Earthlinggb's Blog

VIVISECTION: Far more than an animal rights issue!

Posted in Uncategorized by earthling on November 30, 2009

This section is intended to be read in order that the sinister implications of animal experiments upon the whole of mankind are thoroughly understood. I am aware, from personal experience of street campaigning for animal rights issues, that many people who care passionately about animals find it simply too distressing to see or read any form of evidence to this effect. Consequently, I have chosen not to give
practical details about individual animal experiments in the coming discourse. Instead I will focus upon the scientific fraud perpetrated by vivisectors and how their warped ethos that vivisection is a valuable scientific tool has corrupted the progress of medicine and upset the delicate balance of the minds of millions world-wide. I seek to show how vivisection is an integral part of the manipulation of society (the vivisectors themselves being amongst the most completely manipulated of all) by the very same consciousness and indeed the very same people I have already discussed.
Nothing is worse than vivisection! No other single factor causes more pain, distress and death to humans and animals.
Nor is there any less scientific or ethical method of research currently being employed in industry or educational establishments anywhere in the world.
Unless you have read the books and seen the video footage which I and thousands of other anti-vivisection campaigners have been required to endure, nothing in your imagination can paint for you anything like the true picture of the hell of animal experiments. In fact, if you can conjure up the most heinous spectacle of abuse within your mind, be assured that this is precisely what is being done today, but probably much worse, around the world in schools, universities and research labs owned by private companies – and then some. It is being done with our money, and in order to provide huge mega-wealthy pharmaceutical companies with staggering profit and as an excuse to provide jobs for vivisectors. It is also perpetuated to ensure that mankind never becomes learned about the true nature, cause and cure of disease.
Two thousand animals per minute die as a result of gruesome experiments; that is 250 million per year; approximately 3.5 million per year in Great Britain alone. Over 75% of these experiments are done without anaesthetics, and when they are, they are often inadequately applied. Most experiments are done with public money. 0.2% of the animals used are for the testing of cosmetics. In Britain there are merely
19 Home Office inspectors to cover 20,000 licensed vivisectors.
The practise of animal experimentation has been the mainstay of medical and biological research since the early 1800s even though it has brought about not one major breakthrough in medical science. And yet, every medical student, in order to pass his or her exam and advance in their chosen career must quote the results of animal experiments.
How can respect for life, compassion and empathy be taught to and nurtured in our doctors through a practise which necessitates the ignorance of pain, suffering, anxiety terror and death, as is the case with the training process of US doctors who regularly dissect live animals as part of their training? The answer is simple: It can’t.
The animal experimenters are the cornerstone of the highly corrupt and manipulative pharmaceutical industry. These are a pseudo-scientific fraternity who earn vast amounts of money for their employers by performing unbelievably barbaric experiments which can be used to (falsely) substantiate claims that their drugs are safe for human use. Dr. James D. Gallagher, Director of Research of Lederle Laboratories in the Journal of the American Medical Association, March 14, 1964 stated:

‘Animal studies are done for legal reasons and not for scientific reasons. The predictive value for such studies for man is meaningless – which means our research may be meaningless.’

There is no British or European law which states that new drugs, chemicals or cosmetics must be tested on animals. However, animal testing ensures that vivisectors get the results they want in order to sell their dangerous chemicals to an unwary public. In numerous legal trials of drug companies who have caused fatalities and injuries, the most effective defence which has been used time and again is that: ‘All of the usual and required testing had been done to establish the safety of the drug in question’. A standpoint which most legal authorities are not qualified to dispute. Indeed, the ‘experts’ upon whom they call for advice in such matters are invariably members of other drug companies or drug sponsored agencies and therefore the animal testing fraternity.
Animal experiments have been cited in many court battles over drugs damages claims and have been used both to defend the idea that such disasters were unforeseen because adequate testing had been employed, but have also been successfully used, as in the Thalidomide case in December 1970, to admonish the drug company (in this case Chemie Grunenthal) who testified that animal tests could never be conclusive for humans.
The very idea that a test or operation done on an animal will show results which are directly translatable to humans is plainly ridiculous. As has been stated by some of the greatest and most influential physicians in medical history: the anatomy, physiology and psychology of animals is entirely different to our own in many ways, and this difference is further exaggerated in the case of animals bred for and/or housed in laboratories. This can be plainly illustrated in many ways; here are just a few –

The LD 50 (Lethal Dose 50%) test, which is the standard toxicity technique used to establish how much of a chemical toxin is required to kill half of a number of animals. These animals are specifically bred to be exactly identical in every way, i.e. genetically and physically they are the
● same size and weight. And yet, an equivalent dose of a toxin, in equal quantity and strength will succeed in killing merely half of the batch whilst leaving half to suffer varying degrees of disablement. These results are then haphazardly translated to give the figure for safe and fatal levels for humans. There are 12 different methods which determine statistically the safety of chemicals for humans from animal experiments. These may disagree by up to a factor of four.
It is accepted that animal tests are successful in identifying cancer-causing agents in only 37% of cases. This means, in effect, that the results of the tests are more times wrong than right and are significantly statistically worse than tossing a coin.
● As stated by Hans Ruesch in The Naked Empress or the Great Medical Fraud:
‘Two grams of scopolamine kill a human being, but dogs and cats can stand hundred times higher dosages. A single Aminata phalloides mushroom can wipe out a whole human family, but is health food for the rabbit, one of the favourite laboratory animals.
A porcupine can eat one lump without discomfort as much opium as a human addict smokes in two weeks, and wash it down with as much prussic acid to poison a regiment of soldiers. The sheep can swallow enormous quantities of arsenic, once the murderer’s favourite poison. Morphine, which calms and anaesthetises man, causes maniacal excitement in cats and mice. On the other hand our sweet almond can kill foxes, our common parsley is poisonous to parrots, and our revered penicillin strikes another favourite laboratory animal dead – the guinea pig.’
● It is fortunate for many that penicillin was never tested on guinea pigs at the outset where it would have immediately been discarded as dangerous. And if you want to prove that vitamin C is useless, withhold it from the diet of dogs – which produce vitamin C in the gut. Moreover, the whole discipline of surgery and post surgical recovery was hindered for hundreds of years after the Greek Galen (Second Century AD) showed through animal experimentation that the principle laid down by Hippocrates (Fifth century BC) was incorrect – that hygiene and a good diet (as well as establishing the simple fact that nature heals) was essential to good health and medicine. Galen maintained this standpoint, which seems bizarre by today’s standards, because animals did not readily succumb to infections following childbirth and surgical procedures. Galen’s animal experiments caused a rejection of Hippocratic values and a reduction in surgical asepsis. This destructive attitude was supported by the Catholic Church and was only substantially reversed in the 1800s following the discovery of the germ and how cleanliness and sterilisation could prevent bacterial infection.
The following is a list of drugs which were passed as safe for human consumption on the back of animal tests and the damage which they subsequently caused:

Eraldin (for heart disease) – Corneal damage including blindness.

Paracetamol (painkiller) – 1,500 people had to be hospitalised in Great Britain in 1971.

Orabilex – caused kidney damages with fatal outcome.

MEL/29 (anti-hypertensive) – caused cataracts.

Methaqualone (hypnotic) – caused severe psychic disturbances leading to at least 366 deaths,
mainly through murder or suicide.

Thalidomide (tranquilliser) – caused 10,000 malformed children.

Isoproterenol (asthma) – caused 3,500 deaths in the sixties.

Stilboestrol (prostate cancer) – caused cancer in young women.

Trilergan (anti-allergic) – caused viral hepatitis.

Flamamil (rheumatism) – caused loss of consciousness.

Phenformin (diabetes) – caused 1,000 deaths annually until withdrawn.

Atromid S (cholesterol) – caused deaths from cancer, liver, gallbladder and intestinal disease.

Valium (tranquilliser) – addictive in moderate doses.

Preludin & Maxiton (diet pills) – caused serious damage to the heart and the nervous system.

Nembutal (insomnia) – caused insomnia.

Pronap & Plaxin (tranquilliser) – killed many babies.

Phenacetin (painkiller) – caused severe damages to kidneys and red blood corpuscles.

Amydopyrine (painkiller) – caused blood disease.

Marzine (nausea) – damaged children.

Reserpine (anti-hypertensive) – increased risks of cancer of the brain, pancreas, uterus, ovaries,
skin and women’s breasts.

Methotrexate (leukaemia) – caused intestinal haemorrhage, severe anaemia and rumours.

Urethane (leukaemia) – caused cancer of liver, lungs and bone marrow.

Mitotane (leukaemia) – caused kidney damage.

Cyclophosphamide (cancer) – caused liver and lung damage.

Isoniazid (tuberculosis) – caused liver destruction.

Kanamycin (tuberculosis) – caused deafness and kidney destruction.

Chloromycetin (typhoid) – caused leukaemia, cardiovascular collapse and death.

Phenolphthalein (laxative) – caused kidney damage, delirium and death.

Clioquinol (diarrhoea) – caused blindness, paralysis and death.

DES (prevent miscarriage) – caused birth defects and cancer.

Debendox (nausea) – caused birth defects.

Accutane (acne) – caused deafness and kidney destruction.

(Taken from Vivisection: Science or Sham by Dr. Roy Kupsinel, and Naked Empress by Hans Ruesch)

Vivisectors often claim credit for many advances in medicine which have been brought about by non-vivisection methods. Frequently, they will quote animal experiments which show the same results without also disclosing the pioneering previous non-animal discovery. One example of this is the case of vaccinations. Whilst it is certainly true that many diseases which have decimated mankind for centuries,
such as polio, smallpox, whooping cough, tuberculosis, diphtheria and tetanus have seen a dramatic decline over the last century or so, it is not because of the introduction of vaccinations. Figures show that such diseases were long in decline before the introduction of vaccinations and that the rate of fall was severely impeded once they were introduced. Advances in hygiene, sanitation, nutrition and wealth status are the obvious reasons for the improvement of the world’s health overall. Vaccinations are responsible for causing many of the diseases they are supposed to cure as well as compromising the immune systems of the vulnerable, especially babies who are statistically more likely to suffer Sudden Infant Death Syndrome within weeks of having their initial standard vaccinations.
The vivisectionists are master manipulators. They invest huge amounts of money in massive PR organisations such as the Research Defence Society in the UK. Furthermore, they have infiltrated many areas of the Anti-Vivisection (AV) movement and have created much confusion in the minds of the public as to the truth behind this barbaric trade in misery. An example of this was highlighted in possibly the greatest expose of vivisection industry ever written, The Slaughter of the Innocent by Hans Ruesch:
An interesting case was the Animal Protection league of Basel. Its president, Dr Rudolph Schenkel, professor of ethology, criticised the revival of antivivisectionist feeling in Switzerland. Thereafter, the establishment press could write that ‘even the animal defenders
disapprove of the antivivisectionists’ views.’ A closer look at Schenkel revealed that:
His league had received a donation of 200,000 Swiss francs (about $100,000) from Hoffman-La Roche, ‘for its animal shelter’ – with no questions asked.
1. His own wife was experimenting on animals in the endocrinology department of Ceiba-Geigy.
2. When my CIVIS organisation brought about these facts, Schenkel dropped all pretence of being an animal protectionist: at the next convention of Swiss animal protection groups (SPCAs), he argued that ‘since laboratory animals are a product of human enterprise, we can
do with them as we please.’ (My highlight added.)
(This infiltration tactic is not solely within the realms of the AV movement but is widespread throughout the animal rights movement. This is exemplified at present by the large scale enrolment of blood-sports practitioners [fox and stag hunters etc.] with the RSPCA whereby they are steadily creating a significant policy influencing force by taking advantage of the apathy of many members who do not turn out to vote upon Society matters. The RSPCA also has financial investments in companies that support vivisection.)
The smoke-screen perpetuated by vivisectors that it is preferable to test drugs on animals than on humans, and the emotive stance that ‘it’s your child or an animal’, is probably the most effective way that they ensure public support for their industry. What they always fail to say is that all drugs are tested on humans immediately after the animal trials and often without the patient’s knowledge or consent. Those that are informed of the trial are usually reassured to know that ‘animal studies have shown the drug to be safe’.
AV supporters are simply people who have come to realise the truth about this situation and have committed themselves to being a part of the process of change and reformation to abolish this massive and system of cruel fraud, both for the sake of the animals and humans. However, they are usually portrayed in the media as extremists; an inevitable side-effect of a necessary evil. Ordinary people who are deemed responsible enough to bear and raise children, minister to the sick, save lives, handle the nation’s wealth, run for political seats etc., once they have made an AV stance, are immediately demoted to, at best ‘irrational’ and ‘oversensitive’, or, at worst, ‘people-hating terrorists’ with no right to express an opinion about such matters. Once branded as such they are given about as much regard as are the animals in the laboratory cages and are made largely impotent on the political scene because MPs do not consider it a wise career move or vote winner to consort with anyone considered to be extremist.
In the case of vivisection, the public is all too willing to accept that it is a necessary part of modern progress and not really cruel at all. One reason for this is because the alternative, i.e. the truth, is almost too great a burden to accept. Such a stance is often taken in defence of one’s own sanity as a mental survival technique in order that one does not go mad with the anger, sorrow, frustration and terrible
empathy which the idea of vivisection evokes in us. Therefore, the vivisectors have yet another advantage over the masses in the battle to keep them convinced of the verity of their cause, whilst the AV organisations have to face a perpetual uphill struggle against the tide of wealth, mind control, tradition and human apathy which is forever on the side of the manipulators.
As George Bernard Shaw once stated, ‘Whoever doesn’t hesitate to vivisect will hardly hesitate to lie about it’.
By creating a ‘healthcare’ (more accurately termed ‘ill-healthcare’) system which relies upon the misleading results of animal experiments, the manipulators of this century have ensured that, within the system, the true causes and cures for disease will never be revealed. This in turn creates a self-perpetuating industry for the multinationals who, by creating disease via their drugs, can be assured of massive funding in order to discover
a) the reason for the drug error, which is guaranteed to involve further animal studies, and
b) further drugs to treat the results of the initial drug error. In the, by now, all too familiar pattern: the manipulators perpetuate the problem of a state of global ill health and therefore the need for the solution which is offered in the form of more and more pharmaceutical involvement.
For the sake of your selves, your children and the animals: WAKE UP PEOPLE! Take back your power over your own health and stop supporting these barbaric and sick individuals. Only you can do this. The time to do this is now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: