Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

Letters to the Editor

Secrecy necessary for safety

To the editor,

Contrary to the letters published today in the Wildcat about the proposed monkey lab (strangely, none are from the UA itself), it is unlikely the researchers are "hiding" details because of fear of public outcry. They are far more likely to be hiding details (especially about how security in the lab will work) because of violent animal activists. Researchers have been bombed themselves and had their labs destroyed. Some groups are even claiming they will use biological agents in the future! Two examples:

At the University of Minnesota last April vandals (the Animal Liberation Front claims responsibility) destroyed an Alzheimer's and Parkinson's research lab, causing $750,000 in damage and released over 100 animals. Information to be used by the FDA to approve human testing of a cancer vaccine was lost.

A vision researcher in Great Britain has been the continued target of bomb threats and kidnapping threats (towards his children). He has been beaten, had his home vandalized and can no longer travel safely in public without police escort.

There are many more incidents (usually damage and the freeing of animals).

Many are claimed by a few violent animal rights groups such as the Animal Liberation Front. Researchers are also mailed letters containing razors and people have been hurt by them. Labs with publicly known and accessible labs (i.e. in a classroom building) are targets for harassment.

These kinds of actions should give any researcher good reason to keep quiet about his involvement in animal research - he may be sent a bomb, a letter with a biological agent such as anthrax in it (as has been recently threatened), have his children kidnapped, his house vandalized, and most often his research destroyed.

Why should the researchers make it easy to have their work or lives destroyed?

Rachael Ludwick

Mathematics and computer science junior

Christian invasion upsetting

To the editor,

OK, I think I represent a huge majority of the students in wondering, what the hell is with all the Christian Freaks out on the mall today (Friday)?

I mean, next week is there going to be a Ku Klux Klan recruitment rally? A celebration of the He-Man Woman-Haters Club? Actually, I, myself, would like to start up an organization and exercise my rights of free speech and assembly: The Student Crusade for Satan. We'll go out on the lawn with banners proclaiming, "You are all beautiful people!" and "You are all doomed to go to heaven unless you convert to the dark side!" This will surely guilt everyone into coming to Black Mass and sacrificing nubile young virgins to the Dark Lord. Who will join me in this endeavor? We'll hand out smiley-face stickers, gather together to sing Britney Spears songs, and spout off messages of love and joy to all! Let's revel in the absurdity of campus life! Let's all go to hell!

Chris Lovett

Religious studies junior

Activists don't understand research

To the editor,

This letter is addressed to some of those who wrote letters opposing the primate research facility being installed in the Psychology building. It was painfully apparent that many persons opposing the experiment have no idea of what the experiment entails. Ms. Schenne asks, "What possible explanation could there be for cutting into the brains of live monkeys?" If she had read the article in its entirety, she would have seen that Dr. Wilson is researching how "to find a way to curb seizures in patients without causing memory loss." If Ms. Schenne has an alternate way of how to dissect monkey brains without killing the animal, I'm sure the research community would be delighted to hear it.

Ms. Lochner also seemed to miss the point of the so-called "cruel and unnecessary research." The monkeys are being used because of their anatomical similarities to humans. I'm sure if she was a seizure patient who had to take medication that made her lose her memory, she may not be so quick to judge and call the research "unnecessary." I encourage the campus community and the readers of the Wildcat to become a little more educated on what they are protesting before they decide to condemn it.

Maybe the reason the department was trying to keep the research quiet was so uninformed persons wouldn't start protesting unnecessarily when someone's hurting the cute animals. I didn't see too many complaints about rat research.

John Ryan

Psychology and philosophy senior

Researchers lack hidden agenda

To the editor,

I see from the letters to the Wildcat concerning a planned animal experiment at the U of A that there are people concerned, among other things, with hidden agendas researchers may have. Animal experiments at the U of A must be approved both by the granting agency and the university's animal care and use committee. To my knowledge, the information is public record. In addition, the results are usually published in scientific journals which are also open to the public. If I choose to not speak of the work I do, which I never have been told to do, it would be to avoid potentially violent confrontations and not to hide some evil agenda. The lab I work in follows all of the various animal regulations.

My lab doesn't work with monkeys. On the other hand, the Animal Liberation Front never advertises its raids or membership. They hide in the shadows like all terrorists do.

One other thing: one writer says "many of the staff are contemptuous of animal humane laws ..." It isn't the laws we hold in contempt. It is those few who burn labs and destroy research that are held in contempt. I defend the right to demonstrate and write letters to espouse an opinion. I certainly have taken advantage of that right myself.

However, defending a right doesn't mean I approve of the opinion.

Samuel L Marion

Research specialist, physiology