|
VIP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dp2GnOypc4&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVFeVYFs-40 http://www.thememoryhole.org/
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/
DYI PSYOPSZZZ
I am gonna put this on my website with some pix DYIPsyOPz
A great old cartoon - please share it with your kids - and my brother, Keith's idea for
ending this carnage ... er, I mean "war" ... using a version of Bush's own tactics -
enjoy all -
Peace - R
x<0--------------------------------------xx<0>xx-------------------------------------0>x
From: Keith
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:45 AM
Subject: 1939: MGM's "Peace On Earth", and How To Win The War On Terror
Click here to see the only cartoon in history ever to win the Nobel Peace Prize. It's
about eight
minutes long and very well done. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVFeVYFs-40Recently,
I listened to a hour-long lecture given by William Perry, former Defense
Secretary and one of ten panelists on President Bush's Iraq Study Group (ISG). Perry's
knowledgeable view of the prospects and consequences of our invasion and occupation
of Iraq is so dim and so pessimistic, Cindy Sheehan looks hawkish in comparison.
Afterward, emerging from deep depression, I got to thinking: this war was born of artful
lies, deception and manipulation of facts.Why not end it the same way?
Following is a rough draft of how to win the war on terror thru lies and deceit (feel
free to expand, delete, take credit for it, or change any part of it. It's imaginary after all):
1. Go scoop up some beggar off a street corner in Beirut. It doesn't matter if he's Shiite or Sunni or
Dervish or what, as long as he looks terrorist (meaning he would glide right
through any Homeland Security airport departing flights cordon while the snow-white 80-year-old
woman is strip-searched).
2. Dress him up in terrorist garb. Turban, robes, all the good stuff. Have him say "In'sh Allah" every
two or three sentences.
3. Spread rumors about a major media event coming. Have the White House deny all such rumors.
4. Introduce him to the mass media as Khalif Mohammed (or whatever, you know? Just pick a good,
terrorist-sounding Muslim name), chief representative of a coalition of Islamic terrorist organizations,
including Al Quaeda.
5. Have him explain that bin Laden has renounced Islam, been reborn in Jesus Christ his new
Lord and Savior, and hereby commands that all terrorist activities cease immediately, especially
suicide attacks.
6. Finally, have our beggar-cum-terrorist king offer up a signed, formal document of
Unconditional Surrender, and another dissolving support to all and any violent organized
groups.
Bingo! The War On Terror is won! We WIN! USA! USA! Finally, we can start to rebuild in
peace and security.That's pretty much how we started this war. I bet it would work to get
us out.
***
The sun is 330,330 times larger than the earth.
Allah bless America
sandra and richard <>
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+
|
|
Transgenic pigs xenotransplantation
Subject: Transgenic pigs sent abroad for experiments
Clayton this is a must read!!! If you are still curious about AIDS Dick Chaney who
invented it while attempting to create Transplantable Pig hearts for him self and
Rummy and all of his filthy rich buddies.. .
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:50:20 GMT
Clayton xenotransplantation!!!
Did Dick Chaney invent HIV AIDS with his company’s illegal cloning experiments in
xenotransplantation ...
Did Dick Chaney invent HIV AIDS illegal cloning experiments in xenotransplantation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Did+Dick+Chaney+invent+HIV+AIDS++illegal+cloning+experim
ents+in+xenotransplantation+&btnG=Search
www.mickeyz.net/news/weblog/full_article/why_panama/ht
3024k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
If you are still curious about AIDS ask Dick Chaney who ran a corporation probably that
invented it while attempting to create transplantable Pig hearts for him self and Rummy and all
of his filthy rich GREEDY buddies...
Aids & Xenotransplantation
The Islet Foundation - JDF/NASA Conference
AIDS was not caused by xenotransplantation… Those opposing islet xenotransplantation
frequently talk about the scourge of AIDS. It is important to remember ....
www.islet.org/24.htm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages
Quirks & Quarks for February 28, 1998
Jeff Getty, AIDS and Xenotransplantation activist, is one of the few humans who
has received a transplant of tissue from another species. ...
radio.cbc.ca/programs/quirks/archives/97-98/feb2898.htm - 4k - Cached - Similar pages
Of Pigs, Primates, and Plagues: Xenotransplantation Critique
Xenotransplantation is a dangerous and unproven technology. ... HIV - the virus
that causes AIDS - may be a simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) that leapt ...
www.mrmcmed.org/pigs.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
Xenotransplantation: The Next Biotech Disaster?
Xenotransplantation: Falsified reports, incompetence, the possible introduction
of AIDS and other new diseases, and not one single success story.
www.organicconsumers.org/patent/xenodisaster.cfm - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Xenotransplantation for AIDS.
Xenotransplantation for AIDS. Ildstad ST. Publication Types Comment Letter MeSH
Terms Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/therapy* Animals ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8602019&dopt=Abstract -
Similar pages
Features: Xenotransplantation
"Use of animal cells or tissue could be beneficial in AIDS, ... Early research
in xenotransplantation should be done at medical centers with expertise in ...
www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-1.2/Xeno.htm - 22k - Cached - Similar pages
Satya 3/00: Xenotransplantation and the HIV Question
The FDA admits that xenotransplantation could spread known and unknown ....
Since people with HIV/AIDS are normally not allowed to receive human organ ...
www.satyamag.com/march00/xeno.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
Aids & Xenotransplantation.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Aids+%26+Xenotransplantation.&btnG=Search
Xenotransplantation: A New Way of Consuming Animals?
http://www.google..com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Xenotransplantation%3A+A+New+Way+of+Consuming+Animals%3
F&btnG=Search
Excerpt:
4.2 Public health: virus transfer
More attention has been devoted to the danger of virus transfer than any other issue in the
debate on xenotransplantation. It has also been the issue that has done most to force government regulatory bodies to deal with the technology with apparent caution. Unlike immunological and physiological complications, virus transfer affects not only the recipient of the organ, but endangers the entire human population.26 Some commentators have suggested that newly emerging viruses pose the greatest risk to human health in modern times.27 These viruses usually cross into the human population from other species of animals.
Normally the skin, mucosal surfaces and the highly acidic environment of the gastric system present an effective barrier to such viruses. However, xenotransplantation presents a unique opportunity for cross-species infection because it involves the circumvention of all these natural barriers, bringing animal viruses directly into contact with the living cells and tissue of patients with heavily-suppressed immune systems.28 To make matters worse, one leading virologist, Professor Robin Weiss, suggests that the introduction of human genetic material into pig cells could enable pig viruses to infect human beings more efficiently.29
There are several incidences of viral pandemics that have emerged from animals, including pigs.
One stronglysupported theory contends that HIV crossed from chimpanzees to humans, possibly through contaminated polio vaccines produced from chimpanzee kidneys. AIDS victims now number several million worldwide.30 The Spanish Influenza epidemic of 1918 which killed up to 50 million people is thought to have originated from pigs.31 More recently, a previously unknown virus spread from pigs to humans in Malaysia killing over half of the 200+ people it infected.32 There are literally hundreds of examples of cross-species infection. Often, the virus causes no ill-effects in its natural host. But when the virus finds itself in a new host, it can become pathogenic, and even deadly.
33
Rescuing the American Flag Review of 50 American Revolutions You’re Not Supposed to Know: Reclaiming American Patriotism by Mickey Z. (Disinformation, 2005, 155 pages).
"I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth, and I am a citizen of the world.” -Eugene V. Debs, Mickey Z. wants to reclaim American patriotism from the zealots who have turned it into an antihuman passion. His new book, 50 American Revolutions You’re Not Supposed to Know: Reclaiming American Patriotism, highlights people throughout US history who, through self-sacrifice and struggle, elevated the welfare of individuals and the community above the survival of the lifeless entity known as the nation-state. The 50 “revolutions” cited in the book represent a form of patriotism based on challenging tradition and taking action. The book serves as a wonderful companion to Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. Both serve as histories of the United States, although Zinn begins with Columbus while Mickey starts with Thomas Paine’s Common Sense (published in 1776).
This document is the transcription of a speech given by Dan Lyons at the Mediterranean Vegetarian Festival in Malta, October 5 1999. Dan Lyons is a campaigner with Uncaged Campaigns, which is an anti-vivisection NGO based in Sheffield, England. He is also a PhD researcher at the University of Sheffield, investigating the ethical and political implications of xenotransplantation.References
1 John Wallwork. Current status of xenotransplantation. International Journal of Cardiology 62 Suppl. 1 (1997): S38. J.van den Bogaerde and D. White. Xenogeneic transplantation. British Medical Bulletin 1997; 53 (No. 4): 904-920.2 Written Question No. 176, Parliamentary Session 1997-98
3 S. Moore. Novartis Picks up Pace in Xenotransplant Race. Wall Street Journal (Europe), 10 October 1997: 4. 4 Department of Health: The Advisory Group on the Ethics of Xenotransplantation [AGEX]. Animal tissue into humans. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1997: 9. 5 Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Animal-to-Human Transplants: the ethics of xenotransplantation,
Xenotransplantation: A New Way of Consuming Animals?
1. Introduction Xenotransplantation is the transplant of LIVE cells, tissues and organs from one species to another species.Specifically, we are talking about the prospect of transplanting material from pigs into human beings. Although, in the,meantime, a range of quite gruesome animal experiments have taken place where, for example, organs from pigs have been transplanted into rhesus monkeys and baboons1, some of whom have been captured from the wild.
2. The reason why xenotransplantation is being developed is that companies such as Novartis are trying to exploit a gap in the market for organ transplants.
3 There are growing waiting lists for organs and, currently, shortfalls in the supply.
4
Although heart valves from pigs have been transplanted into human beings for the past twenty-five years, these valves are preserved in glutaraldehyde, thereby rendering them lifeless - they are not living tissue, and perform a relatively,simple, mechanical function. Furthermore, it is believed that they do not harbour microorganisms such as viruses that could infect the recipient and then move into the general population.5 Obviously, from an animal-rights perspective,whether the tissue is alive or not is beside the point as both kinds of tissue involve the exploitation of animals. However, modern xenotransplantation threatens to open up a brand new, never seen before area of animal abuse. This,means that fighting xenotransplantation must become a priority for animal protection campaigners around the world.,The fact that xenotransplantation is not yet established means there is a unique opportunity to tackle a form of animal abuse when it is perhaps at its most vulnerable, rather than reacting too late.
2. The development of xenotransplantation The research team which is probably at the forefront of efforts to develop xenotransplantation is Imutran, who are based in Cambridge, England. Imutran was formed in the mid 1980s by David White - an immunologist, and the Papworth Hospital transplant surgeon John Wallwork. Imutran's macabre vision has been to develop geneticallycorrupted pigs (through the addition of a human gene to the pig's genome) who would be kept in unnatural, barren conditions, and then slaughtered and dismembered. Their organs would then be transplanted into patients with organ failure. In 1995, Imutran caused international shockwaves by claiming that they were ready to transplant pig hearts into humans within a year. Many commentators, including doctors, transplant surgeons and other scientists, condemned this announcement as not only grossly premature because of the lack of scientific basis for such a move, but also they noted the presence of powerful financial motivations for such a prediction. By exaggerating the prospects of xenotransplantation, the company hoped to make itself more attractive to potential investors or buyers.6 It seems to
have worked. Imutran was bought by the Swiss pharmaceutical corporation Sandoz in 1996. Sandoz had a particular interest in transplantation generally because it was the manufacturer of the drug which completely dominates the
market for immunosuppressant drugs: Cyclosporine.
7 The following year, Sandoz merged with another Swiss drug company, Ciba Geigy, to form a powerful and verywealthy new drug corporation - Novartis. Today, Novartis is in competition with a couple of U.S.-based biotechnology,firms for a share of what is predicted to be an $11 billion annual market for pig organs and associated drug treatments8 - if it works, and if it is allowed to go ahead.
Imutran's prediction of pig hearts in humans by the end of 1996 did not materialise. Now, in October 1999, no permission has yet been granted to transplant organs from pigs into humans anywhere in the world. (Although some sporadic experiments have taken place in the U.S. and elsewhere with pig cells and external pig livers).,In response to Imutran's shock announcement in 1995, the UK Government created an Advisory Group on the Ethics of Xenotransplantation (AGEX), who published a report in January 1997. Deplorably, but not
surprisingly, the AGEX concluded that the exploitation of pigs as sources of material for xenotransplantation was, in principle, justifiable.9 The AGEX was able to reach this conclusion because they dismissed, without making any argument, the case for animal rights. This dismissal had no basis in rationality, and betrayed a dogmatic unwillingness to question the tyranny of certain industries and associated professions over nonhuman animals.
However, the AGEX also concluded that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that safety and effectiveness of xenotransplantation. Therefore, for human-centred reasons, it would be unethical to proceed with clinical trials,according to the AGEX.10 The UK Government agreed with the AGEX, and imposed a de facto moratorium on human
trials of xenotransplantation procedures, pending evidence in favour of their safety and effectiveness. Since the UK report, other European countries, including the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and France have taken up policy positions broadly in line with the UK's. The Council of Europe and the European Union are also starting to develop xenotransplantation regulations.
At the same time, Imutran/Novartis have been conducting various forms of research, including an ongoing programme of severe and traumatic animal experiments, in order to try to produce evidence that they can interpret in such a way so as to pressurise regulatory authorities to allow them to proceed with the first human trials.
Furthermore, other biotechnology companies trying to market products comprised of live pig cells have applied for permission to conduct human trials,11 though such permission has yet to be granted.
3. The International Dimension,As mentioned earlier, several European countries have started to develop regulations on xenotransplantation.Furthermore, controversial small-scale clinical trials of pig cells and pig livers (as external blood perfusion devices) have taken place in the USA. Canada is also a fast-emerging centre for xenotransplantation. It has been predicted that Novartis's first human experiments with pig organs will take place in the Canada within two years (September 2001).12
Two years ago, a maverick doctor was jailed in India for unsuccessfully transplanting a pig's heart into a man.
13
Novartis is a global company, and would therefore intend to sell pig organs wherever conventional transplants currently take place. However, research into xenotransplantation, and the suffering and destruction of animals that accompanies it, is already international in scope.
Novartis has exported genetically-mutated pigs for research and breeding purposes from the UK to the following countries: USA, Japan, Netherlands, Canada, Spain & Italy.14 In addition, Sweden, Switzerland, France and Australia have witnessed research and/or regulatory activity.These are just the countries we know about.
4. Aspects of Xenotransplantation Most of the controversial issues that xenotransplantation throws up can be grouped into three broad categories:medical, public health, and treatment of animals. A brief examination of these subjects demonstrates that xenotransplantation embodies presumptions and attitudes that are diametrically opposed to both a respectful and a realistic view of living organisms and the natural world. 4.1 Medical aspects The overarching question we must pose here is Can xenotransplantation work? There are two serious medical obstacles to effective xenotransplantation: rejection and organ function.4.1.1 Rejection Rejection problems are far worse, at every stage, with pig-to-human transplants than with "conventional" human-tohuman transplants.
15 In particular, pig transplants provoke a reaction from the human immmune system called Hyperacute Rejection (HAR), which can kill the organ within minutes.16 The genetic manipulation of pigs is designed to overcome this by introducing a human gene to stimulate production of a sugar which interrupts the reaction in human blood which would normally lead part of the immune system to attack the foreign organ.
17 Imutran/Novartis have experimented on hundreds of primates to see if they have succeeded in producing pig organs that do not succumb to HAR. Some reported results from these experiments appear to show that they have succeeded in a proportion of cases.
18 However, results from non-human primate experiments do not predict the human response reliably, which is why Imutran/Novartis have been very keen to move to human trials - they have acknowledged that there is a limit to what they can find out in animal experiments. Furthermore, overcoming HAR has uncovered further severe problems. There are at least three subsequent rejection processes to be endured by the xenotransplanted organ.
19
These rejection processes are poorly understood in human-to-human transplants, never mind xenotransplantation. Now,Imutran/Novartis are trying to develop new, powerful anti-rejection drugs to try to dampen down these extremely strong rejection processes.20 These new cocktails of drugs hold several dangers - they may not work, the side-effects are severe, and they make virus transfer from pigs into human more likely to occur.4.1.2 Organ function The two organs most likely to be transplanted are kidneys and hearts. Differences between pig and human livers are widely acknowledged to be too great for a realistic prospect of successful xenotransplantation.
21
But the bottom line is that pig kidneys and hearts are not the same as human kidneys and hearts. They are different anatomically, physiologically and biochemically.22 Many reports about the prospects of xenotransplantation have,expressed optimism about the technology by making shallow statements referring to similarities in size between pig organs and human organs. Not only is this hopelessly vague, but it is pretty irrelevant. There are countless criteria that,an organ must fulfil if it is going to function in a human being, and size is one of the most trivial. Pig kidneys produce different substances at different rates to human kidneys. A unique study published last year,identified eight major anatomical differences between pig hearts and human hearts.
23 The notion that pig organs are sufficiently similar to human organs is undoubtedly little more than dogma. We can identify a particular worldview that lurks behind the xenotransplantation project. This worldview holds and,erroneous atomistic and reductionist view of living organisms and nature in general. In contrast, our own position is this:Organisms are highly integrated both internally and externally with their environment. Pig organs have evolved to cope with the whole of the pig's life: its entire ,physiology,and its environmental circumstances combine to form what could,be described as the porcine condition. Taking an organ whose natural context is the porcinecondition ,and transplanting that organ into utterly different conditions invites complications and incompatibilities that would work in a kind of exponential chain reaction through the whole of the recipient's body.
24
Indeed, xenotransplantation is biologically irrational because it falsely assumes that human and nonhuman body parts are interchangeable.
25
4.2 Public health: virus transfer More attention has been devoted to the danger of virus transfer than any other issue in the debate on xenotransplantation. It has also been the issue that has done most to force government regulatory bodies to deal with the technology with apparent caution. Unlike immunological and physiological complications, virus transfer affects not only the recipient of the organ, but endangers the entire human population.
26
Some commentators have suggested that newly emerging viruses pose the greatest risk to human health in modern times.
27 These viruses usually cross into the human population from other species of animals. Normally the skin, mucosal surfaces and the highly acidic environment of the gastric system present an effective barrier to such viruses.However, xenotransplantation presents a unique opportunity for cross-species infection because it involves the circumvention of all these natural barriers, bringing animal viruses directly into contact with the living cells and tissue of patients with heavily-suppressed immune systems.28 To make matters worse, one leading virologist, Professor Robin Weiss, suggests that the introduction of human genetic material into pig cells could enable pig viruses to infect human beings more efficiently.
29
There are several incidences of viral pandemics that have emerged from animals, including pigs. One stronglysupported theory contends that HIV crossed from chimpanzees to humans, possibly through contaminated polio vaccines produced from chimpanzee kidneys. AIDS victims now number several million worldwide.30 The Spanish Influenza epidemic of 1918 which killed up to 50 million people is thought to have originated from pigs.
31
More recently, a previously unknown virus spread from pigs to humans in Malaysia killing over half of
the 200+people it infected.
32
There are literally hundreds of examples of cross-species infection. Often, the virus causes no ill-effects in its natural host. But when the virus finds itself in a new host, it can become pathogenic, and even deadly.
33
The danger posed by viruses in pigs was brought to the fore by a series of surprising studies that showed that some pig endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) -
a particular kind of virus - can infect human cells.
34
Furthermore, PERVs cannot be eliminated from pigs.35 These results shocked
the scientific community and other observers of the development of xenotransplantation, and have
been a major reason for the lack of widespread clinical trials of xenotransplantation.
36
Efforts to learn about, predict and control the risk of cross-species infection are severely hampered. Trying to detect viruses is an uncertain and imprecise affair, and testing for unknown viruses presents
a formidable challenge to say the least. It is acknowledged that pigs will contain unknown viruses.
37
Despite the persistent danger of virus transfer, Imutran/Novartis have continued to push ahead with research, including spurious studies of previous recipients of live pig tissue scattered around the world. Imutran/Novartis have tried to claim that these studies indicate that the risk of viral transfer from xenotransplantation is sufficiently low to justify clinical trials.38 This interpretation is debatable to say the very least, and many scientists and other observers have pointed to several weaknesses in the study's predictive power for the safety of xenotransplantation.
39
Together with national governments, Imutran/Novartis have formulated guidelines for the housing of pigs and the surveillance of future recipients of pig tissue. Biotech corporations and regulators alike try to give the impression of knowledge and control. This is a dangerous myth. As virologist Dr Jon Allan put it: "If you're putting your bets on containment, it's a lost cause."
40
Perhaps the greatest danger lies with insidious viruses with long incubation periods, such as the retrovirus HIV or cancer-causing viruses. Such viruses could spread throughout the human population
for decades before coming to light.Even once a disease is identified, our experience of HIV/AIDS demonstrates that control and containment is impossible.
41
Once again, the approach to the risk of virus transfer adopted by industry and government is based
upon faulty underlying assumptions about the nature of living organisms. Thus they have a tendency
to exhibit an arrogant delusion when it comes to the concept of controlling the danger posed by
viruses in xenotransplantation. In our submission to the United Kingdom governmental regulators, Uncaged Campaigns made the point that any claims for meaningful control of the action and spread of viruses are likely to be dangerously exaggerated. Our view is based on an appreciation of the complexity and interconnectedness of biological phenomena - an appreciation which is sadly lacking from much of modern scientific endeavour. As a society, we are deluding ourselves if we can completely control nature. Nature is inherently chaotic and unpredictable, as well as mind-bogglingly complex - that is what makes it "nature."By trying to force xenotransplantation upon society, Novartis and others are literally playing Russion Roulette with all of us.4.3 The impact on animals Xenotransplantation is, quite clearly and intrinsically, a systematic abuse of the fundamental moral right of all sentient creatures to enjoy life, liberty and natural enjoyment without deliberate interference from human moral agents. Specifically, there are two main areas where animals are being made to suffer and are exploited in devastating ways: the production of source animals and vivisectionist research. Pigs, who are highly intelligent and sociable animals, are being lined up as the source animals. A substantial research effort is being made by Imutran/Novartis, PPL Therapeutics (the creators of Dolly the cloned sheep) and US biotech companies to genetically-mutate pigs through the addition of human genes into the pig's genome. The production of transgenic pigs has involved invasive surgery on sows, including the removal of eggs, the reinjection of eggs into different sows, and the birth of transgenic pigs, sometimes through the hysterectomy and destruction of the sow.
42
To expand the transgenic heard, the piglets are weaned as early as five days, when naturally they
would weaned at anything up to 80 days. This causes psychological distress to both mother and piglet. Selected members of the herd, known as sentinels, are routinely executed and tested for infections etc..
43
The transgenic pigs are raised in so-called Qualified Pathogen Free conditions that aim to exclude only certain identified pathogens from the herd. The RSPCA says about these conditions: "We believe that this seriously limits their ability to express their normal behaviour repertoire."44 In particular, pigs
spend most of their daylight hours rooting and foraging. This will be severely disrupted and frustrated
by their conditions.
The reality of these conditions was discovered in the course of an undercover investigation organised
by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection at a bredding establishment called Harlan UK in Leicestershire. The investigator saw how the pigs' overcrowded conditions led to frustration and boredom. The pigs began to fight viciously with each other: these animals are quite literally emotionally and physically damaged.
45
Their lives are then extinguished by the xenotransplantation researchers.. They are dismembered,
and their organs and tissue used in experiments. Other tissue is tested for signs of infection and gene expression. Used and abused, discarded like rubbish: this is the ultimate in degrading exploitation.
Genzyme is a US-based biotechnology company that has been the first to submit an application to the UK Xenotransplantation Interim Regulatory Authority (UKXIRA) to conduct a clinical trial of a xenotransplantation procedure.
46
Genzyme decapitates piglet foetuses in order to mine foetal brain cells. In research, monkeys have
been brain-damaged in ham-fisted attempts to model Parkinson's disease. The foetal pig cells have
then been injected into the monkeys' brains.
47
Imutran/Novartis have exported transgenic pigs around the world. Some pigs have been exported to accompany transgenic pigs, and then simply destroyed when they have reached their destination. Research in the UK and elsewhere has involved the transplantation of various pig organs into primates such as rhesus monkeys and baboons, some of whom have been captured from the wild. Imutran/Novartis are working their way through some 200 primate victims at a research centre in the Netherlands which has been criticised by the RSPCA for cruelty to monkeys.
48
Some "control" monkeys have received non-transgenic organs so that experimenters can compare the their survival rates with those who have received transgenic organs. These control monkeys have died within a few days from organ failure. Monkeys with transgenic organs have been kept alive for up to 100 days, gradually dying of organ rejection and other complications. In their papers, Imutran reveal: "Five animals from the transgenic heart group had to be euthanased due to gastrointestinal toxicity, resulting in severe diarrhoea."
49 In other words, they were being poisoned to death by Imutran's researchers. Other monkeys who
have received pig kidneys have died of severe anaemia because the kidneys have failed to function in the necessary manner.
50
Imutran claim to be concerned for animal welfare! As if the catalogue of misery and abuse related above were not damning enough, one of the reasons why Imutran/Novartis has exported pigs around the world has been to avoid the situation where UK Government Inspectors have asked Imutran researchers to put primates out of their misery.
Imutran researchers have complained that they would like to keep them alive to the bitter end in order to learn as much about rejection and organ function as possible.51 The hesitancy of the UK Government to give them permission to start clinical trials is another reason why they have taken their research and breeding programmes around the world in order to beat their American competitors in the race to dominate a potentially lucrative market.
5. Campaigning against xenotransplantation Uncaged Campaigns started to lobby against xenotransplantation in July 1996. We decided to embark on this campaign because xenotransplantation was not being tackled in a concerted fashion.. Given the enormity of the technology's consequences for both human health and animal welfare, we felt that it was imperative that there
was sustained and informed opposition to the practice.
Our campaigning work has many facets. One of the most important is public education. Through street information stalls, we have distributed hundreds of thousands of xenotransplantation information leaflets to members of the public.
At the same time we have collected almost a quarter of a million signatures on our petition calling for
a ban on xenotransplantation. 20,000 members of the public have also sent postcards to the UK Department of Health to express their opposition to xenotransplantation. We have consistently responded to Government announcements and scientific developments with demonstration, petition submissions, and scores of regional and national media appearances.
In spring 1997 we submitted a 56-page report to the Department of Health detailing our case against xenotransplantation. The deep and telling criticisms contained in our report have since been referred
to positively in academic journal papers and textbooks for law undergraduates. Uncaged Campaigns representatives have met with relevant Government ministers and civil servants. Early Day Motions
have been tabled on our behalf in the House of Commons and attracted cross-party support.
Parliamentary Questions we have drafted have squeezed information about xenotransplantation from ministers.Overall, the public's response to our campaign has been very positive. We have received much more support than we expected. The public realise that xenotransplantation is a cruel and dangerous technology.This is a truly historic campaign. The implications for public health and the welfare and rights of animals are momentous. There is a great deal to fight for before the development of xenotransplantation gains even greater momentum, making it a harder task to bring this technological juggernaut to a halt.
As we near the turn of the millenium, we must ask the big question: How should
we define the progress of humanity?,By measuring the number of complex, radical and unstable technologies we develop?
By our bizarre efforts to achieve immortality?
Or should it be by the way we treat others?
The philosopher and writer Milan Kundera, in the Unbearable Lightness of Being, suggested that the measure of humankind can be taken by the way we treat those who we have power over. The group
that exemplifies powerlessness is nonhuman animals. Kundera observes that because of the abuse
and cruelty we inflict on animals, humankind is a "debacle." Let us not allow that disastrous situation
to deteriorate even further. This is a millenial struggle for a millenial movement - challenging the
abuse and destruction of animals, people and the environment by corporate science and technology. Let us engage in that struggle, and win it.
This document is the transcription of a speech given by Dan Lyons at the Mediterranean Vegetarian Festival in Malta, October 5 1999. Dan Lyons is a campaigner with Uncaged Campaigns, which is an anti-vivisection NGO based in Sheffield, England. He is also a PhD researcher at the University of Sheffield, investigating the ethical and political implications of xenotransplantation.References
1 John Wallwork. Current status of xenotransplantation. International Journal of Cardiology 62 Suppl. 1 (1997): S38. J.van den Bogaerde and D. White. Xenogeneic transplantation. British Medical Bulletin 1997; 53 (No. 4): 904-920.2 Written Question No. 176, Parliamentary Session 1997-98
3 S. Moore. Novartis Picks up Pace in Xenotransplant Race. Wall Street Journal (Europe), 10 October 1997: 4. 4 Department of Health: The Advisory Group on the Ethics of Xenotransplantation [AGEX]. Animal tissue into humans. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1997: 9. 5 Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Animal-to-Human Transplants: the ethics of xenotransplantation,
1996: 26.
6 L. Rogers, "Pig hearts team 'raised false hope'" Sunday Times 17 September 1995.
7 Anon. "Foreign organs" New Scientist, 27 April 1996: 13.
8 See 3.
9 AGEX: para. 4.28.
10 AGEX: para. 4.50.
11 P. Brown & D. King. "Pig cell treatment for humans." The Guardian, 15 February 1999: 1.
12 A. Coghlan, New Scientist, 4 September 1999: 18.
13 Anon. "'Pig-heart' surgeon back in business" The Asian Age, 6 February 1999: 1.
14 "Ed Hall Investigates." BBC Radio 5 Live, broadcast 14 February 1999.
15 Nuffield: 25. AGEX: 9.
16 AGEX: 21.
17 E. Cozzi and D. White. "The generation of transgenic pigs as potential organ donors for
humans." Nature Medicine
1995, 1: 964-6.
18 New Scientist, 31 August 1996: 10.
19 D. Butler. "Briefing: xenotransplantation". Nature, Vol 391, 22 January 1998: 323.
20 See 12.
21 AGEX: 18-19.
22 Ibid.. G. Langley and J D'Silva. Animal organs in humans. (British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection and
Compassion in World Farming: 1998): 19-52.
23 S. Crick et al. "Anatomy of the pig heart: comparisons with normal human cardiac structure." J
Anat 1998 Jul; 193
(Pt 1): 105-119.
24 S. Beddard & D. Lyons. The Science and Ethics of Xenotransplantation (Uncaged Campaigns,
1997): 51-52.
25 Medical Research Modernization Committee (MRMC). Of Pigs, Primates and Plagues. New York,
1997: 9.
26 S. Boseley. "Beasts bring home the bacon". The Guardian, the week section, 18 April 1998: 1-2.
27 C. Thompson. "Dead reckoning". Sunday Times magazine, 26 June 1997: 17.
28 Nuffield: 69. AGEX: 29.
29 R. Weiss. "Transgenic pigs and virus adaptation". Nature, Vol 391. 22 January 1998: 327-328.
30 R. Weiss. "Xenografts and Retroviruses." Science, Vol 285, No. 5431, 20 August 1999:
1221-1222.
31 M. Day. "Pigs caused Great War flu deaths." New Scientist, 29 March 1997: 20.
32 A. Ung. "Tropical killer virus is first of its kind; experts stumped".. Associated Press, 8
April 1999.
33 Nuffield: 69-70.
34 C. Patience et al. "Infection of human cells by an endogenous retrovirus of pigs." Nature, 1
March 1997: 282.
35 M. Day. "Tainted transplants." New Scientist, 18 October 1997: 4.
36 See 19.
37 AGEX: 74.
38 K. Paradis et al., Science 285, 1236 (1999)
39 E.g. E. Goldman, "Comments on paradis et al.,"
http://www.oecd.org/dsti/sti/s_t/biotech/xenosite/c |
Comments & Responses