PETA wants military to stop using animals in medical training

[RedGlitter]

I realize a lot of members are going to attribute this to the grudge people have against Peta, but that aside, did you know your tax money pays for your government to perform this cruelty on animals? Do you care?





PETA wants military to stop using animals in medical training



HONOLULU, Hawaii (AP) -- Animal-rights activists want the United States to stop using animals as subjects to help train its military, calling the medical and trauma exercises cruel and a disservice to the troops.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sent a letter Monday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates asking him to replace the use of animals with non-animal methods such as human simulators.

In the letter, PETA said the military inflicts gunshot, burn and chemical wounds on monkeys, pigs and goats for training.

"This outmoded practice is not only cruel, but is a disservice to the men and women who risk their lives in defense of our country and who deserve the most effective trauma training methods available," wrote Kathy Guillermo, director of the PETA's Laboratory Investigations Department.



The Pentagon did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

PETA's letter comes 10 days after the group failed to prevent the Army from shooting live pigs and treating their gunshot wounds in a medical trauma exercise at Schofield Barracks in Hawaii.

The Army said the training is critical to teach soldiers how to manage critically injured patients within the first few hours of their injuries when there are no medics, doctors or facilities nearby.

PETA believes the military's Combat Trauma Patient Simulation system, which is being used at other bases such as Camp Pendleton in California and Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, is a more advanced and humane option.

PETA noted the Department of Defense's animal welfare policy that states, "Alternative methods to the use of animals must be considered and used if such alternatives produce scientifically valid or equivalent results to attain the research, education, training, and testing objectives."

[spot]

RedGlitter;934260 wrote: PETA noted the Department of Defense's animal welfare policy that states, "Alternative methods to the use of animals must be considered and used if such alternatives produce scientifically valid or equivalent results to attain the research, education, training, and testing objectives."
What's the equivalent to pinning down a crazed 200 pound mammal that's spurting blood over your hands while you're trying to clamp severed arteries and get a field dressing established before it dies on you? I can't see any likely alternative to that at all. Lives are dependent on the average GI knowing beforehand what it takes.

[RedGlitter]

Well, I figure if you're going to be working on people, you should practice on people. Similar to doctors. Let them get some cadavers instead. I don't like cruelty. A lot of that stuff is unnecessary. I don't approve of the government using my money for that.

[spot]

RedGlitter;934312 wrote: Well, I figure if you're going to be working on people, you should practice on people. Similar to doctors. Let them get some cadavers instead. I don't like cruelty. A lot of that stuff is unnecessary. I don't approve of the government using my money for that.


It can't be a dead body, human or otherwise. It has to be spurting and wriggling. Anyone can patch up a corpse. The only real alternative is to train the GIs in less realistic conditions.

[RedGlitter]

I don't see anything wrong with that. If they have flight simulators in the military and surgical simulators in the medical field, then they ought to be able to come up with something better for this situation. I just don't think it's ever right to use animals which are feeling, sentient creatures in cruelty ridden procedures for the sake of human benefit. I mean, if I said why not use humans? You'd probably tell me I was insane. But really if it's unethical to do that, then it's just as unethical to use an animal who can't consent. The word I want to use to describe what I think of the people behind this if I can say this, is "chickensh*t." That's what I think it is. Lowdown.

[spot]

You'll end up with more battlefield deaths. Removing the one leads to the other. I've no idea what "military and surgical simulators in the medical field" are - perhaps you can point to one - but it's not the same as an injured pig. How close does it simulate?

[RedGlitter]

In medicine they have machines that simulate what it's like to perform surgery or perform say, a gynecological exam. I'm sure it's not 100% the same as putting your hand in a real body or in the case of military flight simulators which imitate what it's like to pilot a plane, as good as flying in a real plane, but from what I have read in articles from doctors and military people, it's an adequate comparison.

I don't know statistically how close these machines come to accurate simulation, I'm sorry I can't answer that.

Have you happened to see any documented footage of these military animal tests, Spot? It's quite upsetting. A pig screaming in pain because its skin has been burned off is not a sound you forget.

[Accountable]

RedGlitter;934357 wrote:



Have you happened to see any documented footage of these military animal tests? It's quite upsetting. A pig screaming in pain because its skin has been burned off is not a sound you forget.
Do you have links?

[RedGlitter]

This is the uncut version taken from the Peta.org website. It might offer a little more info?

U.S. Military Shooting and Burning Live Monkeys, Goats, and Pigs in Trauma Training



The Department of Defense is shooting and burning monkeys, pigs, and goats in combat training exercises for servicemen and servicewomen—even though more effective non-animal simulators are readily available. Leading medical experts agree that these simulators offer superior training. In addition to being cruel, this outmoded practice is a disservice to the men and women who risk their lives in defense of our country and who deserve the most effective trauma training methods available.

PETA is calling for an immediate end to all use of animals in trauma training exercises. Most medical schools long ago ended the use of animals for trauma training.

Many humane alternatives for trauma training are readily available, including the following:

• Having military level one trauma centers work with the community and take care of the entire population of their city

• The Combat Trauma Patient Simulation System, which "provide[s] realistic training" and dropped the trainee attrition rate from 23 percent to 6 percent, according to CHIPS (the U.S. Navy's information technology magazine)

• Simulab Corporation's TraumaMan system, which has been approved by the American College of Surgeons for teaching Advanced Trauma Life Support

• Dr. Emad Aboud's "living" cadaver perfusion model, which has been endorsed by more than 20 surgeons and used in surgical training at universities in the U.S. and abroad

You Can Help

Medical experts agree that there is no need to shoot pigs and goats and to burn monkeys with chemical weapons to teach soldiers and medics how to treat human injuries. Please help animals who are suffering in Department of Defense trauma training exercises by using the form below to send a quick message to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates respectfully urging him to replace the use of animals with non-animal methods.

Please contact the Department of Defense today by filling out their Ask A Question web form.

Feel free to copy and paste the sample letter below or write your own.

Sample Letter

I was shocked to learn that the Department of Defense is shooting live pigs and goats and burning monkeys in trauma training exercises. There is no justification for this cruelty. The majority of medical schools in North America no longer use animals for medical trauma training, and more effective humane alternatives are readily available. I respectfully request that you adopt PETA's recommendations and take immediate action to end the needless suffering of animals in these outdated training exercises.

[RedGlitter]

Accountable;934362 wrote: Do you have links?


It's been a while but I will certainly try to find some for you.

[RedGlitter]

Here are some links detailing animals used in tests by the military and in bioterrorism research:



http://www.all-creatures.org/saen/articles-themost.html

http://www.mrmcmed.org/mar.html

http://www.hsus.org/animals_in_research ... earch.html

http://www.idausa.org/facts/military.html

http://www.all-creatures.org/saen/artic ... games.html

http://www.downbound.com/Animal_Testing_s/274.htm

[spot]

RedGlitter;934366 wrote: It's been a while but I will certainly try to find some for you.


I've checked the links and none have any "military and surgical simulators in the medical field" that would make an alternative to a live pig. Do they exist?

[Accountable]

koochikoo;934385 wrote: I'm with you Red, we have fantastic technology in todays age that can produce things from bionic body parts to interplanetary spacecraft. Surely a technology must exist that will produce a suitable alternative to inflicting pain and suffering on a defenseless animal.



I rarely visit the PETA site, it makes me feel so sad and helpless. I've seen things on there that have given me nightmares for weeks.
Then please, leave warfare to warriors.

[spot]

And you still get to eat it afterwards.

[RedGlitter]

I'm gonna leave you with your sentiment Jester because I feel it's irrefutably wrong.

I can't change your mind but no human is worth another living being's life. If you want a practice victim, see how many humans would be willing to "sacrifice" for their fellow man. Not ethical? Mmhmm.

[Omni_Skittles]

Okay i officially want to start running tests on the members of PETA! sheesh

[RedGlitter]

Animals are not equivalent to humans they are here for our enjoyment and pleasure and for our food. Obviously I love animals but I also know thier place in the food chain.


Jester I don't subscribe to that. I don't believe at all that humans are any better than animals. what rulebook stated that animals are here for our food and pleasure?

[spot]

RedGlitter;938593 wrote: I can't change your mind but no human is worth another living being's life.


I wouldn't kill a wasp for enjoyment but I'd kill it if it was buzzing round my room and refused to leave through the window and I was trying to read a book and concentrate. That's the extent to which I value the life of a wasp.

Would you not give up a wasp's life to save a human's? I'm only asking to see if there's a level of life below which the value drops.

Jester wrote: Animals are not equivalent to humans they are here for our enjoyment and pleasure and for our food. That's the best argument I know that Christianity is bunk, and I know quite a few. That one tops them all. No God could be that obscene and immoral.

[suzy_creamcheese]

im wondering what this all has to do with religion.

People love to assume they have the right to do what they will with animals because"they can" therefore its in our interests to think its ok.

Im a carnivore so im aware it makes me hypocritical a bit, but i think that the absolute terror that these animals must go through for these practice runs make it a huge moral no no. Absolutely hideous. There can be no justification for it, certainly not for the sake of wars

[RedGlitter]

but the simple fact of the matter is we are superior and we are controllers of what we consider our domain.


The simple fact of the matter is we're not the only species on earth. We just think we are. No person has a "right" to torture another living being. That's just how it is. I'm thinking we'd better agree to differ again because we're sure not going to change.

[spot]

Jester;940052 wrote: Ask Spot, he brought it up. I just stated the obvious. As to the morality of it, until it is outlawed, which it one day will be I have no doubt, it is optional.


Oh come on! Your post said "Animals are not equivalent to humans they are here for our enjoyment and pleasure and for our food" - that's an interpretation of chunks of Genesis and Acts and you've quoted the relevant passages in the past to support your view! Of course it's a religious statement!

[spot]

Jester;940100 wrote: But it does not mean it is 'religious' as it is fact, isn't it obvious naturally that man has dominion over the animals?Absolutely 100% no.

[spot]

Jester;940109 wrote: Well thank you for your opinion.


It's taken life in all its variations close to four thousand million years to develop to the current range and variety inhabiting this planet and an accident has suddenly unduly unavoidably favoured intelligence. This one species, Human, is reducing the balance of complexity and leaving huge numbers of identical small thin strands of complexity in its place. It's a calamity. If the number of people suddenly, instantly, diminished by a factor of ten thousand or so and stayed at a half million permanently then maybe the planet could afford us. It certainly can't afford what we've turned into.

[spot]

Jester;940118 wrote: Rubbish. 100% pure rubbish.


The reduction of complexity? That's capable of demonstration. I can show that.

Or was it something else?

[spot]

Jester;940125 wrote: Spot, yer delusional... why would I take anything you say seriously anymore? You think the world trade centers were destroyed by a controlled demolition and that Bush and the PNAC planned and orchestared the whole thing...

You have lost all credibility in my eyes. In fact most of what you've said in the past that I thought you were nuts about but gave you the benift of the doubt... well you were just nuts all along.

If the convaluted thinking you used to come to your unbelivable conlusion on the WTC has any bearing on reduction of complexity, no I dont want a demonstration.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiversity#Threats