View Full Forums : Univ. of New Mexico Condones Animal Torture Experiments by High School Student


Tudamorf
05-21-2007, 06:04 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070521/ap_on_sc/animal_research_1ALBUQUERQUE - Mice were hung by their tails with adhesive tape, subjected to electrical shocks and forced to swim until nearly drowning during experiments done at the University of New Mexico.

University officials say there was nothing wrong with the research that helped a high school student study hopelessness and depression for a science fair project. But the former lab veterinarian at the university called the research "torture," and an animal protection group said it was a perversion of science, the Albuquerque Journal reported in a story published Sunday.

"To me, it suggests inadequacy of faculty guidance," said Randall Lockwood, senior vice president of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. "This has been against the rules for science fairs for a quarter-century."

Then-La Cueva High School student Sarah Founds conducted the research in 2003 and 2004 for a science fair project, which was disqualified after national science-fair officials said it violated standards on the ethical use of animals. The research also led to the resignation of the lab's research veterinarian, who said he didn't know about the experiments until after the fact.

"I have defended animal research, stating that we do not abuse animals. Then, this slapped me in the face," said Daniel Theele, who had been in charge of the welfare of lab animals at UNM.

Theele complained about the project and now is suing UNM over the treatment he says he received after being forced to resign in October 2005. An internal investigation at UNM concluded that the experiments violated federal guidelines and had not been properly approved.

A report on the investigation also expressed great concern about exposing a high school student to experiments inflicting pain on animals. Theele said the experiments were inappropriate even for medical students to conduct. "I can provide no justification for a high school student being exposed to those kinds of experiments," he said.

However, UNM continues to defend what happened. "No illegal, abusive or inappropriate conduct or research occurred," an attorney for the UNM board of regents, wrote in a response to Theele's lawsuit.

Founds, who did the research in conjunction with a graduate student in 2003 and a medical student in 2004, said the project at UNM was worthwhile and did no harm.

"I thought it was awesome. I had a lot of fun working on it," said Founds, who now is studying nutrition at the University of Idaho. She said the project "wasn't overly painful." "I'd encourage other students to do that kind of research," she said.

UNM has between 7,000 and 8,000 animals for use in teaching or research. Most of the animals are mice or rats, but there are other creatures such as hamsters, frogs, fish, rabbits and snakes, said Susan McKinsey, communications director for the university.

Elizabeth Jennings, executive director of Animal Protection of New Mexico, said the experiments on mice raise questions about "what the thousands of other animals on campus are being subjected to, and if anyone is paying attention."That high school girl found it "fun" and "awesome" to torture animals to see how they'd respond? And the university approves it?

That girl should be serving out a prison sentence right now for animal cruelty, and the labs at that university should be shut down. Maybe the dean should be hung by his ass for a while, or forced to swim until he almost drowns, too.

Klath
05-21-2007, 07:42 PM
An internal investigation at UNM concluded that the experiments violated federal guidelines and had not been properly approved.

Anyone know what federal guidelines they might be referring to?

Tudamorf
05-21-2007, 09:45 PM
Anyone know what federal guidelines they might be referring to?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testing#United_States (presumably).

Klath
05-21-2007, 10:25 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testing#United_States (presumably).

Okay, I knew that the AWA didn't protect certain animals ("Currently, AWA only protects mammals. In 2002, the Farm Security Act of 2002, the fifth amendment to the AWA, specifically excluded purpose-bred birds, rats, and mice (as opposed to wild-captured mice, rats, and birds) from regulations"), I wasn't aware of the Health Research Extension Act. It's too bad it doesn't cover non-federally funded labs/research.

Fyyr Lu'Storm
05-21-2007, 11:03 PM
However, UNM continues to defend what happened. "No illegal, abusive or inappropriate conduct or research occurred," an attorney for the UNM board of regents, wrote in a response to Theele's lawsuit.

I bet you could find a lawyer to legally defend the Inquisition, the Holocaust, and the notion that the Sun revolves around the Earth...if you just paid them.

Aidon
05-22-2007, 10:53 AM
I bet you could find a lawyer to legally defend the Inquisition, the Holocaust, and the notion that the Sun revolves around the Earth...if you just paid them.

That's their job, Fy'yr. That's what they are paid to do. To defend their client's interests. They have an ethical duty to do so.

Fyyr Lu'Storm
05-22-2007, 11:42 AM
You may think that it is ethical to defend evil and stupidity. I don't.

I have the ability to judge people by what they do, as do you. Especially professionals who have the power to chose who their clients are.

There is a level of difference between merely providing a service for such people, say the Clerksian subcontractors on the Death Star, and out and out defending their actions.

It puts such purveyors on the same ethical and moral rung as their clients.

There must be some brainwashing or morals washing courses in Law School that are required or prerequisites, that allows these people to live with themselves and sleep at night. Or maybe they lacked it from the beginning, I dunno; most people have to take some form of plunge before they submit to a life of prostitution.

Tudamorf
05-22-2007, 02:50 PM
You know you're scum when <b>Fyyr</b> calls you amoral. <img src=http://lag9.com/biggrin.gif>

Tudamorf
05-22-2007, 02:51 PM
That's their job, Fy'yr. That's what they are paid to do. To defend their client's interests. They have an ethical duty to do so.Yep, just following orders, Aidon!

Aidon
05-22-2007, 03:12 PM
You are both morons. You lack the ability to look at things logically and consider the broader picture.

Imagine, for a moment, a situation where something unpopular could find noone to defend it...say, I don't know, attorneys working for those evil video game companies who publish violent video games which are destroying our society.

****ing morons, the both of you.

Tudamorf
05-22-2007, 03:28 PM
You are both morons. You lack the ability to look at things logically and consider the broader picture.

Imagine, for a moment, a situation where something unpopular could find noone to defend it...If something is so unpopular that NO ONE has an innate desire to defend it, it doesn't deserve a defense.say, I don't know, attorneys working for those evil video game companies who publish violent video games which are destroying our society.I would defend the right of video game companies, for free, because I believe it's worth defending. I'm not the only one.

Aidon
05-22-2007, 03:35 PM
If something is so unpopular that NO ONE has an innate desire to defend it, it doesn't deserve a defense.

Really? What about the sex offenders? Should they have no defenders?

These attorneys work for the University. By and large I strongly support defense of Institutions of Higher Education. I may not always agree with specifics, but they deserve defense in and of themselves. As employees of the University, their's is not to chose what issues they will and will not defend the University for.



Oh, and asshat, don't try to compare a couple of rats getting spanked and dunked in water with the Nuremburg trials, you worthless piece of ****.

Tudamorf
05-22-2007, 03:38 PM
Really? What about the sex offenders? Should they have no defenders?I would defend "sex offenders" for free. Because I believe in the cause of liberty.As employees of the University, their's is not to chose what issues they will and will not defend the University for.Silly me, I thought slavery had been outlawed in the United States.Oh, and asshat, don't try to compare a couple of rats getting spanked and dunked in water with the Nuremburg trials, you worthless piece of ****.I didn't. Though now that you mention it, the mentality is the same. Anyone who gets pleasure from torturing another creature deserves no place in our society.

Anka
05-22-2007, 06:35 PM
Whilst it is correct that lawyers should defend unpopular clients, they shouldn't mislead, misdirect, or misinform when they do so.

Aidon
05-22-2007, 08:27 PM
Whilst it is correct that lawyers should defend unpopular clients, they shouldn't mislead, misdirect, or misinform when they do so.

Their duty is to do whatever they can to defend the interests of those who employ them, so long as it does not fall outside the bounds of the law or professional ethics.

Anka
05-22-2007, 10:09 PM
Their duty is to do whatever they can to defend the interests of those who employ them, so long as it does not fall outside the bounds of the law or professional ethics.

Their means of employment does not excuse them of dishonest practice. It should never do so either.

Fyyr Lu'Storm
05-22-2007, 11:13 PM
Their duty is to do whatever they can to defend the interests of those who employ them, so long as it does not fall outside the bounds of the law or professional ethics.

You have already stated that defending evil and stupidity is ethical.

I don't think there is anything else left. edit: If you count the defending of wrongly accused defendants, or good people; which I was including in the total(but neglected to mention, but assumed would be understood, but now realize that it might not be).

If everything and anything is ethical, no matter how despicable, then why the need to even qualify it?

Tudamorf
05-22-2007, 11:54 PM
If everything and anything is ethical, no matter how despicable, then why the need to even qualify it?Aidon is talking about legal ethics, which have nothing to do with real world ethics. For example, if you represent Evil Guy #1 and then Evil Guy #2, legal ethics are concerned with whether you're going to use #1's secrets to help #2 capture the market on evil, and are totally unconcerned with the fact that they're evil in the first place.

Amped
05-24-2007, 11:25 AM
Aidon is talking about legal ethics, which have nothing to do with real world ethics. For example, if you represent Evil Guy #1 and then Evil Guy #2, legal ethics are concerned with whether you're going to use #1's secrets to help #2 capture the market on evil, and are totally unconcerned with the fact that they're evil in the first place.

/boggle

What does this have to do with actual ethics? And why woudl you NOT care that they are evil in the first place?

Tudamorf
05-24-2007, 02:43 PM
/boggle

What does this have to do with actual ethics?Nothing, as does the practice of law in many areas. That was my point.