!> i isr i o isr
The Battalion • Page 5
Wednesday • June 14, 1995
Necessary ‘evil’ of animal research benefits many
C hewy made the cover
of The Battalion last
week. He’s not a stu
dent. He’s one of the cats
involved in the research of
Feline Immunodeficiency
Virus, FIV, at the Texas
A&M College of Veterinary
Medicine. Research done
on Chewy and his friends
may help scientists discover new ways
of treating HIV.
FIV affects cats in a similar manner
that HIV affects humans. The re
searchers are attempting to induce im
munity to the virus. If they are success
ful, a similar treatment might work on
HIV as well.
Unfortunately, if the treatment does
not work. Chewy and company might
become infected with the virus and die.
Like millions of other laboratory ani
mals, Chewy will probably give his life
in the name of medicine and science.
Then again. Chewy really doesn’t
have a choice. Animals are removed
from animal shelters, breeding farms
and even their natural environments to
be placed in cages and subjected to var
ious mental and physical distresses.
Their basic needs are provided, but
they have been de
prived of their natural
habitats.
Is it right to use
these animals for our
benefit? Is it fair for
them to suffer in order
to increase our knowl
edge? Without the use
of animals in re
search, science and medicine would not
be as advanced as they are today.
People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals, PETA, states as part of their
motto, “Animals are not ours to experi
ment on.” It’s true.
Animals are not “ours.” But the
earth isn’t ours either, and we certainly
have exploited it. One exploitation
doesn’t justify another, but the sacrifice
of animals to research produces bene
fits for both humans and animals.
Organizations such as PETA have
played an important role in creating
more humane conditions in animal re
search laboratories. PETA’s investiga
tions into an painful experiment involv
ing dogs and rabbits at Ohio’s Wright
State University led to charges by the
United States Drug Administration of
violations of the Animal Welfare Act.
The Animal Liberation Front, a radi
cal organization that is linked to PETA,
has also played a role in exposing labo
ratories and industries that have cruel
ly treated animal subjects. They have
broken into labs, posed as workers and
even destroyed equipment and re
search data in the name of animal
rights. Their motives are com
mendable, but their methods
are questionable.
It shouldn’t be neces
sary for radical groups
to break the law to pre
vent inhumane situa
tions. Laws such as the
Health Research Exten
sion Act of 1985 exist to
protect animals.
These laws regulate the
use of animals in research and require
research projects to be reviewed by a
board of experts before funding is
granted. In theory, this ensures that
the use of animals in projects is neces
sary and that their suffering is mini
mized. But the federal government
doesn’t have the manpower to prevent
cruelty once the animals are in the lab.
The few lowlifes of the scientific
community whose inhumanity has been
exposed by PETA and the ALF have
made a bad name for all involved in an
imal research. Contrary to the stereo-
type induced by PETA and ALF, ani
mal researchers aren’t mad scientists
who dream of creative ways to torture
their subjects.
Dr. Jim Mahoney, a veterinary sci
entist with the Laboratory for Experi
mental Medicine and Surgery in
FVimates, has a deep respect
and love for his animals.
He takes care of the pri
mates that are
used in AIDS re
search and vaccine
studies.
He has made extra ef
forts to keep his chim
panzees as happy as pos
sible outside of their nat
ural environment.
They have extra-large cages, plenty
of interaction with humans and access
to sunlight.
In an article on the internet. Dr. Ma
honey admits, “ I would very often like
to walk out on animal research, but I
would feel like a coward for having de
serted the cause of human beings. Chil
dren should not die of Hepatitis B or
AIDS, malnutrition or malaria, when
we have the potential for improving
their lives.”
Animal research is a necessary evil.
It seems unfair for animals to suffer,
but if a human life is saved, the use of
animals is justified.
PETA suggests alternatives to ani
mal usage, such as substituting com
puter models for dissections in anato
my courses. That’s fine for high school
students, but no one wants a veteri
narian cutting into their dog, when he
only practiced on a computer program
in vet school.
Animals, like the earth, are a valu
able resource.
Now many species are utilized for
various purposes by humans. By using
animals, we assume responsibility for
their well being.
We must take care of them, ensure
that every species is allowed to thrive
and prevent unjustified suffering.
We also must realize the enormous
contribution of animal research to the
health and well-being of humans and
animals.
Margaret Gordon is
a senior genetics major
The B/vetwei<t>n
Established in 1893
Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views
of the editorials board. They do not necessarily reflect
the opinions of other Battalion staff members, the
Texas A&M student body, regents, administration,
faculty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons
and letters express the opinions of the authors.
Contact the opinion editor for information on
submitting guest columns.
Editorials Board
Jay Robbins
Editor in Chief
Rob Clark
Managing Editor
Sterling Hayman
Opinion Editor
Kyle Littlefield
Assistant Opinion Editor
Seeking Safety
The CSPD should adequately
protect the Northgate area.
The Northgate area beck
ons College Station residents
each night and every week
end into the throes of its bars
and taverns. Most view bars
like Duddley’s Draw and the
Dixie Chicken as convenient
places to go and unwind,
meet with good friends and
to have a few drinks.
But to the College Station
police department, Northgate
is a thorn in its side. With the
large number of people the fre
quent the area establishments,
many of whom are consuming
alcohol, the possibility of prob
lems is much more prevalent.
Northgate easily can become
a concentrated zone of drunken
rowdies, especially during foot
ball season, that sometimes
can warrant two officers on foot
patrol, in addition to the offi
cers who patrol Northgate as a
part of their beat.
Lt. Scott McCollum, from
the College Station Police De
partment, said the large crowd
generated after football games
is always grounds for the extra
officers, but that even during
summer, which is usually
much quieter, those extra pa
trols are called in.
During 1994 in the area
from University Drive to
Church street and from Nagle
street to Wellborn drive. Police
issued 150 tickets to minors in
possession; 83 public intoxica
tion citations, each resulting in
an arrest; and responded to 25
assaults and 3 aggravated as
saults. An aggravated assault
constitutes the “use of a
firearm or anything made by
man to cause death, or causing
serious bodily injury.”
People who drink have a re
sponsibility to themselves and
to others to act with respect.
Acting with respect includes
arranging for transportation
when you’ve had too much to
drink and following the ideals
of the Golden Rule.
But people aren’t perfect,
they often make mistakes, and
the police are there to correct
those mistakes. Northgate is a
College Station landmark and
a pseudo-mecca for Aggies
everywhere, but that doesn’t
change the fact that it can be
dangerous.
The College Station Police
Department should evaluate
its policies to ensure that there
is adequate police patrol and
protection of the area at all
times, so that Northgate can
remain an area of good times
and safe fun.
Social interaction dictates political viewpoints
u ~T‘ou’re way too con-
servative. How
-L. could you possibly
think that way?”
“Me? You’re so liberal you
wouldn’t know reality if it bit
you on the butt.”
All of us at one time or
another, have stared quizzi
cally at a friend or acquain
tance and thought to ourselves that we were
in the presence of a crazy person.
Not the “Hannibal Lechter” kind of crazy,
but more along the lines of why a person
might think in a radically different way than
we do, particularly about politics.
Regardless of the political ideology with
which we identify, our views are most likely
based on our social environment.
But because there are too many ideological
variations to list, I’m forced to be grossly gen
eral and lump everyone as “conservative” or
“liberal.” We tend to identify more with one or
the other anyway.
So, why are some people “uptight” conserv
atives and other people “weirdo” liberals?
According to Webster’s, “conservative”
means, “tending to preserve old institu
tions, methods, customs, and the like; ad
hering to what is old or established; oppos
ing or resisting change; as a ‘conservative’
political party ...”
On the other hand, “liberal” is defined as,
“favoring reform or progress, as in religion,
education, etc.; specifically, favoring political
reforms tending toward democracy and per
sonal freedom for the individual ...”
Whichever of these political definitions
best describes you is likely to indicate a par
ticular set of socially-induced values — with a
social circle to match. Political leanings ap
pear in traits from religious perspectives to
fashion choice.
People tend to gravitate toward those who
are similar to them in thought, as well as ap
pearance and background.
However, people also tend to
assume the values of those who
surround them through social
pressure. Social pressure is a
very sneaky thing. We’ve all
been raised with it, and we take
it wherever we go.
Social pressure appears to
start with your parents, but
they are influenced by it as well.
The problem is that if you want to please
Mom and Dad, you’ll swear they’re right, if
you don’t, you’ll swear they’re wrong.
Remember, no one is born with political
convictions, they always are learned.
At a certain point in life, these learned val
ues are either generally accepted or rejected,
based on any number of reasons. But the
greatest influence is still desire for acceptance
by people who bestowed ideas upon you, peo
ple who now surround you or people you
would like to surround you.
Quite simply, it’s not a coincidence that most
of your friends have simi]. i a£ political viewpoints
or that you share your parents’ ideas.
As anyone who has ventured away from
this socially protective cover knows, it’s very
difficult to change or even alter your ideology
from those emotionally or physically close to
you. The social pressure can be intense, not to
mention the temporary loss of identity that
frequently accompanies a new viewpoint.
People often feel like they have had to
“leave” friends or family members in some
way. In fact, “leaving” a socially comfortable
value system is so distressing that people of
ten will keep particular viewpoints secret.
How many viewpoints do you keep secret
for fear of what cert gun others might think?
These learned values, which inevitably
make their way into your political stance, are
neither right nor wrong. For the most part,
they are socially arbitrary values which with
out strong conviction would mean nothing to
the beholder.
I have them and you have them, but our con
viction doesn’t make them the “right” values.
For instance, whenever I’m within earshot
of the political moaning that goes on around
here, I usually hear something like, “That Bill
Clinton is a total idiot ... blah, blah.” Or per
haps, “Newt Gingrich is not just a fascist, but
a stupid one ..." etc.
If we would just step back from our emo
tions for a moment we could see that neither
of these men is lacking intelligence. In fact,
not only are they both considered to be quite
bright, but they are also more educated than
most of us.
So why must we insist that at least one of
these men and his cohorts are dimwits? Why
do we stare at our political opponents and
wonder, “Are they crazy?”
It’s pride. Pride in whichever political
viewpoint we’ve learned to embrace. People
have an innate desire to maintain their iden
tity, or else they feel lost.
People tend to gravitate to
ward those who are similar
to them in thought.
Pride maintains political identity as well
as religious, ethnic or even collegiate identity.
The reasons we may consider ourselves to
be conservative or liberal are not based on
sanity, intelligence, love of family, humanity,
art, life or even God; but on the very interpre
tation of each and the perceived importance
therein. This reasoning should be part of self-
actualization, not with whom you associate.
Don’t just examine your political beliefs, or
even the values that lead to them.
Instead, examine how and why you ac
quired your values.
Are they really, really your own? Or are
they a product of your social environment?
Frank Stanford is a
philosophy graduate student
Frank
Stanford
Columnist
Mail
Mantle deserved
liver transplant
Julie Thomas' June 12 col
umn on Mickey Mantle's liver
transplant truly shocked me.
Some of the misleading sta
tistics quoted by Thomas de
mand clarification.
She quotes an average wait
for a liver transplant candidate
to be 142 days.
According to her source and
how the question was phrased,
that may be true.
However, according to the
surgeon who performed the op
eration (interviewed the next
day on CNN), the average wait
for “someone in Mr. Mantle's
stage of liver failure is 3-4 days.”
Thomas also neglects to men
tion that the computer trans
plant network from which all or
gans are prioritized and distrib
uted placed Mantle at the top of
the list — according to medical
condition, not ability to pay.
While I do not condone the al
coholism that admittedly de
stroyed Mantle's liver, neither
do I find Thomas' assertion that
by continuing to live, he con
sciously took a life from another.
Numerous times in the col
umn, Thomas speaks of people
being "robbed of receiving a
liver", or "why does he deserve
to live."
Amazingly enough, Thomas
quotes no statistics on those
who die because someone fa
mous, or with more money, got
"their" liver.
Perhaps the most alarming
thing about this column is the
impression I got that Thomas
deems herself worthy of decid
ing who lives or dies.
If she was the one who had to
look into the eyes of a wife, son,
daughter or other relative and
say that their loved one was not
good enough to get a second
chance at life, I believe her
views would .change.
If not, then perhaps she is
worthy of judging life and death.
In that case, an accounting
degree from A&M would seem
rather unnecessary.
Matthew Gardner
Class of ’91
Jackson shows art,
musical talent
In response to Amy Uptmor’s
column on Michael Jackson yes
terday, I have a few things that
should be pointed out.
First, Jackson did not elect
himself as the “king of pop,” no
more than Elvis elected himself
the “king of rock.”
The title came from the be
ginning days of pop music, in
which he was an artist who con
tributed a great deal.
If Uptmor really thinks
Michael is a freak, maybe she
should take a closer look.
Perhaps it is the media that
are the freaks.
Michael Jackson is an artist
of music, and he is mostly a her
mit. He isn’t a camera freak
who makes media appearances
as often as he can.
If you like any music at all,
you will find that most musical
artists, and even other kinds of
artists, have some problems in
their life history that they ex
press through their art.
Jackson’s art is that of music,
choreography and dance.
He expresses it well.
Some may think it is
grotesque or freaky, but a true
appreciator of real art will see
what he is truly showing.
Those who don’t take the
time to look, won’t see.
As far as MTV coverage, if
Uptmor is so worked up on
freaks, then why does she con
tinue to watch MTV?
Michael Davis
Class of ’98
Th E B /ATTAsEI ct n
Editorial Staff
Jay ROBBINS, Editor in Chief
Rob Clark, Managing Editor
Sterling Hayman, Opinion editor
GRFTCHEN PerrenOT, City Editor
Jody Holley, night news Editor
STACY Stanton, Night News Editor
MICHAEL LandauER, Aggielife Editor
NlCK GeORGANDIS, Sports Editor
Stew Milne, photo edftor
Staff Members
City Desk - Assistant Editor: Eleanor Colvin; Re
porters: Katherine Arnold, Javier Hinojosa,
Scott McMahan, Jill Saunders, Michael Sim
mons, Wes Swift & Tara Wilkinson
Aggielife Desk - Feature Writers: Kristen Adams,
Amy Collier & Libe Goad; Columnist: Amy
Uptmor
Sportswriters — David Winder and Lee Wright
Opinion Desk - Assistant Editor: Kyle Littlefield;
Columnists: Elizabeth Preston, Frank Stan
ford & David Taylor; Contributing Colum
nists: Justin Barnett, Margaret Cordon, Alex
Miller, Chris Stidvent & Mark Zane; Editori
al Writers: Jason Brown & Alex Walters;
Editorial Cartoonists: Brad Graeber &
George Nasr
Photographers — Mike Friend, Roger Hsieh, Nick
Rodnicki & Eddy Wylie
Page Designers - News: Kristin DeLuca;
Sports: Robin Greathouse; Aggielife: Stew
Milne
Copy Editors — Rob Clark & Sterling Hayman
Graphic Artists — Toon Boonyavanich & Melissa
Oldham
Strip Cartoonists — Valerie Myers & Quatro Oakley
Office Staff - Office Manager: Julie Thomas;
Clerks: Wendy Crockett & Heather Harris
News: The Battalion news department is managed by
students at Texas A&M University in the Divi
sion of Student Publications, a unit of the De
partment of Journalism.
News offices are in 013 Reed McDonald Building.
Newsroom hours:
Sunday, 2 p.m. to 1 0 p.m.
Monday — Thursday, 10 a.m. to 1 0 p.m.
Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Newsroom phone: 845-3313; Fax: 845-2647
E-mail: Batt@tamvm1.tamu.edu
The Battalion Online: The Battalion offers photos
and the day's headlines on the worldwide
web. Web Site: http://128.194.30.84
Advertising: Publication of advertising does not im
ply sponsorship or endorsement by The Bat
talion. For campus, local and national dis
play advertising, call 845-2696. For classi
fied advertising, call 845-0569. Advertising
offices are in 015 Reed McDonald and of
fice hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday
through Friday. Fax: 845-2678.
Subscriptions: A part of the Student Services Fee entitles
each Texas A&M student to pick up a single
copy of The Battalion. Mail subscriptions are
$20 per semester, $40 per school year and $50
per full year. To charge by VISA, MasterCard,
Discover or American Express, call 845-2611.
The Battalion (USPS 045-360) is published daily,
Monday through Friday during the fall and spring
semesters and Monday through Thursday during the
summer sessions (except University holidays and
exam periods), at Texas A&M University. Second
class postage paid at College Station, TX 77840.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The
Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald Building, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.