly news as most research echo Insel\’s view that monkeys are a much better animal model, and much innovative AIDS research involving monkeys has been and is currently being conducted at Yerkes.

Did Emory University \”quickly reassign Tom to other duties\” after his appearance on ABC\’s 20/20? That is a claim repeated over and over on web sites, but the reality is much different.

Insel did indeed step down as director of Yerkes on October 16, 1999. But not to be reassigned to some backwater out of the public eye because Emory was embarrassed. Instead, Insel resigned from Yerkes to take over as head of Emory\’s Center for Behavioral Neuroscience. The CBN was started with a whopping $40 million grant from the National Institute of Health — one of the largest such grants ever awarded. As Insel noted in an interview, the Emory neuroscience center is probably the biggest program of its kind in the United States. If anything, Insel\’s move to CBN was a promotion and returned him to concentrate on his primary interest, neuroscience.

Maybe where Barnes is from being appointed to head up the largest center in the United States dedicated to your specialty qualifies as being \”quickly reassigned . . . to other duties,\” but the rest of us should be so lucky.

Sources;

AIDS vaccine researchers turn from chimps to monkeys. Paul Smaglik, The Scientist, 13[16]:7, Aug. 16, 1999.

(GA) animal abuser\’s wife at Commerce Club. Jean Barnes, E-mail, March 25, 2002.

Yerkes chief steps down for new post. M.A.J. McKenna, The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, October 16, 1999.

Why do Voles Fall in Love? Emory Magazine, Spring 1999.

Atlanta\’s Medical Mile: AIDS, Neuroscience Center Ready To Open. M.A.J. McKenna, The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, October 3, 1999.

Insel leaves Yerkes post to head neuroscience center. Emory Report, October 25, 1999.

New techniques show the power of a single gene. The Dana Brain Daybook, September/October 1999.

Share

More Cow Bingo Madness

Connellsville Area High School plans on using a \”Cow Bingo\” event as a fund raiser, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has already sent letters to the school complaining that the event is cruel to the cow.

The event will involve marking the front lawn of the school into 3,025 squares, allowing people to buy a square for $10, with the winner being decided on where the cow decides to do her business.

PETA\’s Amy Rhodes sent a letter saying, \”We are writing to ask that you ensure that this event is immediately replaced with a more humane and truly entertaining one.\”

Principal Robert McLuckey told the Associated Press that the show will go on. \”People have already bought tickets for it,\” McLuckey said. \”We have had a positive response to it overall.\”

Source:

Despite PETA opposition, prom fund-raiser goes on. The Associated Press, March 26, 2002.

Share

Guard Who Crushed Kittens Receives One Year Jail Sentence

A former Sing Sing prison guard was sentenced this week to a year in jail for killing five kittens in a garbage compactor.

Saying that the crime was \”so offensive and so calculated and so gratuitously cruel, it diminishes the humanity of everybody,\” Westchester Supreme Court Justice Kenneth Lange sentenced Ronald Hunlock, 48, to a year in prison.

Hunlock actually received six separate one-year sentences — one for each of the kittens as well as one for the mother cat — but the judge allowed Hunlock to serve the sentences concurrently.

Under 3-year-old New York statute, the maximum prison time Hunlock could have received was two years.

On March 22, 2002, Hunlock was officially fired from his job (he had been on suspension without pay since being arrested) and forfeited over half a million in pension and retirement benefits as a result.

Sources:

Sing Sing guard gets year in jail for crushing cats. Owen Motiz, New York Daily News, March 23, 2002.

Sing Sing guard gets year in jail for killing 5 kittens. Jim Fitzgerald, Associated Press, March 22, 2002.

Share

Memo to Jeff Luers: Don\’t Do the Crime If You Can\’t Do the Time

In June 2000, Jeff Luers and Craig Marshall went to a Chevrolet dealership in Oregon and set three pickups on fire, causing an estimated $40,000 in damage. Almost a year later, on June 11, 2001, the 22-year old activist was sentenced to 22 years in jail for those acts of arson and related crimes. A large portion of that sentence does not carry any parole option, so Luers will likely spend close to 15 years in jail. Good for him.

The facts behind Luers\’ case show that whatever else he is, he is not very bright. Luers had been just released from jail on a disorderly conduct charge. Plainclothes police were tailing him but lost him near the car dealership. He was arrested 10 minutes after the fire by another office on a traffic violation!

Luers received a 22-year sentence for two reasons. First, unlike Marshall, he refused to plea bargain. Marshall plead to lesser charges and received 5 1/2 years. As one newspaper account put it, Luers chose to roll the dice on a trial and lost big time. Second, Luers was also convicted of trying to ignite a gasoline tanker at Eugene\’s Tyree Oil Co. in May 2000. The judge apparently decided that based on those two incidents, Luers was a serial arsonist and gave him a stiff sentence in response.

Of course animal rights and environmental extremists see Luers as a victim due to his long sentence. They seem to think that Luers and the right to commit arson because his conscience told him it was the right thing to do, but society does not have the right to protect itself against arsonists such as Luers.

Luers himself recently wrote a letter to Rep. Scott McInnis, who is conducting hearings into ecoterrorism, which is reproduced in its entirety below,

Dear Mr Scott McInnis,

I am writing in response to your recent statements and questions about me. I do not appreciate your deliberate and malicious misrepresentations of my words to further your political goals. Not only have you taken my words and formed new sentences with them attributing them to me, you have quoted me as saying things that I have never said. As an elected Representative of the people, I believe it is your legal and moral duty to be truthful when carrying out the political and legal activities of your office.

However I do appreciate your concern about me \” [wasting] away in prison for the next two plus decades.\” You will be pleased to know that is not the case. I have stayed quite active in my college studies working towards my BA. Also, I have had a unique opportunity to discuss my situation with media from around the globe who have shown a surprising interest in my sentence.

You must realize Scott, that two years ago I was just a young man frustrated by the increasingly severe destruction of the environment. I burned some tires on some trucks as a result of that frustration. Perhaps my actions were misguided. Perhaps they can be rationalized as the lesser of two evils. It is all perspective.

Had I been given a reasonable sentence I would have been forgotten by the public. I would have been one news story.I would have served my sentence and finished my BA. I would have been released, reunited with my family and enjoyed the rest of my life. Yes, I would have continued to be active in efforts to protect the environment, but I would have avoided activities that would lead me back to prison.

By giving me a sentence of 22 years, viewed by a majority of people as overly harsh and extreme, the system has put me in the spot light, giving me international attention. I have been made to be an example. However, that has only served to make me a political prisoner and for some perhaps even a martyr. This is not a role I chose to fill. It was forced upon me. It is oppression that creates revolutionaries Scott, and it is injustice that ignites revolutions.

In defense of Mother Earth

Sincerely,

Jeff Luers

If Luers thinks he has much of a spotlight, he is deluding himself — in a couple years no one but the small cadre of true believers will remember him (his case was barely reported nationally as it was). But he has received a lot of attention from other extremists.

According to an article by Josh Harper in a recent issue of No Compromise, for example,

The fire Free was convicted of setting was an act of compassion. The gas guzzling monstrosities known as SUV\’s slaughter more animals each year than the fur industry, emit fumes that harm the well being of plants and animals alike, and take us further down the path of a world without green spaces. As forests, grasslands, and other wild areas fall to make more room for parking lots and freeways, is it any wonder that people are beginning to attack the auto industry?

Animal rights, extremist environmental sites, and anarchist sites are filled with similar screeds condemning the injustices supposedly done to Luers.

Luers is appealing his sentence, but faces an uphill battle. Meanwhile the car dealership recently filed a civil suit against Luers and Marshall to cover the cost of the destroyed property.

With any luck, the dealers will have to wait 20 years before seeing any money from Luers.

Sources:

Man Called \’Free\’ Sits In Prison. Bryan Denson, The Oregonian, September 25, 2001.

Chevy dealer sues anarchists convicted in arson fire. Associated Press, February 27, 200.

In Honor of Jeff Luers. Josh Harper, No Compromise, Issue 18, Summer 2001.

Share

Activists Unhappy at Animal Researcher\’s Appointment to Head National Institute of Health

Rick Bogle summarized the animal rights view of Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni who was appointed yesterday as the new head of the National Institute of Health. \”Dog vivisector named to head NIH,\” Bogle headlined his e-mail to an animal rights mailing list, complete with a few citations to Zerhouni\’s publications. Zerhouni\’s fascinating work gives a prime opportunity for animal welfare activists to highlight the important work being done by researchers with dogs and other animals.

Zerhouni specializes in radiology and has spent the last decade working on techniques that will revolutionize the field. What Zerhouni does mostly with dogs is give them MRIs.

The MRI is, of course, an incredibly useful diagnostic tool, but it does have its limitations. Take, for example, myocardial infarction (MI) — commonly referred to as a heart attack.

During a heart attack, blood flow to muscles cells in the heart is inadequate and the cells die. In almost all heart attacks, decline in blood flow is caused by a closing of the blood supply from the coronary artery.

Researchers used to think that heart attacks only occurred when there was severe blockage of the coronary artery, but it turns out that even very minor blockages in the coronary artery can cause a heart attack. Unfortunately measuring how much blood is flowing through the heart is still a rather difficult procedure. Obtaining accurate results currently involves a two-day regiment of tests that is very expensive.

Zerhouni and his colleagues are working on a technique that couples the MRI with sophisticated computer analysis and that replace that two-day, expensive test with a one-hour, relatively cheap enhanced MRI that produces a full three dimensional view of the heart and blood flow.

This would revolutionize treatment and, almost as important, prevention of heart attacks. As Zerhouni said in a John Hopkins press release a few years ago,

I would like to develop a one-stop shop approach to cardiac disease that will revolutionize cardiac testing. If we can make proactive screening for heart diseases cheap and rapid enough with radiology, then, combined with genetic techniques, we could identify individuals most likely to get cardiac disease.

So where do the dogs come into play? Dogs\’ cardiovascular system is very similar to the human respiratory system, making dogs a popular animal model for cardiovascular research (dogs were instrumental in the development of open-heart surgery, stent implantation procedures, heart transplants and other cardiovascular innovations).

Zerhouni uses dogs in his research to refine and improve the computer algorithms that he uses to post-process the data from the MRI. Researchers can plug in new algorithms and quickly find out how accurate or inaccurate they are and in this way build a better system much faster than could ever be accomplished with human beings.

Source:

Zerhouni appointed chairman of Hopkins radiology. John Hopkins Medical Institute, February 7, 1996.

Dog vivisector named to head NIH. Rick Bogle, E-mail, March 26, 2002.

Share

Anyone for Pufferfish Rights?

One of the commonly heard refrains about non-human primates is that since they are close to humans genetically, they should be granted rights. If that\’s the case, then what about the poor pufferfish?

The pufferfish is largely known for its potential to kill those who eat it. The pufferfish contains a neurotoxin and, if not prepared properly, can quickly kill a human being who eats it (which, of course, makes it all that much more interesting for thrill seekers).

The pufferfish is also of great interest to medical researchers, however, who are busy trying to sequence its genome. What might surprise a lot of people is that the odd-looking pufferfish is genetically very similar to human beings, which is what makes it of such potential use in research.

\”In terms of gene complement, we are least 90% similar — probably higher,\” said Greg Elgar, who heads up the effort to sequence the pufferfish genome. \”There are big differences in gene expression levels and alternate transcripts, but if you\’re talking about diversity, number and types of proteins, then it\’s pretty difficult to tell us apart.\”

Last October, Elgar announced that one species of pufferfish, Fugu rubripes had been sequenced, and sequencing of another species, Tetraodon nigroviridis, is under way.

Aside from the similarity with the human genome, the other advantage of sequencing the pufferfish genome is that it is relatively small — only about one-tenth the size of the human genome. This is because it lacks the so-called \”junk DNA\” present in many species, including human beings. This makes it easier for researchers to determine the function of the DNA. According to Elgar,

We\’re pretty good at spotting coding sequences, mostly through cDNAs and EST [expressed sequence tags] work, but we\’re very poor at finding regulatory sequences, basically because no one knows what we\’re looking for. These control sequences are often shared between Fugu and mammals, and because the rest of the \’junk\’ is not well conserved, as it often is when you compare mouse and man, they stand out and slap you if you know how to look.

Already, the pufferfish effort has led to important findings about the human genome. For example, one of the things of interest to researchers are evolutionarily conserved regions (ecores) — these are parts of the genetic makeup of animals that exist across species and are the result of a shared evolutionary past.

Because the pufferfish genome lacks much of the junk DNA that makes it difficult to spot ecores, researchers were able to use the pufferfish to identify 207 new ecores between humans and other species.

Source:

Pufferfish genomes probe human genes. Ricki Lewis, The Scientist, 16[6]:22, March 18, 2002.

Share

Animal Rights Movement and Excessive Regulation \”Delay Lifesaving Drugs\”

Medical researchers told the European Breast Cancer Conference that animal rights attacks combined with excessive regulations governing clinical trials are delaying the development of life saving cancer treatments.

Dr. Michael Baum, who chaired the conference, said,

Women will die unnecessarily because of the delays these two threats cause.

. . .

Britain has led the world in reducing deaths from breast cancer because of the research and innovation we have in this country. That is being lost. We are already seeing delays in new drugs coming through and young researchers are deciding it\’s not worth coming into the field because of all the restrctions.

As if animal rights attacks were not enough, in 1996 the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products imposed additional regulations on the conduct of clinical trials. Many medical researchers believe those regulations went too far in protecting the privacy of patients in clinical trials. According to Baum,

I accept that we need to protect patients and protec thtier privacy but these restrictions are nonsensical. There is a pently to pay for them and that pentalty is in peoiple\’s lives.

Source:

Animal rights \’delay lifesaving drugs\’. Helen Rumbelow, The Times (UK), March 23, 2002.

Share