BioCulture controversy

[Altorin]

I just heard about a company in Puerto Rico called BioCulture that is planning to breed monkeys to sell to research laboratories. It was on TV, and of course, PETA is up in arms about it. I rarely agree with PETA on anything, but for some reason, I have a feeling this is a really really shitty idea.

I don't generally agree with testing on animals where the animals aren't cared well for, but at the same time I completely understand that sometimes you do need to break a few eggs to make an omelet, and there have been a LOT of very important medical breakthroughs from animal testing, despite what PETA says.

But I think it's the fact that it's monkeys. Monkeys are primates... Although they are certainly not human, I think that they should be held on some sort of pedestals as our distant monkey cousins, and I think farming them to sell to people who will certainly hurt them seems to go against that.

I'm really quite at odds with myself over this.. I won't lose sleep, but I really don't know where I stand.

 

[Amnestic]

The benefits of medical testing and advancements for the human race far outweigh those of a few monkeys. Perhaps it's because monkeys are at least somewhat more similar to humans than...say, a ferret that they're being tested on in the first place?

No question, I support this. Animal testing does great things, why would we stop now?

 

[dalek sec]

Eh, monkeys are quite similar to us physiologically so it makes sense to use them for a lot of research. I feel bad for animals used in research, but like you said: gotta break a few eggs. I can't make a distinction of 'wrongness' between a dog and a monkey though. It doesn't matter to me that monkeys look more like us.

Pretty much this, I feel bad for them but it's not like we're cruely skinning them alive or anything like that.

 

[Sad Robot]

I know nothing about this particular situation and very little about animal testing but wouldn't it be far more useful from a scientific point of view if the animals are purposefully bred for laboratory use, so they'd be genetically more suitable for the cause like they already do with mice and rats and the like. They wouldn't carry the diseases and in terms of a control group I'd imagine it would make things a lot easier.

As for the ethical side of it all... I'll probably sit this one out, unless someone manages to provoke me successfully.

 

[Kajin]

I don't care. Humans don't need to give a damn about the environment or anything remotely concerning ethics. We just choose to.

 

[Altorin]

The benefits of medical testing and advancements for the human race far outweigh those of a few monkeys. Perhaps it's because monkeys are at least somewhat more similar to humans than...say, a ferret that they're being tested on in the first place?

No question, I support this. Animal testing does great things, why would we stop now?

there's that... my general scaling for "how ok I am with you fatally testing on an animal" is based on the ease of breeding it and it's longevity - for instance, you shouldn't kill tortoises for science as they live for 200 years and are hard as heck to effectively breed, not to mention they're endangered... then say, a mouse, which if left to their own devices would take over the world with little difficulty.

Then there's the fact that monkey's have a similar psychology to humans. They feel things a lot more closer to humans then even animals we've bred to feel things, like dogs. They also have similar social structures. They raise their young in a similar way to humans, albeit with more pooflinging.

I know they're not people, but when I think of a monkey death farm, I can't help but imagining a human death farm, which has a very Nazi feel to it which I don't particularly like.

 

[Amnestic]

The benefits of medical testing and advancements for the human race far outweigh those of a few monkeys. Perhaps it's because monkeys are at least somewhat more similar to humans than...say, a ferret that they're being tested on in the first place?

No question, I support this. Animal testing does great things, why would we stop now?

there's that... my general scaling for "how ok I am with you fatally testing on an animal" is based on the ease of breeding it and it's longevity - for instance, you shouldn't kill tortoises for science as they live for 200 years and are hard as heck to effectively breed, not to mention they're endangered... then say, a mouse, which if left to their own devices would take over the world with little difficulty.

Then there's the fact that monkey's have a similar psychology to humans. They feel things a lot more closer to humans then even animals we've bred to feel things, like dogs. They also have similar social structures. They raise their young in a similar way to humans, albeit with more pooflinging.

I know they're not people, but when I think of a monkey death farm, I can't help but imagining a human death farm, which has a very Nazi feel to it which I don't particularly like.

The problem is you're thinking of it as a death farm. They're not being bred to die, they're being bred to give life. They won't be treated cruelly - I'm fairly sure there are guidelines and rules put in place for such things.

 

[fletch_talon]

Depends on what they're testing.

Cosmetics companies can fuck the hell off. Its not an essential prduct and if they're putting stuff in their cosmetics that leads to hesitation in testing on humans then they need to rethink things. All in my opinion of course.

Medical science is a different matter. It helps improve our quality of life. If it takes some slightly uncomfortable monkeys to stop me from potentially suffering from alzheimers when I'm older then so be it. That however relies on the monkey's being treated well. I don't give a shit if its for food, science or companionship, animals should be treated with at least the same respect you would give someone else's property (ie. not fucking with it needlessly or mistreating it).

Plus when the alternative to farmed monkeys is assumedly non-farmed monkeys, making the first the preferable option.

 

[Altorin]

The problem is you're thinking of it as a death farm. They're not being bred to die, they're being bred to give life. They won't be treated cruelly - I'm fairly sure there are guidelines and rules put in place for such things.

you're probably right, and like I said, I won't be losing sleep over this. Even if you remove the word "death" from the equation... a Monkey Farm? like, a monkey breeding facility? I mean, there are monkey preserves, where no doubt breeding takes place, but they aren't being farmed like a commodity.

It's definitely an ethical grey area and I just thought it was worth bringing up here

Plus when the alternative to farmed monkeys is assumedly non-farmed monkeys, making the first the preferable option.

and yes, that's basically the main "pro" side of the equation.

 

[Kajin]

Depends on what they're testing.

Cosmetics companies can fuck the hell off. Its not an essential prduct and if they're putting stuff in their cosmetics that leads to hesitation in testing on humans then they need to rethink things. All in my opinion of course.

Medical science is a different matter. It helps improve our quality of life. If it takes some slightly uncomfortable monkeys to stop me from potentially suffering from alzheimers when I'm older then so be it. That however relies on the monkey's being treated well. I don't give a shit if its for food, science or companionship, animals should be treated with at least the same respect you would give someone else's property (ie. not fucking with it needlessly or mistreating it).

Plus when the alternative to farmed monkeys is assumedly non-farmed monkeys, making the first the preferable option.

Along the same lines of what I said, but a lot less of a dick about it. Yeah, this.

 

[Amnestic]

The problem is you're thinking of it as a death farm. They're not being bred to die, they're being bred to give life. They won't be treated cruelly - I'm fairly sure there are guidelines and rules put in place for such things.

you're probably right, and like I said, I won't be losing sleep over this. Even if you remove the word "death" from the equation... a Monkey Farm? like, a monkey breeding facility? I mean, there are monkey preserves, where no doubt breeding takes place, but they aren't being farmed like a commodity.

It's definitely an ethical grey area and I just thought it was worth bringing up here

The thing about this kind of thing is that animal breeding for sale has gone on for years. Lab rats are bred for the sole purpose of being in the lab as control subjects and they're just as animal as monkeys are. Oh, monkeys may be closer to humans but they're still not human.

It's something which has always irked me about those professing animal rights (and this is more of a general point not directed at you personally now) how they judge some animals to be more important than others. Generally those which are cuter oddly. The way I see it, if you're for animal rights you should be for all animal rights. That, obviously, includes humans as well.

You can like animals, heck you can even love them and you can pamper them and whatnot but in the end people have to realise that 99 times out of 100, humanity comes first, whether that's in response to medical testing on monkeys or deciding to finally try to wipe out fecking mosquitos once and for all.

 

[Altorin]

The problem is you're thinking of it as a death farm. They're not being bred to die, they're being bred to give life. They won't be treated cruelly - I'm fairly sure there are guidelines and rules put in place for such things.

you're probably right, and like I said, I won't be losing sleep over this. Even if you remove the word "death" from the equation... a Monkey Farm? like, a monkey breeding facility? I mean, there are monkey preserves, where no doubt breeding takes place, but they aren't being farmed like a commodity.

It's definitely an ethical grey area and I just thought it was worth bringing up here

It's something which has always irked me about those professing animal rights (and this is more of a general point not directed at you personally now) how they judge some animals to be more important than others. Generally those which are cuter oddly. The way I see it, if you're for animal rights you should be for all animal rights. That, obviously, includes humans as well.

I can see that. And mostly I agree. My judgements are fairly logical I think (I touched on it before, I won't again for brevity), but I do have a soft spot for monkeys I guess. Hundreds of Thousands of years ago, our ancestors fell out of the trees and they chose to stay above.

It's a decent ethical discussion ground, but for now, I have to go to bed.

 

[Doug]

I can honestly say that whilst I don't like the necessity of animal testing, it is necessary for medical and bio-science advancement. I wish there was another way (and whatever PETA says, there isn't really - unless you want to experiment on humans), but given that there isn't, I have to say I support the scientists.

Notice PETA never target rat exterminators, even though they kill far more animals that even PETA itself. Its because PETA is, as an organization, just an attention whore.

As for animal testing, so long as they minimize the pain and suffering to an absolute minimum, so be it.

 

[Doug]

The problem is you're thinking of it as a death farm. They're not being bred to die, they're being bred to give life. They won't be treated cruelly - I'm fairly sure there are guidelines and rules put in place for such things.

you're probably right, and like I said, I won't be losing sleep over this. Even if you remove the word "death" from the equation... a Monkey Farm? like, a monkey breeding facility? I mean, there are monkey preserves, where no doubt breeding takes place, but they aren't being farmed like a commodity.

It's definitely an ethical grey area and I just thought it was worth bringing up here

It's something which has always irked me about those professing animal rights (and this is more of a general point not directed at you personally now) how they judge some animals to be more important than others. Generally those which are cuter oddly. The way I see it, if you're for animal rights you should be for all animal rights. That, obviously, includes humans as well.

I can see that. And mostly I agree. My judgements are fairly logical I think (I touched on it before, I won't again for brevity), but I do have a soft spot for monkeys I guess. Hundreds of Thousands of years ago, our ancestors fell out of the trees and they chose to stay above.

It's a decent ethical discussion ground, but for now, I have to go to bed.

Well, by the same token, Cows, Pigs, and Sheep are bred as commodities. And Pigs are reckoned to be more intelligent than dogs (though I know which one I'd prefer to have as a pet).

The fact of the matter is, in order to be alive, we have to kill animals and plants for food (And our biology is such that we need certain vitamns and minerals from animals to be healthy). If we need to kill a few animals to give every human a potentially better life, so be it.

Even PETA lie about this - they say they want 'total animal liberation', but even their Vice President takes Insultin from animals to treat her diabetes.

 

[FROGGEman2]

I'm a relativist.

Monkeys = humans = fish.

 

[Sneaklemming]

I'm really quite at odds with myself over this.. I won't lose sleep, but I really don't know where I stand.

You are allowed to be species-ist. Humans are above all other animals. Humans life above all else.

Think about it; why are people concerned about the environment? Because it's hurting the animals? or because of future generations of people?