Animal Rights to English Dictionary

Over our history as an organization, we’ve read a lot of activist portrayals of health research and the people who undertake it. We’ve been called murders and torturers. We’ve had our heads super-imposed over bloody scenes and yes (unsurprisingly) we’ve even been compared to Nazis. See Godwin’s Law.

However, if you are a long-time reader of this Web site, you’ve come to realize something. Activist portrayals of science research are often science fiction. For example: Activist groups frequently send mass mailings to supporters about “infant monkeys torn from their mothers’ wombs.” Real world translation: The babies were born via cesarean section, just like 1/3 of the U.S. population.

Activist groups also frequently use “creative” language to portray researchers and research centers as shadowy and secretive. When groups have “unearthed documents that illustrate abuse,” they actually requested and obtained public documents. Then, used their anti-research point-of-view to translate the records into wild exaggerations that bear little resemblance to the facts they were handed in the first place.

As a public service, and a perhaps a method for bridging the communication gap between activists and scientists, we would like to propose The Activist to English Dictionary.”

Try it out – go find some typical activist verbiage (you know where to find it!) …see if you can use the dictionary below – to decode it.

Also, all you aspiring “Websters” out there, we need your help. Please help us fill out the dictionary by adding your own definitions in our comments section:

Definitions

A

Alternatives = Equality between two more more tools that have superficial resemblance. Activist public usage: “There are plenty of alternatives to animal studies” Activist private usage: “Well…actually there are a small number of alternatives but we better not tell the public that animal research is still required…because that would hurt our fundraising efforts.”

Animals are starved = Controlled access to food or water for animals.

Animals are poisoned = Animals are given medications prior to FDA approval to ensure they are safe for human consumption and to make sure we give people and other animals the right dose once it is made available.

Animals are sliced open/mutilated/cut up/dissected = Animals undergo a common blood test or undergo surgery that makes use of the same sterile conditions and pain medications as used on humans.

Archaic = Time tested and proven Usage: Animal research is archaic/time tested and proven.

C

Cosmetic testing = cosmetic testing.  This should not be confused with health research aimed at ending suffering or preventing human or animal death.

K

Killed = humanely euthanized.

L

Locked up/imprisoned = Animals that live in captivity.

M

Medical expert  = A PeTA/PCRM-paid physician, normally with very limited exposure to research.

Monkeys are forcefully restrained = Monkeys are trained to sit in a chair and receive treats as positive reinforcement.

More and more companies are switching to non-animal tests = More and more companies are paying other companies to do their safety testing for them so they can say they don’t test on animals.

P

Painful = Painful…if the animals are not given painkillers…but they actually are.

“PETA/IDA/PVCRM urged xxx company/university”= PETA/IDA up Web-based email system and told supporters to hit a send button which resulted in 10,000 identical emails being sent to one person often not directly involved in the thing being protested.”

R

Research kills humans = Research saves lives.

S

Secret documents = Public records asked for and received.

Sexism and or racism = Sexism and or racism Usage:Sexism and or racism is unacceptable for anyone else but completely acceptable to our activist group because these offensive tactics are being employed in the name of animal rights!

W

We support good science = We support anything that does not involve the use of

animals in science even when proven animal research models have saved countless lives.  Usage: “We support 21st century science, such as the use of computer modeling, tissue samples, quantum- chaotic technologies, holographic nano-technology, and eco-bot halo-based nintendography.”

V

Vivisection = The use of the same methods used in human surgery in animals with the goal of advancing medical science and the well-being of humans and animals alike.

Regards

Speaking of Research

11 responses to “Animal Rights to English Dictionary

  1. Dennis Alexander

    An incredible public service to the community.

    My contribution:

    Torture Chamber = Any physical location where cutting-edge medical research in the US takes place.

    • David Bienus

      Dennis,

      Then by all means make sure YOU don’t benefit from any such advances. The next time you need any medication please refuse it on principle. Should you need a doctor, refuse any treatment on principle. If you have a pet, refuse to take it to the veterinarian on principle.

      It’s funny how these AR people are NEVER willing to go that route. They seem perfectly willing to take advantage of the benefits while standing on their soapbox preaching against it. The word hypocrisy comes to mind.

  2. Jerry,

    Then why don’t you focus your self on the plight of those people facing those circumstances? I mean if you’re so concerned why not lend your money and efforts to that cause? I know, it’s much easier to sit back and complain than actually do anything about it. That’s what you’ve done for years.

    • Jerry, like many so-called animal rights activists, is not about to focus on the plight of impoverished people.

      His deal is caring about nonhuman animals, presumably reasoning that there are plenty of other folks focusing on human suffering.

      But here are questions for him -even given that he is unable to appreciate the balance of good that animal research addresses and would equate eating a hamburger with animal research on cancer, autism, or another disease — surely he appreciates that only a tiny of fraction of animals are used in research relative to the vast number consumed as food. So why the disproportionate targeting of animal research?

  3. “Animals are starved = Controlled access to food or water for animals.”

    Kind of like a billion humans on this planet are experiencing “controlled access to food and [clean] water”, while these jokers continue to spend millions of dollars annually addicting non-human primates to methamphetamines.

    • “By any means necessary”: Brainwashing naive, idealistic youngsters to engage in criminal activity that will land them in jail while taking refuge behind a computer screen and credit for their actions. Also known as “doing a Jerry on someone”.

    • Yo! Jerry –

      I thought you wanted to get the human population under control, not help them.

      Remember what you said?

      “They would have us believe it’s either the mosquitoes or us. That’s just not the case. For one thing, there are way too many people on the planet,” Vlasak said.

      So… too many people eh?

      Why do you worry about those without clean water?

      You %$@$^@ animal supremacist!

      • Errr…just because someone thinks there are too many people on the planet doesn’t mean they think current people should be allowed to suffer or be prematurely killed off. You can simply lower the birth rate.

    • Actually Jerry, not exactly, as you would know if you either read the literature or were honest in your commentary.

      Animals who receive controlled access to food and water actually receive more than sufficient food and water to maintain terrific health. That is ensured by rigorous regulation and scrutiny. The same animals receive regular medical care that probably exceeds that of many humans. In fact, the care and regulation of animals in research far exceeds that provided to many humans.

      What you are doing is pitching a false choice: either research or sufficient resources for humans in impoverished environments. Really? You must know better than that.

      There are many other choices that could be made. Research vs food vs military expenditures, for example.

      The point of research is to produce discoveries that may lead to reductions in suffering and health-care expenditures over both the short- and the long-term. That would be called progress.

      You are good about criticizing others’ effort. Here’s an opportunity for dialogue. Why don’t you provide your vision for what would actually help in moving science, medicine, and public health forward? Seriously.

    • Actually, I suspect that the billions of people around the world without access to adequate supplies clean water would be quite pleased if access to water was more “controlled”, that way they might get their fair share.

      In the mean time there’s always charities such as
      http://www.wateraid.org/uk/ that you can support if you feal that strongly about the issue.

      As for overpopulation, I don’t deny it’s a problem, and one with many causes and which requires a range of interventions (local and global) to solve. Of course it is also an area where animal research, particularly that done by Gregory Pincus and Min Chueh Chang, has made a key contribution through the development of the oral contraceptive pill.

      https://speakingofresearch.com/2010/06/11/animal-research-benefits-mom-and-baby-alike/

      By the way has Vlasak racially abused anyone lately? Or has he learned to keep at least some of his true opinions to himself.

      http://www.lcwlegal.com/68819

  4. Not Tested On Animals: A product claimeding not be tested on animals is either an old product with new packaging or a new product tested on animals by another company. By federal law, all chemical substances used by humans have been “tested” on animals and humans, which is still very different than biomedical research.