I am outraged at the obtuse opinions expressed in the recent article “Preposterous PETA” (ODE, Nov. 14).
First of all, PETA does not spend the majority of its budget on animal shelters because it focuses on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely and for the longest periods of time: factory farms, labs, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry. PETA’s mission, contrary to Willse’s idea of “the group’s largely fanatical philosophy” is to protect animals from exploitation and cruelty and bring about positive changes in the ways humans regard other species.
Secondly, if PETA has to use images of the holocaust and known cancer sufferer Mayor Giuliani to get its message to people, so be it! PETA’s campaign “Holocaust on your plate” can hardly be called “an appalling affront to every Jew” because it is based on the writings of revered Jewish writer-philosopher Isaac Bashevis Singer, who said “In relation to animals, all people are Nazis; for [them] it is an eternal Treblinka.” The comparison of animal exploitation to the holocaust is consistent with the longstanding Jewish tradition of promoting kindness to animals (Lewis Regenstein, Jewish columnist-author).
According to Willse, “animal testing is essential” and “PETA seems to lack the appreciation for human life or decency”? Human clinical studies and computer simulations are faster, more reliable, less expensive and more humane than animal tests. Animal models differ from their human counterparts, conclusions drawn from animal research are likely to delay progress, mislead, and do harm to the patient (M.A. Fadali, Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgeon). In the last two decades many drugs (among them Thalidomide, Opren, phenacitin, Eferol, Oraflex, Suprol and Selacryn) were taken off the market after causing hundreds of deaths and/or injuries to humans, but were initially approved by the FDA after testing on animals showed favorable results. Many animal experiments give misleading results and with regard to human health, we’d probably be better off if we hadn’t relied on them.
Animal tests are primitive compared to modern technology. For example, instead of dripping chemicals into animals’ eyes to test toxicity, researchers can now grow a layer of cells on a membrane and monitor changes in electrical resistance to test chemicals. Many advances in our society came from others’ exploitation — for examples, roads were built by slaves, yet we still drive on them. We can’t change the past. We can’t stop all suffering; that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t stop any.
Willse also believes “the use of animals for food” is acceptable as long as that use “is reasonable.” Reasonable? We feed so much grain to animals (raised for food) that if we all became vegetarians, we would save a quantity of food equal to the caloric needs of 8.7 billion people more than the entire human population.
Our world today allows for kinder, gentler ways to feed, clothe, entertain and educate ourselves other than by killing animals.