Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 30, 1985)
Commentary: Researchers and PETA should seek compromise In any argument. individuals on opposite skins of a mutually established fence lend to remain steadfast in the attitude that their position is correct, and the opponent is in the wrong. Such . is the case, with a few uxcep (ions, in the continuing debate between the University ex perimental scientists and the animal rights group. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), On one side of the dispute we have the University research community stating that animal research is needed because it benefits humans. On the other side we have PBTA declaring animal research should bo ban ned because hurting or kilting animals through research is morally wrong. At face value, it may seem that the two sides of this argu ment are diametrically oppos ed. and consequently, there is no possibility for resolution or agreement on any points. I pro pose that this is in-fact not the case and that both parties might ' benefit front working toward an understanding of each other's position' rather than hurling barbs across the chasm To begin an objective analysis of th&argument. we must try to understand and appreciate.the contributions.. that have been given to us, in part, through animal, research. We have won the battle against contagious diseases by first testing vaccines and antibodies in live animals. We have worked toward eliminating harmful food ad ditives, such as saccharine and red dye, from our foods by observing the carcinogenic results of those additives in test animals. We better understand our own human anatomy and physiological functioning through comparisons to the systems of many animal species. In fact, if we took a global perspective of the way animal research has influenced and changed our lives, it would be accurate to say that if there had been no animal research in the last eight and one-half decades, the face of the world would be drastically altered. The ultimate motivation for animal research is to conserve and improve human life, and Prof. Richard Marrocco states this position plainly in the opening of his ODE .commen tary (Oct. 14) when he says; “I . have a fundamental belief that science ought- to work for the good of humanity.” ' As a. psychology student interested, in a human* jstic/psychbdynamic in terpretationof the human per son, and without having- the benefit of substantial scientific background' in my coursework, ’ it would be foolish of me to at tempt to explain exactly how Dr. Marrocco's research works for the good of humanity. I am sure that Dr. Marrocco, a respected professor in our university community, does research that legitimately sup ports his fundamental belief, and I appreciate his willingness to explain his use of the macaque monkeys in the animal lab. But as a past employee of the University animal laboratory, ,1 must take exception with some of the procedures which Dr. Marrocco has described. In describing the surgical pro cedure which removes a portion of the skull. Dr. Marrocco says, ‘‘The scalp heals rapidly, and the animals totally ignore the cap." What he means is that for some of the monkeys the. scalp heals rapidly,, but in’reality, sortie of the. monkeys ex perience continued periodic bleeding after each experinien taI procedure, and occasionally, a monkey’s molded skuli^cap is improperly implanted. This results in the cap coming away from the skull, exposing the brain to the air' These" problems are immediately rectified by at tempting to surgically, replace the cap to salvage the subject, but in the two cases during my one year employment; both monkeys were ' terminated because of this complication. He also states that “...the animals totally ignore the cap.” I am sure that this is quite true for the unconscious monkeys that Dr. Marrocco works with, but in the daily life of the cap tive monkeys. 1 observed half of them who would sit for hours rubbing the caps with their hind legs. He also states that the animals can, in some cases, be “returned to the colony to live normally.” All of the monkeys I worked with were terminated, and their brain tissue histologically examined.' These are a few examples of what the PEl’A organization is opposed to. PET A believes that animals should be protected from the pain , and suffering which is imposed on them through:experimental research. It is clear to me, as a past employee of the animal lab, that some of the animals did in fact experience discomfort and pain from the procedures. This truth is accurately observed by Cathy Braden in her letter (ODE. Oct. 14) when she states.!!. “Many University research animals live out their lives suffering through cycles of. fear, stress; social deprivation,/ physical depriva tion! . physical discomfort of repeated injections, ;and often violent reactions to drugs." At the root of the argument is, on the one hand.i that animal research is crucial to the preser vation of human life. What PETA needs to recognize is that animal research does in fact im prove our quality of life. What the scientific community needs to recognize is that animal rights groups such as PETA are lobbying for research that is meaningful in its outcome and which is not repeated one hundred-fold across the country “just for research sake.” 1 sincerely hope that the PETA member recently elected to the. University Animal Care and Use Committee by our University researchers is able to be an effective and contributing member of the committee. ! laud the, spirit of “detente”, created by this election. What both sides need to do now is give this new coalition ari op portunity to address the fun damental issues at hand in an atmosphere which is positive, not negative, and collaborative, not combative. With fair negotiations and an element of understanding. 1 think both par ties will be able to compromise in a way that benefits both humans and our' animal brethren. By Carl F. Schlossman Carl Schlossman is a University psychology student. • ' ' . • ^MFOOD SURVIVAL KIT Got the Dorm Food Blues? One call to Domino's Pizza will save you! We make and deliver hot. tasty, custom-made pizza in less than 30 minutes All you have to do is call! So s(0p the cafeteria. Get your favorite pizza instead. Call Us! 683-7325 1609 East 19th Avenue Eugene Hours: 4:30pm-1:00am Sun.-Thurs. 4:30pm-2:00am Fri. & Sat. Menu All Pizzas Include Our Special Blend of Sauce A 100% Real Dairy Cheese The Price Destroyer* 9 items for the price of 5: Pepperoni, Mushrooms, Black Olives, Ground Beef. Onions. Sausage, Green Peppers. Ham, and Extra Cheese 12" Price Destroyer* $ 9.40 16" Price Destroyer* $1360 Domino’s Deluxe 5 items for the price of 4: Pepperoni, Mushrooms, Onions, Green Peppers, and Sausage 12" DeluxeS 8.55 16" Deluxe $12.35 Our Superb Cheese Pizza 12" small $5.15 16" large $7.35 Additional Items Pepperoni, Mushrooms, Black Olives. Onions, Green Peppers. Ground Beef, Sausage, Ham, Jalapenos, Pineapple, Double Cheese, & Extra Thick Crust 12" pizza $ .85 per item 16“ pizza $1.25 per item Cola available Prices do not include applicable sales tax. Our drivers carry less than $20.00. Limited delivery areas. *1985 Domino's Puza. Inc. Wild Wednesday! Get any 12” 2 item pizza for only $4.99! Good Wednesdays only. One coupon per pizza. Expires: 12-31-85 Fast, Free Delivery' 1609 East019th Avenue 683-7325 Phono Thick Crust! Free thick crust on any pizza One coupon per pizza Expires: 12-31-85 Fast, Free Delivery ’ 1609 East 19th Avenue 683-7325
