Stop dogs cats and other animals from being killed

330 Signatures
  • Start Date:
    10-23-2007
  • Last Signed:
    1-3-2009

Description:

Stop dogs, cats and other animals from being killed at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

I saw what was going on to dogs and other animals at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The things I saw were painful, archaic and scientifically valueless experiments.

Kittens have their brains drilled and eyes sew shut while ALIVE at Dalhousie University. This procedure is very common at Dalhousie University:

Animals are jabbed with needles, tubes forced down their mouths, hearts and brains dissected while still ALIVE. Some of the "lucky" ones get pain relief. These animals never see sunshine and are destroyed after they are no longer needed. Most of this "research" has been done by other students and researchers previously, yet it still continues on.

SEE REPORTS in the Learn more section to the left.

TELL DALHOUSIE TO STOP USING ANIMALS, SIGN BELOW.
Tell a FriendCreate a CampaignBookmark
Submit Signature
Forum Discussion for Stop dogs cats and other animals from being killed
1234next ›last »
Submitted by Stephanie C. on Mon, 12/22/2008 - 11:11

Onefastbikergrrrl
Here is a copy of an email I sent to the jerks who perform this "science". P.S. END EQUINE SLAUGHTER!!!!

Dear Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Sengpiel,

I am writing to object to the methods of your research and the cruelty you inflict on the animals you mutilate. Mr. Mitchell, I think you are twice as twisted because you maul cats and kittens, yet they are the main theme of your website.

I cannot believe that the Universities condone this torture! What sort of crackpots give another set of jerks permission for this sadism?

When I stumbled across this sick garbage on http://www.cracked.com/arti cle_16884_12-..., I puked. Then I thought, "There is no way that any decent human being acts like this" and read what you have published. By your own hand you admit to being an animal killer. I plan on supporting the movement on http ://www.youchoose.net/campaign/stop_d...< /a> and doing whatever I can to end your torture in the name of science.

This is twice as rotten because it is duplicate research. What's with the sixteen year gap between the last time a couple of jerks (Hubel and Wiesel) {pps - Nobel Prize in Medicine 1981 for same experiment} tortured a cat and you? Trying to trot out some old-school experiments hoping the teacher won't remember so you can win the science fair?

Why not use death row inmates for your studies if they are so important? Those dirt bags are going to die anyways and the imperfect (innocent) specimen will no longer suffer. [insert sarcasm] Oh wait, because the life of a condemned serial killer or rapist is so much more valuable than that of a four-week-old kitten.

Boo, hoo, hoo, some poor slob has crossed eyes, poor vision or blindness. Does that affect the fact that the slob still has a life to lead while innocent animals are stuffed in a garbage bag at the end of the day? The consequences listed on http://w ww.afakids.org/ sound like these people are having a great big pity party for themselves. What about using your talents for something that matters, like killer diseases cancer or AIDS? It would be even better if you could cure without killing animals.

Can you put your head on your pillow at the end of the night and be okay with yourself knowing that you've killed so that others won't have bad self esteem? Get real. I may not be able to understand the technicalities of your research, but I do know kitties are for petting and not slicing or dicing. You are a murderer. I hope that you experience every ounce of pain you put those cats through when your time comes and god sends you straight to hell.

You all suck and I'm sorry to inhabit the same planet as you.
Sincerely,
Stephanie C*****, Gordie Cat and Tyler Cat

Submitted by Nicolle H. on Tue, 12/23/2008 - 15:21

Dear stephanie
While I understand that you "may not be able to understand the technicalities of your research", it also appears that you do not understand much of anything.

How nice of you to claim that people and the families of children suffering from visual defects are throwing themselves a pity party. Curing visual defects are not about self esteem - it is about resolving basic human functioning. It is a little thing called depth perception.

How do you put your head on a pillow at the end of the night knowing that you are such an ignorant twat.

Submitted by Nicolle H. on Tue, 12/23/2008 - 15:34

And FYI Dr Mitchell's research is not duplicate research. It utilizes the knowledge gained by previous research and BUILDS UPON it. Everything we know we do not discover all at once...it takes small steps.

Concerning your suggestion that scientists use criminals to study visual system defects - You cannot study "development" in a visual system of an adult criminal because their visual system is already fully developed. How about if we use the infants of criminals instead?

Submitted by Bree G. on Mon, 12/08/2008 - 03:55

Save the animals.

Submitted by Ricky T. on Fri, 11/21/2008 - 22:16

If you feel so strongly about it, then volunteer yourself to take the place of one of those lab rats. Oh, that would be silly huh? The facts are: people are what is important. No animal in this world, no matter how smart and good, is worth the life of the most miserable and low down person. I'm sorry that doesn't fit into the nice politically correct package it is so popular to be in sync with, but it's true. Let the nuts in Hollywood tell you what you should do. Heaven forbid that you should be an individual and use common sense in your decisions. WAKE UP!

Submitted by Girl of Wisdom S. on Fri, 11/21/2008 - 04:22

Okay people, experimenting on animals is bad! I can prove it in at least three ways at the top of my head:

1) Animals can feel pain just like we (humans) do, if
you contradict me, check out the
book, "Animal Liberation"

2) Humans are mammals and mammals are animals,
therefore, humans are animals. By not respecting
animals, we are not respecting ourselves.

3) There are alternatives that we can use instead of
animals, e.g. plants (if genes are included) and
human skin, cells, etc. growing in labs (when it
is not on an actual human).

Animals have given us much more than we should ever ask for...now please don't ask them to give their lives.

Submitted by J S. on Fri, 11/21/2008 - 14:48

Hello Girl of Wisdom,
 
Some replies to your comments, if I may:
1) Nobody is seriously arguing that animals are incapable of feeling pain. The argument is that pain, in itself, is not sufficient justification to put a halt to animal research. In fact, Peter Singer, the author of "Animal Liberation", would approve of (reasonably humane) experimentation on any number of animals, provided that the absolutely guaranteed benefit to some other group of animals (whether human or otherwise) exceeded the suffering caused by the experiment. This is clearly articulated in the book, and a similar idea guides animal experimentation in Canada.
 
I say a similar idea, because a strict implementation of Singer’s utilitarian approach is impractical. Singer's philosophy requires near-absolute knowledge of the outcome of each experiment, but if researchers had this knowledge, the experiment itself would be unnecessary; science progresses by venturing into the unknown. This conundrum is resolved by asking researchers to predict the benefits of their experiments, with sufficient scientific justification for each prediction. In Canada, experiments on animals are only allowed to begin if these potential benefits exceed the probable harm caused to the animals (though admittedly, there is a speciesist bias). An analogous process is used to screen human experiments.
 
So yes, animals can feel pain. Should we thus instruct veterinarians to stop administering vaccines to our pets? As most children will tell you, needles hurt. Or should we recognize that the pain caused is acceptable, as long as it is minimized, and as long as the benefits are substantial? Most people embrace the latter option. Canadian researchers are required to minimize the amount of pain inflicted on animal subjects, and all animal experiments are subjected to the rigorous review process alluded to above. I’ve written more on this note, way below.
 
2) Yes, humans are animals. But why stop there? Humans are mammals, and mammals are multicellular eukaryotic organisms... just like plants and insects. Should we stop eating plants, or stop killing those insects that feed on our crops?
 
This is clearly an absurd argument, but my point is that the distinction between what is "like us" and what is "not like us" is entirely arbitrary. Thus, this is not proof that animal experimentation is morally reprehensible. To be fair, I would use this same argument against people advocating animal research based on the distinction between "human" and "non-human"; this distinction is equally arbitrary, and is not proof that animal experimentation is justified.
 
3) The word “alternatives” is somewhat misleading. In reality, many researchers dabble in both animal and non-animal research. Non-animal research is seen not as an alternative, but rather, as a complementary approach.
 
More importantly, there are many phenomena that cannot be investigated without using animals. If researchers wish to know how stress affects the developing brain, for example, an animal that is capable of experiencing stress is required. When researchers attempt to determine how specific mutations in a gene result in early dementia, an animal capable of being “demented” (i.e., capable of expressing progressive memory deficits, etc.) is required. Cell cultures are wonderful tools, but cells cannot come to the doctor’s office with depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, Parkinson’s disease, etc. To develop an understanding of these conditions, scientists turn to animal research.

Submitted by citrus f. on Fri, 11/21/2008 - 02:19

omd.. ppl can b so mean to animals
i mean, wat hav they ever done to u?? would u lyk it if someone did to u wat u do to animals??
I WANT DALHOUSIE AND EVERY OTHER PLACE TO STOP USING ANIMALS FOR EVERYTHING THEY USE THEM FOR THATS BAD

Submitted by Ricky T. on Sat, 11/15/2008 - 23:16

I will be perfectly honest with you. I don't believe in animals being purposely mistreated, but in the area of experimentation to save human lives if it saves 1 human life then I have no problem if it costs many animal lives. Man is the only creature created in the image of God and housing an eternal soul. I hate to burst the bubble of animal lovers, but though Fido may be a good dog, when he dies he is just a dead dog and his existence ceases. Before everyone starts to cry foul let me tell you this. God knows what we love and if He wants to He can raise up ole' Fido for you to enjoy as a buddy in Heaven. Fact of the matter is we need to experiment on animals to improve the lives of people and to bring an end to diseases that ravage our society such as aids,cancer,muscular dystrophy, and a host of others. I would like to see an end to experimentation on animals but not at the risk of even one single person. Like it or not those are just the facts and I would not change it to save 1 million animals if it cost 1 human life. We need to stop listening to the fruits and nuts that live in Hollywood and use our own brains and the common sense that God gave us.

Submitted by larry t. on Tue, 12/30/2008 - 04:31

Hello Ricky,
If we use your logic, God knows that we oppose aids,cancer,muscular dystrophy etc and if He wants He can put an end to these anytime He see's fit. Maybe these diseases should just go to remind us that we are only on this earth temporarily and that we should not put so much effort to prolong our stay here. You are quick to point out that God created man but did you forget that he created the animals also. Your logic does not make sense as you place so much importance on human life in the flesh. Leave God's animals alone. No need for them to suffer as not even 1 million animal deaths will save one human soul, right?
Personally, I am not religous but I can't help but see how hipocritic your statements are.

Submitted by Bernard S. on Thu, 11/06/2008 - 06:01

I have a few thoughts for your consideration. I did read a couple of the articles, and I understand them.

It has historically been the case for many years that the medical research community uses animals for experimentation. In recent years that has evolved to humane experimentation. The results benefit people, but also benefit other animals; perhaps even the animals experimented on..

Has anyone contacted the following individual (see below) at Dalhousie University to get an explanation of exactly what they do for and to the animals, what their animal mortality rate is, what abusive/destitude circumstances the animals they use came from, and what they do with the animals after the experiments? Do they in fact never see sunshine? Are they in fact tortured? Are they in pain? Do they typically remain alive? Are they placed into caring homes afterwards? Do they confirm by every possible means that the animals they receive are not stolen pets? Are they treated humanely in the course of the experiments?

Honestly, I don't know in this case. I'm asking.

Everyday in this country, millions of people, in normal medical procedures, are jabbed with needles, intubated, have biopsies on every an any part of the body, have entire organs removed, and they do so relatively painlessly.

I work at an animal shelter. I have seen hundreds of cases of abuse. Over 4 million dogs get euthanized legally in this country every year for various reasons, even something as simple as a cold, because there isn't room for them and no one wants them. I have seen people return animals to shelters because they don't match the color of their furniture. I have seen people move out of their houses and leave their pet in an empty house to die. We rescued one that was slowing starving to death for weeks. He has permanent brain damage, but he has a caring home now.

I'm just asking. Are you sure they're being tortured? If so, I agree with you and something should be done about it. It is illegal in most states to abuse or mistreat animals let alone torture them. The first thing would be to contact law enforcement...specifically, Humane Investigations. Call any law enforcement agency and they can refer you.

Here is the individual's name. Her name was posted with one of the articles.

Lesli Smith
Administrative Assistant
Department of Surgery, VG Site
Room 8-845 Victoria Building
1278 Tower Road
Halifax, Nova Scotia
B3H 2Y9

Tel: 902 473-7015
Fax: 902 473-4442

Submitted by Science G. on Fri, 11/07/2008 - 13:55

Bernard
Thanks for using common sense. The fact is: animals are not abused at Dalhousie. I work in the Psychology department at Dalhousie. I do not work with the animals of which Amy speaks. I work instead with some of the "other alternatives" that can be used in neuroscience research to study visual development (yes the university employs many scientific methods to achieve a common goal -understanding). I do, however, have frequent access to the cats.

They are loved and well cared for. They are born in house and have delightful temperaments because they are used to being handled. They have names, toys, playtime, large rooms in which to romp and play and lots of humans to play with them.

Some animals are euthanized after experimentation... which normally involves visual deprivation and behavioral experiments with a simple jumping platform. They must be euthanized in order to examine the effects of visual deprivation on alterations in the cellular structure of the brain.

Animals that are not euthanized are available for adoption. While I constantly tell people that the University has animals for adoption most people do not want to adopt adult cats. Instead animals are adopted by the very people Amy Scott and other on this board accuse of being so heartless...the researchers themselves.

Sometimes animals live at the university for a year or two before we can find them a home. Some older cats that are no longer used in research, but have been neutered, have found a permanent home living amongst our breeding colonies.

To assume that Dr. Donald Mitchell condones abuse of cats is ridiculous - more so once you know the man. He adores his cats. To assume that everyone who works in the department of psychology (profs, students, cleaning staff, veterinary staff, technical staff, animal care workers, clinical psychologists) would sit back and allow animal abuse to happen under their noses is also ridiculous.

Submitted by Sue G. on Mon, 10/27/2008 - 13:50

What the hell - why in the name of Science would such torture be allowed. I just don't understand nor do I want to understand. Stop torturing animals!!

Submitted by TJ W. on Thu, 09/25/2008 - 02:16

Missed my spell check in the first sentence, "attached" articles, not arrached. See, it made me so upset I was not thinking clearly.

Submitted by TJ W. on Thu, 09/25/2008 - 02:13

No need for live animal testing. I read the articles arrached to this and did NOT like what I saw. For this "research" these poor animals had to have MULTIPLE surgical procedures. This means "open heart" procedures and several on each animal. They induced LETHAL cardiac rhythms then "shocked" the animal to restore a normal heart beat. I'm cardiac ICU nurse so I know what I'm talking about.These animals would a VERY short life filled with pain. Unbelievable, and this is just the research on the heart. I shutter to think what might be going on in other projects.

Submitted by J S. on Thu, 09/25/2008 - 19:36

Hello, Amy.
 
Some points for your consideration:
1) You have a distinctive writing style.
 
2) A cardiac ICU nurse (or any fan of Scrubs, Grey's Anatomy, etc.) would know that the "shock" that you're referring to (to re-establish a normal heart beat) is called defibrillation. Standard procedure, regardless of which species you're dealing with. Also the least invasive means of restoring a normal heart rate during fibrillation.
 
3) A nurse would also realize that the maintenance of anaesthesia (repeatedly described in these articles) is sufficient to prevent the sensation of pain during surgery.
 
4) You can edit your posts to fix any spelling errors that you make. That is, until somebody posts a reply.
 
5) Please. Enough deception.
 
6) On the off chance that you are truly TJW, the cardiac ICU nurse, I sincerely apologize. But please, for the safety of your patients, find a new career.

Submitted by Science G. on Fri, 09/26/2008 - 01:39

thank for the informative response JS

To TJ W
I would just like to add that several = 7. There are only two procedures performed on these animals: the first being TMLR, the second being surgery to expose nerves for physiological measurements.

TMLR is used on people who have already had open heart surgeries such as Cardiac bypass since it is a less invasive surgery. Mary humans undergo both of these procedures. to learn more about TMLV in simple terms read this
http://my.cle velandclinic.org/heart/diso...

AS a result they do not have "a short life filled with pain" but a longer life now with less pain. Any Cardiac nurse would know these procedures, which are common in human, and thus should be able to support them in animals.

Submitted by Mike Z. on Thu, 09/04/2008 - 06:48

Dalhousie University has no right to use animals for testing. It is unacceptable.

There are many, many non-animal alternative. And it is not like Dal can't afford them!!

Submitted by Mike Z. on Thu, 09/04/2008 - 06:44

Then why do they have puppy chow, dog cages at Dal if they don't use dogs????? Dal is cruel and everyone knows it.

Submitted by J S. on Thu, 09/04/2008 - 20:57

They don't.
 
If you have evidence to the contrary, please let us know.

Submitted by at Facebook on Tue, 09/02/2008 - 23:28

ooo save the dog/cats but who cares about a baby getting killed by a little thing called abortion

Submitted by Laura S. on Tue, 08/19/2008 - 10:10

It is unacceptable of how cruel a human can be, and if this is for science I would rather die than know a poor animal had to forgo its life to save mine!

Submitted by Kristen A. on Fri, 07/18/2008 - 23:45

Such sickness goes on in this world that we don't even know about. Thanks so much for the exposure.

Submitted by M.R. H. on Tue, 05/20/2008 - 00:56

Oh my God that is just outrageous and appalling. It makes me ill to think of evil people that do such horrid things to defenseless animals in the name of "science" when it's been Proven there are other animal-free ways to test things. It's all so unnecessary and cruel. I'd love to see the researchers on the other side in a cage and see how they like it.

Submitted by k c. on Mon, 05/19/2008 - 23:12

Research first before you take this BS in about dalhousie. See if Dal does do this testing on cats and dogs? They only test on mice and insects.

Submitted by M.R. H. on Tue, 05/20/2008 - 00:57

It's not ok to hurt them either.

Submitted by Courtney R. on Thu, 07/03/2008 - 23:07

I agree.

Submitted by haley j. on Sat, 05/03/2008 - 19:34

Hi I'm Haley and I think that the people who are involved in animal abuse are sychopaths, I mean dogs,cats and other animals are no diffrent then us (humans) our appearances might be diffrent but whe are still the same whe all got a hart, a soul and a mind .A mind that knows the diffrence between pain and being treasured. Hurting animals isn't just wrong it's a diabolical strike on mankind, an embarrasment for the rest of mankind who do charrish animals !!!!

Submitted by tom r. on Tue, 04/22/2008 - 14:58

This is Tom and i would like to say that no one needs to kill any kind of animals i think and fill like if any one that killes animals needs to go to jail.and not get out. This is something that needs jail time like 10 to life.or longer.And us as people need to say and keep on saying and letting people know that this is worng and that this can not happen.

Submitted by payton c. on Wed, 04/16/2008 - 23:13

THIS IS EVIL AND SO IMMATURE!!! YOU KNOW, THIS MAY SCARE PEOPLE, BUT IF I EVEN GET A CHANCE TO EVEN SEE THOSE PEOPLE FROM THAT UNIVERSITY, THEY WILL HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY REGRET IT!!!!!!!!!! WHY SHOULD ANIMALS SUFFER FOR EVIL, MESSED UP HEADS FROM IDIOTS WHO WANT TO COLD BLOOD MURDER! IM VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY UNPLEASED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

1234next ›last »
macys.com
Fileplanet (IGN Entertainment)
Loading People...