Slashdot Mirror


Harvard To Close New England Primate Research Center

sciencehabit writes "Citing an increasingly bleak outlook for federal research funding, Harvard Medical School is shutting down its major primate center, which has recently experienced the departure of several key scientists and an investigation into its handling of animals. In the announcement, which surprised many primate researchers, the school said it will not seek to renew the New England Primate Research Center's (NEPRC's) 5-year grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and will 'wind down operations' at the center in Southborough, Massachusetts, over the next 2 years. The center, which has a nearly 50-year history, had done groundbreaking work on an AIDS vaccine and developed animal models for diseases such as Parkinson's, among other accomplishments."

100 comments

  1. Not tested on animals by kimvette · · Score: 2

    This comment has not been tested on animals. However, we cannot guarantee that it is not cruelty-free.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    1. Re:Not tested on animals by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 3, Funny

      colbert's opening line (from years ago) fits well here:

      "no animals were harmed during the making of this work. we tried, but that monkey was just too damned fast!"

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Not tested on animals by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Humans are not Plants.

  2. Points at Harvard Medical School by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hideki!

  3. what about the monkeys? by alen · · Score: 1

    they just got fired, who is going to feed and care for them now?

    1. Re:what about the monkeys? by schemingmonk · · Score: 1

      Just like those folks that lost their jobs to the noodle-making robots in China the monkeys are now free to find other jobs, which will drive down the overall cost of labor... Everybody wins!

    2. Re:what about the monkeys? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Not to worry, they'l soon find new jobs writing pilot scripts for Amazon Prime shows.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:what about the monkeys? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      There are monkey sanctuaries.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    4. Re:what about the monkeys? by guruevi · · Score: 2

      I can't tell you where exactly they're going, but a number of them are already well taken care off by other primate labs. Also, the equipment is being sent to other primate labs.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:what about the monkeys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever wants monkeys infected with bizarre variants of AIDs.

    6. Re:what about the monkeys? by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 1

      I believe that would be the African bushmeat markets.

    7. Re:what about the monkeys? by fazey · · Score: 3, Funny

      i suppose they could all get into politics like the rest of the monkeys in DC

    8. Re:what about the monkeys? by fazey · · Score: 1

      is there a waiting list?

    9. Re:what about the monkeys? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Or legislation for Congress!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    10. Re:what about the monkeys? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      Or become programmers.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    11. Re:what about the monkeys? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Put to work on the ongoing project for the recreation of the works of Shakespeare.

    12. Re:what about the monkeys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is a horrid, racist remark. Reported to administrators.

      True.

      It REALLY pissed off the monkeys.

    13. Re:what about the monkeys? by tedgyz · · Score: 1

      Obvious. They can work for ThinkGeek.

      --
      "No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
    14. Re:what about the monkeys? by lennier1 · · Score: 0

      True, there's no need to degrade monkeys and put them on the same level as politicians.

    15. Re:what about the monkeys? by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      Won't it be more like Oracle's next lead security guys for Java?

    16. Re: what about the monkeys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duke University also runs a rather large primate research center. I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the animals go to similar research facilities.

      And, no, horde of fellow ACs, most of the research population of animals does not have HIV/AIDS.

    17. Re:what about the monkeys? by jythie · · Score: 1

      Since when do facts and reality get in the way of chest beating 'look, I hate the same people you do!' threads?

      Hating on animal rights activists is what the cool kids are doing.

    18. Re:what about the monkeys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the ones at Adobe.

    19. Re:what about the monkeys? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Since when has "politician" been a race?

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    20. Re:what about the monkeys? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Won't somebody think of the baby monkeys!

    21. Re:what about the monkeys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're probably only the second commenter in the thread to think of that.
      "Washington, DC" is a symbol, not a literal city. The fact that some people live there is irrelevant to the rhetorical device.
      When most Americans refer to "the people in DC" we're talking about the politicians, not the residents.

    22. Re:what about the monkeys? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Washington DC has a majority African-American population.

      And?

      Calling them monkeys is racist.

      Except no one was calling them monkeys. We were all calling the politicians monkeys, regardless of the politician's skin color.

      So I repeat my question. Since when has "politician" been a race?

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
  4. Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglockedup by Hadlock · · Score: 1

    Federal funding has all but dried up for Primate research. Researchers have found that Chimps are indeed very similar to humans, and testing on them is inhumane. Animal/primates rights activists have won, and the few chimps in federal care are the only ones left, they won't be replaced. There's quite a backstory here that isn't being told.
     
    As great of research Harvard provided, they had effectively built a Guantanamo for apes.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  5. Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks like APK will need to find a new home now! Oh dear!

  6. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Used to live right around the corner from this place. It was nothing like Guantanamo, don't be a fucking tard.

  7. Saw it in a movie by a_big_favor · · Score: 1

    When they tried to shut one plant down the apes took over SanFrancisco.

    1. Re:Saw it in a movie by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an improvement.

  8. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by alen · · Score: 1

    from what i hear, the monkeys were treated better than at gitmo

  9. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by amiga3D · · Score: 1

    I don't think he meant it literally. Don't be obtuse.

  10. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by guruevi · · Score: 1

    Really? Where do you source your information you right-wing hippie? The primates are and some have already been shipped to other primate labs. Acquiring and taking care of primates (or any animal) in a public institution is under a very strict oversight from several government agencies as well as institutional committee's. These animals have care and space very similar to a regular zoo. If any of the government agencies would have as strict oversight as these do, we wouldn't have disasters like the Keystone pipeline leaks, BP's oil rig or Exxon-Valdez.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  11. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 1

    That's right, the primates had a chance of leaving before they died.

  12. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even so, did they do experiments on the apes? Did they keep them caged? Would that be a humane thing to do to humans? Then why is it okay with apes?

  13. Re:"50 years" of "groundbreaking work"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is understandable to give time to something like an AIDS vaccine, but we gave them 50 years!

    AIDS and HIV were "discovered" in the early 80's.

  14. So I guess ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    .... this guy is going to have to find work in the private sector. Looks like management material to me.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  15. Re:"50 years" of "groundbreaking work"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    AIDS hasn't existed for 50 years. Their work has been a much more generic "try to find useful scientific uses for primates", and they've been quite successful at it.

  16. PETA needs to step up!!! by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    And volunteer to be tested on instead of animals. Someone has to cure AIDS and Cancer and its not going to happen through computer simulations and best wishes.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:PETA needs to step up!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with your sentiment but I'm afraid it wouldn't be good enough if they did. And the hypocritical bastards won't. After all, the vegan doctor* from the anti-cruelty organisation says our super scientists can just fart out a rainbow, at the end of which medicine can be found. People test on animals because they're evil and want to hurt stuff, right?

      Here's a 10 point list for you:
      1) The ethics committees wouldn't allow it.
      2) Much medical/biological research requires many generations (excluding human subjects unless you want to wait until evolution got bored waiting and just solved the problem itself).
      3) The ethics committees wouldn't allow it.
      4) Lawsuits. As in, "Yes I signed the consent form but they didn't specifically say it can cause diabetes... Yes, I do drink lots of coke and eat lots of cookies but so does Fred and he ain't diabetic."
      5) Humans are high maintenance.
      6) The ethics committees wouldn't allow it.
      7) Humans tend to withdraw consent (or even fake side effects**) before the study is over. This is also not statistically independent from the effect the test has on the individual, so it really screws up the results.
      8) The ethics committees wouldn't allow it.
      9) The statistics benefit from genetically identical or near-identical individuals, at least some parts of it do. (Ever met any hillbilly animal rights activists?)
      10) Did I mention ethics committees?

      * Psychologist/chiropractitioner/homeopath
      ** Very common in medical testing. Oh look -- a higher paying study! Let me just get out of this one...

  17. Researchers plan to study primates in their normal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    environment at Fenway and the Meadowlands....

  18. Planet of the Apes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So has a Planet of the Apes scenario been averted or accelerated?

  19. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by amiga3D · · Score: 1

    It is hard to experiment on the apes if you don't keep them caged. No it is not humane, it is research. Research is where they do bad things to animals (and sometimes people although usually the people volunteer) in order to promote the greater good. You may not agree with it, as is your right, but without it scientific progress slows down. If you've ever been in any slaughter house you'll see there is little humane about our treatment of animals. Most people don't care because they are just animals and have little in the way of rights. We just want our damn cheeseburger.

  20. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    Used to live right around the corner from this place.

    I live right around the corner from a lot of places, and I have no idea what's going on in any of them.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  21. Not ideal, but important research by RandomUsername99 · · Score: 1

    This isn't spraying some perfume into rabbits eyes to make sure it doesn't give people a rash, this is doing research to treat and prevent diseases that are killing and disabling an astounding number of people.

    I think most people that have come to the ethical conclusion that the thousands of animals that they tested HIV and AIDS treatments on at this facility, are more important than the tens or hundreds of thousands of people that are not dead, and living their lives relatively normally because of that research, probably don't know anyone that was pushed down the terrifying, grueling, tortuous path of a slow AIDS related death.

    1. Re:Not ideal, but important research by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2

      It should probably also be stressed at some point that anything that can be tested on a less sentient animal (generally rats and mice) is tested there extensively first. Primate testing is extremely expensive and the ethics guidelines are generally taken very seriously.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:Not ideal, but important research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      remember folks, there is a heirarchy on living things.

      Dumb Invertibrates like crickets or crabs and most species of mollusk
      dumb vertibrates (cold blooded) like a trout, or a Milk Snake
      dumb vertibrates (warmblooded) like a rabbit, or a starling
      smart Invertibrates (certain species of octopus, like the one that plays ball and trys to untie knots)
      smart vertibrates (cold blooded) like bearded dragons and other domesticated animals
      smart vertibrates (warm blooded) like a dog, or an eagle. Most primates barring apes
      Sentient Animals like whales, dolphins, apes, elephants, and such (Some dog breeds have reached this status through aggressive selective breeding like German Shepherds)
      Humans. (enough said)

      This is the heirarchy. Some values get subtracted depending on the rarity and cuddliness factor. There is an inherent bias to Mammals and Avians.

    3. Re:Not ideal, but important research by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Legally it's not quite that complex. In the EU, cephalopods are equivalent to vertebrates, and UK legislation specifically grants octopodes the same status. (As a result they have often been called "honourary" vertebrates.)

      As for an actual hierarchy of "evolvedness," and not just a subjective ethical ranking based on what we know about animal intelligence, alternative splicing seems to be a good indicator of genetic complexity, but we only really have detailed analyses for vertebrates.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  22. here's the real question by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    So a couple businesses went out of business in the area and long story short, I have some really nice tablets and chairs and computer monitors now. So the question is, are they going to auction off all the monkeys? Because that would be freakin awesome!

    1. Re:here's the real question by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      So the question is, are they going to auction off all the monkeys?

      That is almost universally prohibited under NIH funding regulations.

      Because that would be freakin awesome!

      I'm not sure what would be awesome about owning a monkey with AIDS.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:here's the real question by slashmydots · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well that's a seriously offensive statement. Monkeys with aids are just as fun and amazing and intelligent as ones without AIDS. See you at the cross burning, Adolph.

  23. Harvard is gone to the dogs. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its students are cheating. Its professors are either too dumb to use the spreadsheet correctly or so corrupt they cook up data to be shills for austerity mongers. And they cut real research centers to save money. They buy real estate in around Boston from companies going bankrupt and take off the tax rolls of local municipalities (look up the Aresenal area). I think Harvard's mission has become growing the endowments as much as possible while coasting on the goodwill created by earlier decades of solid academic work.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Harvard is gone to the dogs. by DSS11Q13 · · Score: 2

      I don't disagree with you (Harvard grad here), but a couple things I need to point out. First, as a professor, I can tell you that cheating happens everywhere. Second, I saw the spreadsheet thing on the Colbert Report, which is, of course, not a reliable news source. While it's certainly possible that there is an issue with corruption, Harvard is also composed of about a dozen different schools with totally different sources of funding, faculties, etc. One school having corrupt professors would not indicate anything about the others.

    2. Re:Harvard is gone to the dogs. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2
      Sir,

      I am surprised you got the spreadsheet scandal via Colbert. It has been making news for quite some time. There was an NPR report, one BBC report etc. So please do not assume I am getting all my news from Colbert.

      Further, very surprisingly, Stewart and Colbert seem to care for accuracy, despite being a comedy show. Being comedians they are able to laugh off their mistakes on air and apologize by making fun of themselves. But still, they do that when they make a mistake. The one I remember recently is Stewart making up a funny dickish name connected with civil rights, and it turned out to be a real name. The on air apology from him made me wonder, why isn't he called the newsman and the others jokers.

      [1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/microsoft-excel-the-ruiner-of-global-economies/

      [2] http://news.silobreaker.com/does-this-spreadsheet-error-invalidate-the-case-for-austerity-5_2266755871209947215

      [3] http://news.silobreaker.com/three-umass-profs-expose-flaw-in-harvard-research-that-underpinned-austerity-5_2266756154677788864

      [4] http://news.yahoo.com/student-took-eminent-economists-debt-issue-won-095347790--business.html

      [5] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22223190

      [6] http://chronicle.com/article/UMass-Graduate-Student-Talks/138763/

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  24. Such a bummer by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    My friends and I used to sit for hours and watch those flying monkeys on leashes go round and round.

  25. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Federal funding has all but dried up for Primate research. Researchers have found that Chimps are indeed very similar to humans, and testing on them is inhumane. Animal/primates rights activists have won, and the few chimps in federal care are the only ones left, they won't be replaced. There's quite a backstory here that isn't being told.

    As great of research Harvard provided, they had effectively built a Guantanamo for apes.

    This really is the crux of it. All animal researchers today either try their hardest not to think about it, try their hardest to justify it with cost/benefit arguments, or are just plain sick in the head, but the fact is that animals have conscious awareness and feel emotions and pain. Medical experiments on animals are no different ethically than medical experiments on humans.

  26. Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama strikes again.

  27. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually in most cases their quality of life is improved. Mostly research primates have better healthcare and food availability than out in the wild. Their average life-spans are much shorter in the wild. Often they fight, bite or scratch each other, get infected and die. They get eaten, they go hungry etc. The being stuck in a cage part is a negative, sure, but most of the stuff they do to them in research is not really all that bad. See, the thing is, animals don't have the option to join civilization as regular citizens. Once people understand that, it's easy to see that most research primates live fairly good lives. If my only alternatives were to fend for myself in the wild with an average lifespan of 15 years, vs. to have food, housing, and healthcare provided free for me in exchange for staying home all day and doing some research task for a few hours a day in a situation with an average lifespan of 80 years, I might consider the latter an improvement on the former. Not much different from what I do now anyway, except that I get a few hours a week for recreation. Yes, there are labs that study things like pain (that's mostly rats though) or other things that may make research primates' lives relatively worse, but in most labs that's not the case. What we do to them is only worse by civilized human life standards, which will never be available to them.

    Also, I think animal rights people are highly hypocritical. If we made a list of all animal rights activists and banned them from medical advances that were based on animal research (or delayed them from being able to use medical advances until such a time that 'simulations' were able to catch up to animal research), you'd quickly see these animal rights organizations' membership numbers drop significantly.

  28. better to use life/death prisoners by r00t · · Score: 1

    Humans make the results more accurate.

    Consider the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, Manson, the guy known as BTK (for "bind, torture, kill"), the Fort Hood shooter, and those guys that raped girls in Connecticut and then burned down the house with them inside. There are enough awful people that we have no shortage of humans for medical experiments.

    I would have no qualms about performing the experiments. We can implant wires into their brains, give them harmful drugs, whatever... Except for the Fort Hood shooter, we can use these prisoners to test for methods to treat spinal injury. (we break their neck, wait the average amount of time it takes to reach a hospital, then try the experimental treatment) We can use them to test saving people who fall through ice. (dump them in, wait, attempt treatment) We can use them to test treatments for severe burns. (burn them, wait, attempt treatment)

    Want to test something less serious, like household products? Sure, we can do that too. Strap them down, pin back their eyelids, and spray away. Whatever you like: perfume, ant spray, truck bed paint, engine degreaser, dishwasher detergent, laundry detergent, oven cleaner, drain unclogger, etc.

    1. Re:better to use life/death prisoners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your rationalization and conscience have a way to deal with wrongful convictions of alleged rapists and murderers, or would you reduce the test population to those handful of test subjects that are beyond any doubt as to their guilt (and do mentally deranged people make adequate models for non-mentally deranged people in all cases)?

    2. Re:better to use life/death prisoners by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Fortunately, Reichkanzler, civilization does not agree with you.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    3. Re:better to use life/death prisoners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone that values the welfare of animals more than humans deserves to live with those animals far away from the rest of us humans...for the benefit and safety of the rest of us. I've heard it said before on slashdot...It's not that you love animals...but you just absolutely hate people.

    4. Re:better to use life/death prisoners by r00t · · Score: 1

      If there is a bit of doubt, participation in the test population can be put on hold until that is resolved.

  29. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by jythie · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many anti-animal-rights people would be willing to forgo medical advances that were the result of human experimentation yet still be against the idea of it making a comeback.

    The line between hypocrite and pragmatist pretty much comes down to if you are talking about 'us' or 'them'.

  30. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For every one of you dicks shouting "It's GUANTANAMO FOR APES," there's another person shouting "TERRORISM" every time an animal rights activist does anything.

    Both groups of you people are fucktards who apparently can't debate the merits of an issue on its merits, without first declaring that it is a fundamental threat to our life and liberty, or a fucking genocide.

    I'm especially tired of this purple prose on Slashdot - we pride ourselves on being intelligent, rational people, and then we engage in the same Fox News-style mudslinging and hyperbole, and smugly declare that only "sheeple" would disagree.

    It's bullshit, and anybody with a shred of honesty knows it. Fuck you, fuck the GGP who opined that it was "effectively Guantanamo," and fuck all the rest of you doing the same thing all over this site.

  31. Re:"50 years" of "groundbreaking work"... by Holi · · Score: 1

    Your right. It's been around longer then 50 years

    Researchers estimate that sometime in the 1930s a form of simian immunodeficiency virus, SIV, jumped to humans in central Africa. The mutated virus became the first human immunodeficiency virus, HIV-1.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  32. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by jythie · · Score: 1

    Many people build their lifestyle and identity around the idea that animals and humans are fundamentally different, and threatening that really upsets them.

  33. $32 Billion Endowment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given Harvard's status as the wealthiest University in the world ($32 Billion endowment), I'm sure they had the resources to keep the center open if they so wished.

    It was a monkey business decision.

    1. Re:$32 Billion Endowment by metlin · · Score: 2

      I found this comment on the RTFA to be of particular interest. It offers a lot more insight into what may have driven Harvard to shut down the center.

      This article only touches the surface on what happened. It wasn't about Harvard wanting to destroy a "vibrant" center (and I'm very curious as to who the "most well-funded faculty members" who left are and when did they leave?). It may not have even been the most recent horrible press that the primate center gave Harvard, because as in sports, bad behavior and bad press would have been forgiven by Harvard if the science at the primate center was stellar. But the primate center decidedly wasn't stellar.

      It has been almost 20 years since anyone currently working at the primate center and directly working with monkeys had a first author publication (other than a review article) in a top tier science journal. For a Harvard department, that was a pitiful track record. Even in the rather limited world of primate research, Harvard's primate center was second tier. That was why when IAVI (the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative) wanted to figure out how attenuated SIV worked (the attenuated SIV was long considered the domain of Harvard's primate center) it ended up giving the vast majority of its money to other primate centers. Moreover, even at HMS, the best primate research was coming from researchers NOT associated with Harvard's own primate center, those researchers were outsourcing their needs to other primate centers.

      This made Harvard's own primate center expendable and a potential net liability for Harvard especially given all its recent negative press. To make matters worse, the primate center's prior director, a man largely responsible for the center's recent decline, sluggish scientific output, and at least some of the mismanagement at the primate center, was tone deaf to the negative publicity, acting like he had nothing to apologize for, and must have further antagonized the center's position at Harvard. Even after he was forced to resign, Harvard never attracted a first rate primate researcher to take over and energize the place. In the end, Harvard must have decided it was better to just outsource its primate needs and reduce its negative publicity.

      The more interesting question is whether this will turn out to be an isolated event or really a nod to the increasing power of animal rights activists.

  34. data is data, and people are just bald apes. by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Hypocrisy doesn't necessarily enter into this; you don't have to agree with the method used to obtain some information in order to use it ethically.

  35. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think it's the same. I think if someone told me ahead of time before I needed to use any life-critical medical procedure "If you are anti-human-experimentation you won't be able to use medical advances due to them should the need arise." I would be fine with that. I think most people in current society would, but obviously you may have a point since morality can change from society to society.

    I think instead if we told the people fighting against animal research the same thing today, and while they are healthy, that should the need arise they won't be able to use animal-research-derived medical procedures, they would probably quit fighting against animal research. In a different society someone could make the above statement in the context of human experimentation too, and in that society those people would indeed be hypocrites. But I don't think it's the case in current society, at least not the vast majority of modern society. Whereas I think it's the case with the vast majority of animal rights activists.

  36. Re:APK made a monkey outta you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello Paul.

  37. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many anti-animal-rights people would be willing to forgo medical advances that were the result of human experimentation yet still be against the idea of it making a comeback.

    Some medical advances, including methods currently used to revive drowning victims, were developed by the Nazis in experiments conducted on concentration camp inmates. Do you think that we should forgo using these treatments on anyone that thinks these experiments were immoral?

  38. Re:Blame Republicans by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

    Or perhaps you could do the prudent thing and blame it on poor budgeting decisions.

    I think that, for example, this is better than sending money to the national endowment of the arts, or even cut it into defense spending by stopping the manufacture of Abrams tanks that the Army generals have already asked that they stop doing.

    I don't see how anybody anywhere could argue that this is a reason to increase spending. Even if you raised the shit out of the top income rate, you still haven't solved the budget deficit. The spending HAS to decrease as what we're currently doing is absolutely not sustainable.

    Cutting more important spending projects just so that they could say "See?! We must spend more!" is a really asshole thing to do, and people like you foolishly buy into it.

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  39. Didn't know! by grumpyman · · Score: 1

    I didn't know Bieber was a medical researcher?

  40. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by jythie · · Score: 1

    No, but I also not claiming that animal right's people should abstain from modern medicine because they have ethical issues with animal experimentation.

  41. Finally! Monkeys for me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can now finally establish a colony of monkeys in the SW United States to seed the Appalacians with primates. No, really, I have been wanting to do this for 10 years.

  42. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by amiga3D · · Score: 1

    I fully support your right to be a dickhead. This rant places you firmly in the camp with all the people you claim to denounce.

  43. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by Raenex · · Score: 1

    If you've ever been in any slaughter house you'll see there is little humane about our treatment of animals. Most people don't care because they are just animals and have little in the way of rights.

    I'm willing to bet most people do care, which is why they'd rather not be confronted with it. They'd prefer to keep believing that the animals are humanely raised and slaughtered. Personally, I've seen enough and found it disturbing... but I still like eating meat too much, and when it gets on my plate it's yummy food, not factory farmed, slaughtered animals.

  44. Re:Blame Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's not quite true, you could go with tax rates that look like the UK. you know, where the marginal rate hits 40% (income tax, higher than anywhere in the US) at 75k of income, instead of 4-5x that in the US depending on filing status. If you just raise middle class and poor people's taxes enough, you can pay for all the programs quite easily, until you end up like Europe.

  45. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by amiga3D · · Score: 1

    When I was young I lived on a farm. I was involved in the slaughter and preparation of the food we ate. Life is ruthless and most people like to be insulated from that real world.

  46. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by r00t · · Score: 1

    I'm not doing that job for many reasons, but animal rights is not among them. I'd bite right into the side of a living animal if it were safe to do so. (it isn't: unsanitary, legal trouble, and maybe getting pecked or kicked)

    As an end-user, my only complaints about slaughter houses are the bad sanitation and the sleazy attempts to add cheap filler into the meat. As a worker I'd take issue with the pay, the boredom, the legal risk if you fail to follow the crazy laws, the stench, the disease risk, the risk of getting cut or burned or crushed... it's not exactly a cushy office job. I guess it beats being a coal miner or road worker.

  47. Re:Researchers find: Primates don't likebeinglocke by r00t · · Score: 1

    If you've ever been in any slaughter house you'll see there is little humane about our treatment of animals.

    Well of course. Humane is for humans.

    I don't expect a hippo to be nice to me. To a hippo, I'm just a random animal. If I get annoying, the hippo will slaughter me without the slightest bit of compassion.

  48. Re:APK made a monkey outta you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously you struck a nerve. A downmod of your post proves it.

  49. Re:APK made a monkey outta you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paul, you fail it. Your skill is not enough.

  50. This is not I folks: It's Jeremiah Cornelius...apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THIS is why he's doing it & proof of it, here -> http://interviews.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585927&cid=43295193 when others pointed out Jeremiah Cornelius forgot to submit one of the "first post spams" masquerading as myself as AC, & mistakenly submitted one of the impersonations of myself as his registered 'luser' name here on /. forums.

    Pretty pitiful actually, but like every up to no good idiot does? He screwed up & submitted it under his registered 'luser' name here.

    * Jeremiah Cornelius: DO YOURSELF, and the rest of us, A GIANT FAVOR MAN: Seek professional psychiatric help!

    (Since Jeremiah Cornelius obviously can't get over the fact he made a spelling error on what it is HE ALLEGEDLY DID FOR A LIVING? That's not MY fault... it's HIS!)

    APK

    P.S.=> I seriously must have dusted JC (in his mind @ least) for his BAD spelling error & it "got his goat"...

    I.E.-> Catching what he claimed to do as a job, for YEARS he left "PENETRATION" (correct) spelled as "PENTRATION" (incorrect) on his resume on LinkedIn & I pointed it out as he & his friends trolled me as usual (webmistressrachel, gmhowell, & crew (probably ALL JC no doubt using alterate emails or TOR to do it as a possible - I've caught "them & theirs" doing it before, ala Barbara, not Barbie = TomHudson (same person))).

    So THAT is what has gotten his goat in a technical debate & his "geek angst" could only come up with *trying* to "impersonate me" in every news thread on /. for the month of March 2013 so far!

    (Just to attempt to 'discredit me' as a spammer here obviously)

    Doing so, by posting that "$10,000 challenge" &/or reposts of my old posts on hosts file value to end users into EVERY SINGLE NEWS ARTICLE POSTED on /. ...

    It's all I can think of that *might* cause such a mentally troubled 'reaction' like the Jeremiah Cornelius is doing & there's NO QUESTION he's the one doing this spamming of nearly every posted article masquerading as myself...!

    ... apk

  51. Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're embarassing yourself Jeremiah Cornelius http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 since you posted that using your registered username by mistake (instead of your usual anonymous coward submissions by the 100's the past 2-3 months now on slashdot) giving away it's you spamming this forums almost constantly, just as you have in the post I just replied to.