< Accueil

Vivisection: “When Man Turns Monster”

Preamble

Committed to defending animals, Artezia exposes pseudoscientists whose cruelty reaches heights we hardly dare to imagine. How can one knowingly torture and slaughter animals on the pretense of scientific progress? By what right?

French author and statesman André Malraux said, “A life is worth nothing, but nothing is worth a life.” It would be right to add “no life is worth another,” not even an animal’s life. Especially not an animal’s life!
By what right would man have the power of life and death over another being? If man applied all the humanity with which he is endowed, that would be true progress.

... My naïve hope for the near future....

" The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
by the way it treats its animals.” – Gandhi

Definitions

Vivisection : Noun. Dissection, operation carried out on a live animal

Animal, animals : Noun
1. Living being with the ability to feel and move (versus plants)
2. Living being without the ability to speak or reason (versus man)

History: When did experimentation begin?

For centuries, animals have been subject to man’s whims, including experimentation, intensive farming, illegal trafficking, and more.
For fifteen centuries, doctors looked to the physiological and anatomical observations of Claudius Galen (130–201). He recommended basing one’s thinking on experimentation (dissection), rather than on writings.

Starting with the Renaissance, direct observation and experimentation (surgery) developed slowly with scholars including Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) and Andreas Vesalius (1514–1564). Animal cadavers were dissected to determine the position of the organs.

In the 18th century, the philosopher Descartes denied the existence of animal suffering.

Today, mindsets have evolved and we now know that animals, just like humans, suffer physically and mentally when inflicted with pain. Yet the experiments continue.

There are two opposing schools of thought: one that values laboratory study (Cuvier, 1769–1832) and one that advocates the observation of animals in their natural environment (E. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1772–1844). The first school developed into comparative psychology and the second into ethology, the “study of the relationships between beings organized into families and societies, groups and communities.”

At the same time, Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species (1859) was revolutionizing the study of animals. Darwin (1809–1882) stressed the link between animals and humans in The Descent of Man (1871) and the need for comparative study in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872).

Based on Darwin’s ideas, it must be acknowledged that humans evolved from lower animal forms, and the study of physiological and mental functioning is critical to understanding our biological forerunners.

For his laboratory work on animal intelligence, E. L. Thorndike (1874–1949) is often considered the father of controlled animal experimentation. Meanwhile, C. Bernard was developing the methods and basic principles of physiology based on “zoological vivisection,” already using anesthetics (ether and chloroform).

Around 1895, the difficult-to-handle wild rat (Rattus norvegicus) was replaced by the white rat—very different from its ancestors but much more docile for lab experiments.

Considered the “father of vivisection,” Claude Bernard (1813–1878) baked dogs alive in specially designed ovens. Philosopher Johannes Udes’ definition could be applied to him: “vivisectors are morally underdeveloped individuals with pathological tendencies.”

Overview

The term “vivisection” comes from “dissection” and carries a strong emotional charge. Animal experimentation involves all tests conducted on living animals, with or without anesthesia, for experimental purposes. The general public is still largely unaware of these scientific experiments, which are clearly not a reason to be proud of being human, modern, and civilized. Tests on animals are frequent, cruel, and useless, which only adds to their atrocity.

In France, an estimated over 7 million animals die each year after terrible suffering in experiments. This number does not include animals killed in the fur trade or the meat industry.

Animals are used for testing household products (soaps, lotions, perfumes, shampoos, etc.), consumer products (inks, paints, detergents, lubricants, etc.), pesticides, and nuclear and other weapons. Some animals undergo a number of experiments over days, months, or even years.

Each day at the hands of pseudoscientists and future doctors or veterinarians who are considered medical authorities, millions of animals (mice, rats, guinea pigs, hamsters, rabbits, dogs, cats, turtles, monkeys, horses, donkeys, goats, birds, and fish) are blinded with acid or lasers, subjected to a series of electric shocks, repeated immersion, or injections with fatal viruses, and are poisoned, eviscerated, frozen then revived and refrozen, condemned to die of thirst, hunger, heat, or cold, often after the complete or partial removal of a variety of glands, the severing of the spinal cord, or some other operation. They are deprived of oxygen and sleep. Their arteries are compressed or damaged in order to induce anxiety, and they are forced into aggression, dementia, and hypertension. They undergo transplants, head or organ grafts, electrical discharge, injury-induced tumors, chemical-induced cancers, forced drug or alcohol consumption, drowning, blood samples taken from the heart or ears. Monkeys are thrown against walls; dogs, monkeys, and rabbits are restrained and forced to smoke; mice are kept in front of burning cigarettes; horses receive nicotine injections. The intense suffering is interminable.

Once tested on animals, each new method, each new product must then be tested on humans for safety and usefulness. It has often been said that vivisectionist exercises serve no purpose, except to provide a glimpse into human stupidity.

Tortures most commonly inflicted on animals:

• Oxygen and sleep deprivation to induce anxiety, aggression, dementia, convulsions, hypertension.
• Transplants, head and organ grafts, electric shocks, induced tumors
• Nerve removal, forced drug and alcohol consumption, drowning, toxic gas tests, brain experiments
• Genetic manipulation, production of embryonic monsters
• Nicotine injections, restraint in front of burning cigarettes, connection to tubes that force animals to “smoke” cigarettes...

Where experiments are conducted:

• Pharmaceutical lab animal facilities
• Veterinary hospitals
• General hospitals
• Military laboratories
• Universities, high schools
  

Testimony by a student (excerpt from Animaction magazine, summer 2000):
“This year, at least 256 more rats and rabbits will end up in the yellow trash can of the animal physiology lab with their stomachs cut open. [...] Lab 1, Licence Degree, General Biology and Earth Sciences: Anesthetized live rats are cut open and cannulas inserted. Often, there’s a lot of blood, you can’t see anything, and the animal dies during the operation. We throw our ‘dead’ material into the yellow trash can, being very careful with our vivisection equipment, and then that’s it—time to go home. Nothing shocks you? [...] There are a thousand other causes for students to support in the world (abused children, human massacres), but right here in our country, on our campus, there is a lack of respect for life, as well as disregard for and violence against so-called ‘inferior’ beings.”

Charter for ethics in animal experimentation: a joke?

With a shared commitment to improving the conditions of animals used for scientific purposes, talks were held in the Ministry of Research between INSERM, INRA, CEA, and CNRS with the goal of creating regional committees for ethics in animal experimentation. These committees are among the principles set out in a charter to which these organizations subscribe.

Section 1: The need for animal experimentation
The need for biological, medical, and veterinary research and the current limits of alternative methods make animal experimentation essential to advancing knowledge, improving the diagnosis and treatment of disease, and generally protecting health.

Section 2: Animal sensitivity and suffering
Animals are sentient beings with cognitive abilities and emotions. They are capable of suffering. Experimenters have a duty to ensure that animal health and wellbeing are not jeopardized unnecessarily. The prevention of all unnecessary suffering will be their top priority.

Section 3: Experimenter qualification
Scientific and technical knowledge is constantly evolving. Experimenters must seek to maintain and enhance their own skills and those of their colleagues. They must ensure use of the techniques best suited to achieving their scientific objectives in accordance with the physiological and behavioral needs of the animal species used.

Section 4: Experimenter responsibility
Experimenting on animals involves personal responsibility. Experimenters undertake to fully comply with the legal and regulatory requirements in effect. Experimenters also have a moral responsibility toward the animals they use for scientific purposes. They must therefore do their utmost to ensure the ethics of their approach, particularly with respect to the legitimacy of the research goal and the appropriateness of the chosen methods, and to ensure with reasonable probability that their work will lead to new knowledge.

Section 5: The benefit of ethical consideration
Experimenters cannot be the sole judge of the ethical legitimacy of their own work when it involves their relationship with living beings. The scientific community as a whole also needs to broaden its thinking on what is tolerable and what is not. This calls for the creation of special ethics committees.

Section 6: The role of committees for ethics in animal experimentation
These committees assess the compatibility of proposed experimental protocols with ethical principles in order to help experimenters when animals are required in their work. The goal of these committees is to provide an additional guarantee for society as a whole of the respect for animal life and the merits of the proposed work.

Examples of experiments: the very epitome of cruelty

The following examples of experiments are unfortunately frequent and may shock you, but what is your shock compared to the suffering of these animals?
Take courage and open your eyes. It’s time!
These are only a few examples among thousands. These photos from the labs certainly show the “less cruel” experiments—those people still dare to photograph.

Experiments on cats:

Cats’ eyes are removed. Electrodes are implanted in the eyeball and optic nerve. Cats are chemically paralyzed and intubated, catheters are inserted in their arteries, other electrodes are sometimes placed behind the eye and in the jaw, and they are subjected to a variety of tests.
In addition, cats are frequently exposed to radiation in order to test sun and cosmetic products. They also bear the brunt of tests involving razors, shampoos, hair-removal creams, etc.
Here is a tiny newborn kitten who had the misfortune of crossing paths with humans.
Experiment: A leg was grafted to the belly of the kitten at left to see if the leg would develop and function normally. The urinary system of the kitten at right has been sewn shut to prevent the kitten from urinating. Result: This kitten died when his bladder burst inside his body. What’s the purpose? Are scientists so stupid they can’t predict such an obvious outcome?

Experiments on dogs:
(Man’s so called “best friend,” and this is how man thanks him!)

Because of their “docility,” beagles are among the most commonly used dogs in experiments. Above are beagles being forced to smoke through a tube inserted inside their closed mouth. They are also seriously burned in tests that expose them to solar radiation, lasers, and toxic chemicals. This torture is unacceptable! So many lives wasted, so many madmen running free… Where are morals taught?
	In this experiment on a dog in a restraint device, the liver was replaced with the spleen, the eyes torn out and sewn onto the back, and the sciatic nerve cut and inserted into the stomach. Can we really say this is scientific progress?
	Here are the disastrous results of a test on a weight loss product. The dog was rescued by activists opposed to animal experimentation but did not survive despite the care provided, as he was too undernourished. Deliberately put into a state of deficiency by the injected chemical, his body was unable to recover.
	In this experiment, part of this dog’s brain was surgically removed. Result: The dog became completely still, unable to move. Reduced to a vegetative state, this dog will be subjected to further experiments… until his death.
	In this experiment, a second head was grafted onto this dog. The dog died two days after the operation. What if we grafted a brain onto experimenters?!

Experiments on monkeys:

Confined, intubated, and restrained in torture devices, monkeys undergo the worst suffering in tests with toxic chemicals and gases, mutilation, and more.
	Some years ago in a Japanese lab, one of these monkeys managed to get free of his cage. Do you know the first thing he did? He opened all the cages in the room in order to free the other monkeys before escaping. Don’t tell me after that that animals lack intelligence! They are even more human than man.
The frightened expression of monkeys who know what is in store for them and patiently await their turn. The “scientist” seems to find this funny.
This experimental setup reproduces a crash test system. The monkey is thrown at high speed against the steel bar a few centimeters away and crashes into it like a car hitting a wall at 130 kilometers per hour. What is the purpose? Please help me, because I truly do not understand!
Eye tests are common, with the injection of toxins or viral solutions and laser-induced burns.
	In this experiment, the monkey’s eyes are sewn shut to see how she will react when she wakes up. Bravo, how far will human “intelligence” go?!
This monkey was scalped alive, then fitted with electrode-like devices to measure brain activity and conduct tests to match certain areas of the brain with certain abilities. In the best of cases, animals are anesthetized but receive no pain reliever, which might alter experimental results. On awakening, the pain is intense or intolerable for these monkeys. How long do you think you could live with your skull cut open and electrodes inserted in your brain? Certainly not long.
In spring 1977, Dr. Robert White presented a film on Italian television in which one monkey’s head was grafted onto another’s body. The doctor attempted to elicit a response from his dying victim by poking him in the face. The poor animal was in no condition to react, despite the surgeon’s persistent “stimulation.” His nose bleeding incessantly, the monkey could only stare in terror at his abuser. Despite public outcry, the doctor—completely out of touch with reality—announced the next day that he was ready to transplant a human head. He just needed a volunteer…

Experiments on mice, rats, guinea pigs, and rabbits:

The animals try desperately to escape their hell but steel bars hold them back. Strapped to a torture table, the guinea pig above was just waxed in order to test a cosmetic product on her bare skin. After being coated with this product, she is placed under a lamp until her skin burns.
Their eyes burned with toxic chemicals and suffering from illnesses induced by intravenous injection, rabbits are doomed to die a most painful death.
Mice, hamsters, and guinea pigs are the most commonly used lab animals. The term “guinea pig” surely stems from the frequent use of this animal in so-called “scientific” experiments.

More sadistic experiments:

U.S. researchers separated kittens from their mother at birth. At the end of the experiment, the vivisectors concluded that kittens who are separated meow more than kittens who are not, and the cries of separated kittens indicate emotional distress.

At the University of California, 1,000 dogs were given food containing doses of radiation 200,000 times stronger than what humans might be exposed to in an area with radioactive fallout. Their terrible internal and external burns were used to calibrate the radioactive effects of future nuclear missiles.

A U.S. researcher gave rats more than 15,000 electrical shocks over seven hours. Later, the vivisector heated their cage floor until the imprisoned rats jumped and licked their feet as the environment became hotter and hotter.

This same experiment was conducted with a mother monkey and her baby, with the cage floor becoming hotter and hotter until it burned the mother, who was carrying her baby on her head to save him from death. This experiment shows that monkeys also have a maternal instinct and that man is vile! Just what does this contribute to humanity?

For toxicity tests like the LD-50 (lethal dose 50%), a group of 20 to 200 animals is force fed a substance (floor wax, oven cleaner, etc.) until half the subjects die, regardless of how much of the substance they have ingested. The symptoms experienced by the animals over the fourteen days of this “treatment” range from suffocation, vomiting, and bleeding from the eyes, nose, and mouth to respiratory problems, convulsions, organ damage, and paralysis. The survivors are then killed for examination or used for other experiments.

Animal experimentation: not very ethical

Lack of respect for life

René Descartes, known for his philosophical rigor and broad thinking, considered soulless animals as simple machines, reacting to pain only for mechanical reasons and therefore without suffering. Today it is acknowledged that animals also feel pain, so what right do we have to continue these barbaric acts?

Da Vinci, Schweitzer, Voltaire, and Goethe believed that a species wishing to be saved from such practices did not deserve to be saved. What gives us the right to use living beings—whatever the species—as experimental equipment, to disregard the suffering caused, and to cast aside any principle of humanity or respect for life, even if these beings may be judged as inferior?

Judeo-Christian cultural influences have clearly contributed to man’s egocentric perspective and the belief that animals are inferior and can be subjugated by us for our own benefit.
But what god would allow his creations to torture other beings created by him?

Science without conscience only bankrupts the soul

There is a risk that experimenters will become increasingly desensitized to animal suffering, lose their perspective, and even perpetrate the same abominations on other humans (as we have seen during periods of war). At certain universities, vivisection is presented to young undergraduate biology students as a normal practice, just like using an oscilloscope in the physical sciences. No remark, no comment on even the possibility that a sacrificed animal might suffer.

The twenty-year-old mind comes to accept animal experimentation as an irrefutable fact, under the guise of scientific progress and the impervious foundation of deified science.

Aren’t the dangers posed by transgenic species, genetic manipulation, and cloning distressing examples of dehumanization and the acceptance of cruelty as commonplace, on the excuse that “you don’t stop progress”?

What about the Hippocratic Oath?

Isn’t a scientist or doctor’s duty to safe lives, rather than sacrifice them?

Armed with statistics, certain researchers claim they have achieved positive results with certain chemotherapy treatments, failing to mention the suffering caused to guinea pigs or the short lives of these sacrificed victims who died soon after the terrible treatments. Contaminated blood disasters (HIV and hepatitis C) and mad cow disease seem to be other cases where legislation and good sense are supplanted by barbarity and a thirst for profit and glory driven by an ethical, pragmatic, and methodological imbalance. Reprehensible largely for its futility and lack of rigor, animal experimentation makes a mockery of the ethics of respect for life.

Are these experiments necessary and reliable?

Using animals as experimental models is a trap for three key reasons:

• The diseases induced in laboratories are utopic models that are not identical to diseases in real life.
  
  
• Different animal species react differently from each other and from humans. Each individual reacts individually.
  
  
• Lab animals suffer stress, anxiety, and fear that alter their reactions and responses.
  

Concrete examples:

• Aspirin, extracted from willow bark, has been around for 100 years. Worldwide, people take nearly 100 billion aspirins a year, and some fifty nonprescription medications are aspirin-based. Although aspirin is now popular and known for its effectiveness, it would never have made it to the market if developers had considered its toxicity for rats, mice, dogs, cats, and monkeys.
  
  
• While not harmful for monkeys and chickens, arsenic is fatal to humans.
  
  
• Morphine is a sedative for humans and rats but causes acute agitation in cats and mice.
  
  
• A dose of opium that would be fatal for humans is harmless to dogs.
  
  
• Cats can tolerate isoproterenol (an asthma medication administered in an aerosol pump) in a dose 175 higher than the amount that is lethal for asthmatics (result: approximately 3,500 human deaths worldwide).
  
  
• A drug intended to ease the lives of people with motor disabilities caused a number of human deaths before being taken off the market. Yet it had been tested on animals.
  
  
• Thalidomide was tested on thousands of animals and was claimed to be harmless. Thousands of children with severe birth defects paid the price!
  
  
• Parsley is fatal to parrots, and too much salt is fatal to all birds. The death cap mushroom does not hurt slugs or squirrels but is fatal to humans.
  
  
• In 1785, British doctor and botanist William Withering successfully tested an infusion of dried foxglove leaves on patients with heart disease. Researchers discovered that foxglove raised the blood pressure in dogs to dangerous levels. Not until nearly 150 years later was foxglove recognized for its benefits to humans.

Since the last century, a tremendous amount of dogs have been sacrificed in an attempt to understand diabetes, the third leading cause of death in North America after cardiovascular disease and cancer. Since the discovery of insulin, deaths due to diabetes have only increased. The incidence of this disease doubles every ten years.
It is mistakenly believed that in 1921 Canadians Best and Banting demonstrated the role of insulin in diabetes. In 1788, physician Thomas Cawley had already connected diabetes to degeneration of the pancreas—without animal experimentation—by examining the body of one of his patients who had died of the disease. As early as 1766, another doctor, Matthew Dobson, observed high sugar levels in the urine of one of his patients.
Fifty years ago, British surgeon J.E.R. McDonagh expressed doubt regarding the benefits of insulin: “Diabetes is a symptom, not a disease, and insulin only alleviates this symptom. The drug sheds no light on the cause, it does not act in the manner described, and if the cause were found and eliminated—which is possible—there would be no reason to use it.”
Dogs—one of vivisectors’ favorite animals for studying diabetes—are wrongly sacrificed, as their dietary habits and organic reactions are radically different from those of humans. A study described by Dr. Inder Sigh shows that diabetes is tied to dietary or environmental factors.
Today, cases of diabetes are rare, even inexistent, in countries that consume primarily grains, vegetables, and fruits. As regards juvenile diabetes, certain researchers have asserted that vaccines may trigger the disease process.

Members of the medical community are increasingly speaking out against the harmfulness of vaccines. The polio vaccine, deemed “miraculous” in the 1950s, is actually dangerous. Made with the kidneys of monkeys, the vaccine has been repeatedly contaminated by animal viruses.

Iodine and penicillin are other examples of drugs discovered without animal experimentation. Key advances in certain medical fields have arisen from the clinical observation of patients, hygiene measures, chance discoveries, and epidemiology.

Medicine does not need vivisection to achieve true progress. The United States—the world’s leading consumer of lab animals—is not the healthiest nation. The country only ranks 17th in terms of life expectancy worldwide.

The use of certain drugs with benefits for humans has been delayed due to harmful effects on animals: Digitalin, used for heart disease, was found to be dangerous to the dogs on which it was tested. Penicillin, a highly useful antibiotic, is fatal to guinea pigs but was fortunately not tested on them. The use of chloroform was long delayed due to its high toxicity for dogs.

Different people can tolerate different doses and cannot always tolerate the same drugs. The differences between species are even bigger. The results of an animal experiment cannot be scientifically extrapolated and applied to humans. A veterinarian would not advise giving a dog a product tested on rabbits, yet animal experimenters would recommend giving this same product to your children or parents.

Furthermore, animals are placed in situations we are not—particularly when they are exposed to constant solar radiation until they burn. This in no way reflects a situation humans might place themselves in when using a sun cream, for example.

The same is true of shampoo tests. Clearly, when you get a drop of shampoo in your eye you rinse it out immediately; in experiments animals are restrained and the shampoo attacks the eye for hours or even days until it becomes infected and the animal dies. What comparison can be made?

Dogmatic propaganda in favor of animal experimentation takes advantage of a poorly informed general public and media by citing cases involving similarities in the reactions of animals and humans. It is obvious and natural that there will be similarities, but we only know this after experimentation and not before. A comparative study of 23 products showed similarities in the metabolism of rats and humans in only four cases, and there is no way to predict which cases through animal experimentation alone. But even worse, many patients continue to suffer while potentially beneficial products are ruled out because animals react poorly in the lab.

Animal experimentation has surely been useful in medicine as an aid in the discovery of vaccines or proper treatments. Useful perhaps (I acknowledge this even though I do not agree), but certainly not essential.

Are there alternatives to animal experimentation?

Of course there are, but they are more expensive than sacrificing animals:

• Training and experimentation using videos, computer simulations, etc.
• Testing on synthetic systems, such as artificial skin
• Use of microorganisms such as bacteria and yeast
• Testing on human cells in tissue cultures, on organs in perfusion
• Computers and robot simulators (e.g., in car crash tests instead of sacrificing monkeys)
• Biomathematics

  ...

At Université de Paris VII and in Angers, France, researchers have developed an alternative to animal experimentation using the mass culture of unicellular organisms.

The benefits of using unicellular organisms in toxicology research, for example, is that they in some sense provide an exact “duplication” of the same type of cell; this makes it possible to obtain statistical data based on the law of large numbers, just like in routine animal experimentation but without having to sacrifice a single animal!

In addition, these organisms are more “adaptable” to various culture conditions and to subsequent experimentation; the results obtained for a tested substance are much more reliable because there is no unfortunate interference due to the deplorable conditions of animal experiments.

Unicellular organisms can also be cultured in all possible conditions, day and night, at low or high temperature, etc., without a significant impact on the results.
This method—a perfect compromise between science and respect for life—is a much more reliable route toward market authorization.
All types of products can be tested: drugs, detergents, herbicides, cosmetics, and anything else!

Conclusion

We could describe thousands of experiments that show that vivisection—far from advancing science or medicine—has caused a regression to a form of barbarity, but a few examples are more than enough to show the horror of this sadistic practice.

Many people believe that humans are superior to animals and, consequently, have the right to use animals as they wish. Unfortunately, this type of reasoning has led humanity to racism, slavery, Nazism, and physical, mental, and racial discrimination.

“The question is not ‘Can they reason?’ nor ‘Can they talk?’ but rather ‘Can they suffer?’” – philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832)

The belief that rats are miniature humans arises from mental aberration and scientific fraud. Humans and animals are very different anatomically and psychologically. They do not react in the same way to certain products. The models applied to humans are therefore completely misleading and useless!

It is absurd to use an animal model for disorders such as migraines, depression, obesity, alcoholism, or Alzheimer’s, where the highly developed mind of humans is involved to a degree that no one can accurately determine. Human beings are not mice; they are more than their physical package. They are tied to their emotions, spiritual aspirations, soul, and mind.

Although pharmaceutical companies claim that animal experimentation is essential to protecting humans, drugs tested on animals and declared potentially dangerous are still marketed.

Why lie to ourselves? All drugs end up being tested on humans despite animal experimentation. When labs obtain the right to market a product, they measure the effects on humans and, based on the results, the product is either left on the market or withdrawn.
It is technically possible, scientifically desirable, and morally essential to stop animal experimentation.

The slippery slope from animals to humans ...

Many humans including newborns, the mentally disabled, orphans, seniors, and prisoners—many as powerless and defenseless as lab animals—have been involuntary guinea pigs of science without a conscience.

In the late 1950s, the Toronto children’s hospital conducted numerous experiments on “the pressure exerted by the blood on the walls of the pulmonary artery during the first five months of life” by inserting a catheter from the thigh vein to the pulmonary artery. Study subjects—mentally disabled babies—underwent these experiments without sedatives.

Several years later in Boston, doctors performed heart catheterizations on 38 newborns. The operations were conducted without anesthesia on babies with no heart defects.

In the United States, 21 people with mental disabilities or psychoses were administered a spinal injection of tuberculin (a derivative of the tubercule bacillus used in skin tests). Several hours later, the subjects’ temperature increased, they began vomiting, and some suffered from meningitis.

In New York City in 1958, 40 mentally disabled children age 5 to 10 were used as experimental equipment and infected with the hepatitis virus.

In 1975, 425 poor, illiterate, black syphilis patients recruited in Alabama public clinics were deprived of a remedy known to be effective in order to “study the effects of syphilis on the human body.”

More and more experiments are being conducted on live aborted human fetuses. Cases have been reported in which the hearts of live human embryos removed from their mothers’ bodies were sold to researchers and implanted in dogs.

Human fetal tissue (liver, thymus, etc.) is transplanted in mice for leukemia, hepatitis, and AIDS research.

You might wonder whether medical progress is really being made when more and more people are dying of cancer, degenerative diseases, and weakened immune systems due to viruses, toxins, pesticides, drugs, antibiotics, and vaccines. Life expectancy has increased, but not the quality of life. People are not cured but kept alive artificially.

Many key diagnostic and treatment methods were developed without using animals. These include the stethoscope, the thermometer, electrocardiography, blood pressure measurement, percussion, X-rays, and resuscitation techniques.

“I have never known a single good surgeon who learned anything using animals.” – Abel Desjardins, Head Surgeon, School of Surgery, Faculté de Paris

A true surgical education comes from the study of anatomy texts, the dissection of human cadavers, and the observation of patients. Canine anatomy can teach us nothing about human anatomy.

Certain “scientists” are so hungry for recognition that they are prepared do anything, even if it involves torturing animals and humans. Vivisection dehumanizes and desensitizes experimenters to the suffering of others. What is intelligence without sensitivity?

These monsters of science, these torturers work in complete legality in the shadows of laboratories, away from the media in the name of progress, and are “protected” by a science blinded by money and power.

Suffering is suffering.
Slaughtering a dog, cat, or any other animal is slaughtering an animal,
regardless of what it may teach us!

Don’t be fooled—human health has nothing to do with developing transgenic piglets or mice with human cells, transplanting baboon hearts, cloning monkeys, or removing guinea pigs’ hair with wax and burning their skin with sun lamps.

Bibliography:

Hurlements, Marcel Duquette, Édition Michel Quintin
Ces bêtes qu’on torture inutilement, Hans Ruesch, Édition Pierre-Marcel Favre
Les faussaires de la Science, Hans Ruesch, Édition Civis
Nous sommes tous des cobayes, Marc Maillet, Édition J.A.
Why Animal Experiments Must Stop, Vernon Coleman, Edition Green Print
Betrayal of Trust, Vernon Coleman, Edition European Medical Journal
In Pity and in Anger, A Study of the Use of Animal in Science, John Vyvyan, Edition Micah
Is Animal Experimentation Justified ?, Collectif, Edition Greenhaven Press Inc.
The Myth of Vivisection, Alert (B.P. 94, Côte-des-Neiges, Montréal, H3S 1S4)
La volonté de guérir, Norman Cousins, Édition du Seuil
The Case Book of Experiments With Living Animals, The American Anti-VivisectionSociety
L’anti-vivisection, No. 124, 1995, Ligue française contre la vivisection
Expressions, National Anti-Vivisection Society

Animal protection organizations:

“Savages lay hold on this dog, which surpasses man so wonderfully in friendship; they nail him on a table, and they dissect him alive to show you the mesaraic veins. You find in him the same organs of feeling which are in yourself. Answer me, automatist; has nature arranged all the springs of feeling in this animal to the end that he may not feel? Has he nerves to be without pleasure or pain?”

Voltaire,
Dictionary of philosophy

“Why does the suffering of an animal upset me so? Why can I not bear the idea that an animal might suffer, to the point that I get up at night, in the winter, to make sure my cat has his cup of water? [...]
“I truly believe that my charity toward animals comes from the fact that they cannot speak, explain their needs, or indicate their troubles. When a creature is suffering and has no way to make us understand how and why—is this not horrible, is this not harrowing?”

Emile Zola,
Le Figaro, March 24, 1896

To their memory...

Merci à Kind Translators pour la traduction de ce dossier !
Traduction faite par Julie Plovnick

Entrer votre code d'accès - Entrer votre code d'accès Champ facultatif Document compatible My allopass. N'oubliez pas d'insérer votre adresse email pour gagner sur My allopass ! Plus d'infos Pour connaître notre solution de micro paiement : Allopass

Dossier Artezia ©
M.M.