Skip to main content

Home/ Teleperra/ Group items tagged to

Rss Feed Group items tagged

pepa garcía

More on Milk - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  • the links between milk (or dairy) and such a broad range of ailments has not been well studied, at least by the medical establishment.
  • Yet if you speak with people who’ve had these kinds of reactive problems, it would appear that the medical establishment is among the last places you’d want to turn for advice.
  • the job of an agriculture department should not be to sell whatever crops our farmers can grow most efficiently, it should be to encourage the growth of crops that will benefit the greatest number of Americans. Those crops are not corn and soy, grown largely to create hyper-processed food or animal feed (and in turn animal products), but an increasing variety of plants that can be directly eaten by humans.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • for many doctors drugs are the answer to almost every condition, a situation that suits Big Pharma just fine.
  •  
    More on Milk By MARK BITTMAN Mark Bittman on food and all things related. TAGS: DAIRY, DIETS, MILK Not surprisingly, experiences like mine with dairy, outlined in my column of two weeks ago, are more common than unusual, at least according to the roughly 1,300 comments and e-mails we received since then. In them, people outlined their experiences with dairy and health problems as varied as heartburn, migraines, irritable bowel syndrome, colitis, eczema, acne, hives, asthma ("When I gave up dairy, my asthma went away completely"), gall bladder issues, body aches, ear infections, colic, "seasonal allergies," rhinitis, chronic sinus infections and more. (One writer mentioned an absence of canker sores after cutting dairy; I realized I hadn't had a canker sore - which I've gotten an average of once a month my whole life - in four months. Something else to think about.) Although lactose intolerance and its generalized digestive tract problems are well documented, and milk allergies are thought to affect perhaps 1 percent of the American population, the links between milk (or dairy) and such a broad range of ailments has not been well studied, at least by the medical establishment. RELATED Mark Bittman: Got Milk? You Don't Need It Yet if you speak with people who've had these kinds of reactive problems, it would appear that the medical establishment is among the last places you'd want to turn for advice. Nearly everyone who complained of heartburn, for example, later resolved by eliminating dairy, had a story of a doctor (usually a gastroenterologist) prescribing a proton pump inhibitor, or P.P.I., a drug (among the most prescribed in the United States) that blocks the production of acid in the stomach. But - like statins - P.P.I.s don't address underlying problems, nor are they "cures." They address only the symptom, not its cause, and they are only effective while the user takes them. Thus in the last few days I'
pepa garcía

THE POPE & THE HOMELESS CATS: John Paul II had a dream By: J.R. Hyland - Humane Religio... - 0 views

  •  
    ""It was a terribly severe winter in New York, the city was completely covered with snow. Inhabitants were well-off and warmly dressed, and walking slowly along roads because cars, due to mountains of snow, could not be operated. I was happy that I could walk on top of the snow on avenues of white. "All my physical effort was spent on walking. To this day, pictures of huge apartment houses on both sides of the avenue are instilled in my mind, and the doormen quickly closing and opening entrance doors as though trying to prevent humanity and warmth from escaping. "On top of the snow, I noticed a brown cat emerge from a side street and walk on the snow. I looked closer, and to my surprise, saw that this big cat was being followed by six small brown-and- white kittens, all of them following the big brown cat in a perfect line. The mother cat looked back from time to time to see if her babies were there, but her main concern was to reach the entrance door. I presumed she was trying to find warmth for herself and her children, but as soon as she reached the door, a man in a well-pressed uniform, jumped at her with a broom and chased them away. I followed this procession and prepared to deliver a speech to the doorman. I opened my mouth and tried to complain, 'Where is your proverbial American generosity? Where is your American good heart and fair play? Let them in. Let them in!! "I tried to speak, but the words would not come out. Maybe I was afraid of the doorman with the broom. I started searching my cassock pockets for a piece of bread, found some crumbs and put them on my palms, calling: 'Kitty, kitty, kitty.' But the words would not come from my supposedly intelligent mouth. Instead, the wind blew the crumbs from my palm and I said, 'what can I do? I can't speak to the cats. I can't speak to the doorman. But there are many hungry birds. They might pick up the crumbs.' "Again, I walked after the cats, now with a pain in my chest, feeling treme
pepa garcía

Maddie's Fund - Using Data to Make Austin a No-Kill City - 0 views

  • I founded a low-cost and free spay/neuter clinic, Emancipet, in 1999.
  • The thought was to decrease the number animals entering the shelter through fewer births in the community so fewer would have to be euthanized in the shelter for lack of space.
  • By 2008 and after over 60,000 spay/neuter surgeries, I had expected to see a bigger reduction in city shelter intake numbers.
  • ...36 more annotations...
  • Although there was an initial decrease in euthanasia from 85% to 50% between 1999 and 2001, after 2001 the AAC (the only open admission shelter in Austin, Texas) consistently took in over 23,000 animals and euthanized an average of 50 - 55% of the animals admitted each year.
  • In fact, AAC euthanized over 14,000 animals in 2007, which was a decade record and showed me that my efforts were not decreasing shelter intake or euthanasia like I had hoped.
  • The other piece of data that was eye-opening to me in 2008 was that the number of AAC live outcomes stayed static at 10,000 per year, year after year, even after budgetary increases.
  • By then, the City of Austin and the Austin nonprofit animal welfare partners were providing substantial community services for spaying, neutering, vaccinations, and wellness clinics; however, the city's live releases had not changed at all in spite of the wealth of community resources that were geared towards lowering euthanasia.
  • It was clear that the city had a system that was capable of producing no more than 10,000 live outcomes per year, regardless of intake numbers, which meant that euthanasia only fluctuated when intake numbers fluctuated. If intake went up, euthanasia went up. If intake went down, euthanasia went down.
  • For years, the city had been measuring "inputs" for city performance standards such as the number of spay/neuters performed, the number of microchips placed, the number of rabies vaccines given; and with the large amounts of city and donor funds going into free and low-cost spay/neuter, it appeared to politicians and foundations from a performance measure standpoint that Austin was at the top of its game.
  • The thing that really struck me was that although "outputs" such as euthanasia, adoption, return to owner, and transfers were being documented and measured, decisions to directly impact those numbers were not being driven by their measurement. Funds were never requested to directly improve live outcomes and city staff was not being directed to strive for higher live outcome numbers. In fact, there was no live outcome improvements projected for at least the five years after 2007 and that was apparent as plans for capacity in building a new shelter got underway.
  • It bothered me that we had no real conclusive studies that showed the impact of spay/neuter on euthanasia in the shelter
  • and that the labors of all my work were not something I could see an impact from in a decade.
  • I felt strongly that there had to be a way to save more lives at the shelter and a more direct way to measure the work that provides that impact.
  • If it takes longer than a decade to see an impact at the shelter euthanasia level through spay/neuter, the work can never be tweaked to have a bigger impact.
  • There had to be a more direct method to save lives that could be measured month-to-month and tweaked quickly if the desired effect is not seen.
  • It appeared that a new and different kind of work needed to be created to really get measurable results on euthanasia figures since it also appeared that all current resources were operating at their max.
  • It was apparent to me that I needed to change what I was doing to effect faster change in the community.
  • The American Veterinary Medical Association's (AVMA) Demographic Sourcebook dispelled my belief that there were not enough homes.
  • In the Greater Austin Area, AVMA calculates that at least 75,000 homes take in a pet less than one year old each year, and the ASPCA has reported that only 20 - 25% come from shelters and rescues. We only had to find homes for up to 14,000 pets per year.
  • This seemed very doable when 75,000 homes are open each year for incoming pets.
  • Using Data to Identify and Fill in the Gaps
  • Using Data to Re-Assess and Fine-Tune Programs
  • The second strategy
  • Using Data to Develop Programs: Filling the Gaps
  • The first strategy
  • the medical help that I provided did not help the sheltered animals leave alive in any larger numbers.
  • off-site adoption programs
  • These were animals with mange or kennel cough, minor behavior issues like being scared, or animals with minor injuries. APA created a large-scale foster program to provide short-term foster for these animals as they overcame their minor problems.
  • neonatal nursery with all the supplies needed for around-the-clock kitten care
  • again built up a large-scale medical foster base for all the injured and ill animals.
  • large breed dogs with behavior problems.
  • The Austin community's demand for adopting a pet is higher than the supply from AAC
  • By bringing in animals from other shelters, APA is able to prevent adopters from becoming pet store pet buyers and thus save a whole lot more lives.
  • adult large breed dogs with behavior issues are adopted each year because of improved customer service,
  • pet-matching practices,
  • behavior modification
  • APA rescued over 5,000 animals last year. No cat, kitten, small breed dog, puppy of any breed, or large breed friendly dog, including pit bulls, died in the City of Austin in 2011 simply because it didn't have a home.
  • increase the number of adoption venues
  • additional exposure.
pepa garcía

On Human-Nonhuman Relations: On Rights and Animal Rights (Part One). - 0 views

  • Regan also articulates his firm belief that ‘moral philosophy is no substitute for political action’, but insists, ‘still, it can make a contribution. Its currency is ideas’. This assertion was made many years ago in 1983. However, it appears that large sections of the animal advocacy movement was not (and is not) listening to this important message. Many factions in the modern animal protection movement do not agree that a well worked out philosophical position assists in the furtherance of altering the moral standing of nonhuman animals. Moreover, many of those that do seem to agree with the general point that social movements require a solid basis for claims-making, appear not to accept the case for animal rights in the first place. Recent developments in the animal movement tends to confirm such a view. For example, Francione [4] states that ‘the modern animal “rights” movement has explicitly rejected the doctrine of animal rights’. In fact, it might be tempting to claim, analogous to Gilroy’s [5] declaration that ‘there ain’t no black in the Union Jack’, that there ain’t much rights in ‘animal rights’ either. This tends to beg the question, if not rights violations, what do modern animal advocates substantially rely upon in order to make claims on behalf of nonhuman animals? Francione argues that the contemporary animal movement appears content to rely on a new formulation of traditional ideas, which he labels ‘new welfarism’. He describes this conception of new welfarism as a ‘hybrid position’ which may be understood to be a more progressive, or in Francione’s terms, a ‘modified’ welfare position compared with traditional animal welfarism, especially in the sense that this ‘version of animal welfare…accepts animal rights as an ideal state of affairs that can be achieved only through continued adherence to animal welfare measures’.
  • However, for Francione, new welfarists – despite what sets them apart from traditionalists of the genre - should be regarded as committed to the endorsement of measures ‘indistinguishable’ from policies put forward by those ‘who accept the legitimacy of animal exploitation’.
  • Advocates who wish to pursue a position based on rights thinking are very few in number and, furthermore, do not often feature in ‘leadership’ positions within the current animal protection movement.
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • Francione’s work, especially because it includes a strong critique of new welfarism, has not so much been regarded as a source of philosophical clarity within a social movement, nor helpful in terms of strategic thinking, but rather labelled ‘disruptive’, ‘divisive’ and ‘elitist’.
  • For understandable psychological reasons, ‘victories’ on any scale tend to be loudly trumpeted within social movements.
  • Why, since the modern animal protection movement has rarely if ever pursued an abolitionist agenda for any prolonged period, are many advocates apparently and unequivocally so sure that it is doomed to failure? Why are they so convinced that it will take hundreds of years? Why, moreover, that a philosophical grounding in widely accepted ideas of rights undoubtedly represent demands that unrealistically call for ‘too much’?
  • Francione agrees with Regan that philosophy and political action go together.
  • Indeed, in contrast to many in the movement, he claims the latter requires the former to inform its direction:
  • it is my view that the explicit goal must be abolition and that abolition must shape incremental change.
  • basic rights
  • a paradoxical situation in which the so-called ‘animal rights movement’ virtually rejects genuine rights theories while embracing a non-rights animal liberation position as its main philosophical stance.
  • ‘as a practical matter, [animal welfarism] does not work. We have had animal welfare laws in most western countries for well over a hundred years now, and they have done little to reduce animal suffering and they have certainly not resulted in the gradual abolition of any practices… As to why welfarism fails…the reason has to do with the property status of animals. If animals are property, then they have no value beyond that which is accorded to them by their owners.
  • Benton and Redfearn write: ‘Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation is…within the utilitarian tradition, and it may be that the animal welfare movement’s concern with animal suffering is a measure of the pervasiveness of utilitarianism as the ‘common sense’ of secular morality’
  •  
    This tends to beg the question, if not rights violations, what do modern animal advocates substantially rely upon in order to make claims on behalf of nonhuman animals? Francione argues that the contemporary animal movement appears content to rely on a new formulation of traditional ideas, which he labels 'new welfarism'. He describes this conception of new welfarism as a 'hybrid position' which may be understood to be a more progressive, or in Francione's terms, a 'modified' welfare position compared with traditional animal welfarism, especially in the sense that this 'version of animal welfare…accepts animal rights as an ideal state of affairs that can be achieved only through continued adherence to animal welfare measures'.
pepa garcía

Pet Overpopulation, Puppy Mills, and Lessons from Proposition B : Nathan J Winograd - 0 views

  • To claim to want to shut down puppy mills, but to ignore or fight reform efforts to stop shelter neglect, abuse, and killing (as groups like HSUS and PETA do) is not only ethically inconsistent, it is morally bankrupt.
  • Neglect is neglect, abuse is abuse, killing is killing regardless of by whose hand that neglect, abuse, and killing is done.
  • To look the other way at one because that neglect, abuse, and killing is done by “friends,” “colleagues,” or simply because the perpetrators call themselves a “humane society” is indefensible.
  • ...27 more annotations...
  • These organizations have built a dependency model where you give them money and they promise to take care of things, rather than empowering the grassroots to actually go out and solve the problem.
  • community education and protest
  • make it easy for people to do the right thing, and they will
  • we must expose these organizations for what they really are
    • pepa garcía
       
      cómo es en chile? hay informes sobre las condiciones etc. de los criaderos de perros?
  • legislation that prohibits puppy mill dogs from being sold either at pet stores or online,
  • , when we work to reform local shelters, we are also working to impact the puppy mill trade.
  • When shelters turn away good homes because of poor customer service or arbitrary rules, we fuel the pet shop trade
  • when shelters go head to head with the competition, they win.
  • uring the 1990s, at the height of its adoption success and popularity, the San Francisco SPCA had seven offsite adoption locations throughout the city seven days a week. Consequently, the number of pet stores which sold puppies was reduced to zero.
  • T]he more animals dying in a given community (which traditionalists claim means lack of homes), the greater number of pet stores that sell dogs and cats (which shows homes readily available). Generally, pet stores succeed when a shelter is not meeting market demand or competing effectively, and because animal lovers do not want to go into a shelter that kills the vast majority of the animals…
  • we can file civil lawsuits and push for criminal prosecution.
  • we can attempt to regulate and/or eliminate puppy mills directly through legislation, as several states have done
  • severe lack of state inspectors
  • Protest, educate, litigate, legislate, push for enforcement, and reform the shelter. And oh yeah, don’t buy from a pet store, sign my pledge, and send me money. (Just kidding.)
  • the bill will require commercial breeders to provide each dog with sufficient food and clean water, necessary veterinary care, housing, sufficient space, regular exercise, and limits on how many times per year a dog can be bred.
  • It continues the breeding, buying, and selling of dogs.
  • It specifically excludes dogs in animal research labs. It excludes breeding operations who sell “hunting dogs.” And it excludes animal shelters
  • the opposition is using the support of groups like the Humane Society of the United States to claim this is part of a radical animal rights agenda.
  • Compromises must often be made to achieve piecemeal success which can be built on over time.
  • For example, I would support laws banning the killing of animals in shelters altogether. But given tremendous opposition from the shelter killing industry, and the support of that industry by powerful groups like (ironically) the Humane Society of the United States, the ASPCA, and Best Friends, local and state governments are not willing to do that at this time in history, so I work on legislation like the Hayden Law and Assembly Member Micah Kellner’s rescue access bill in New York State to reduce the number killed. T
  • Historically, HSUS has a disturbing pattern of raising money on an issue, and immediately moving on, just as they did when they raised $30 million on Hurricane Katrina rescue, spent $4 million, shipped the animals off to kill shelters, announced “Mission: Accomplished,” and went  home $26 million richer with two criminal investigations on their fundraising practices in their wake.
  • we need local and other national groups to act less like simpleton cheerleaders of HSUS and more like what they should be—groups whose mission is to advocate for dogs.
  • HSUS taking some of its $110 million annual budget (of which only ½ of one percent goes to shelters)
  • ASPCA taking some of its $120 million in annual revenues,
  • Best Friends taking some of its $40 million per year it takes in to rescue only 600 animals per year (at a whopping $70,000 each
  • If HSUS and others fully commit resources and energy into creating a safety net for dogs currently in puppy mills who will be discarded when Proposition B passes, any potential downsides resulting from this legislation would be eliminated.
  • In truth, I believe people are ready for laws banning puppy mills altogether and that would make sense, so long as we do not inadvertently open up markets to puppy mills from places like China, where medieval levels of barbarity would likely be the norm and they would remain out of regulatory reach.
pepa garcía

Los asesinos no descansan. Fuck Peta > Deceptive 'Animal Rescue Act' Will Endanger Anim... - 0 views

  •  
    Deceptive 'Animal Rescue Act' Will Endanger Animals in Florida! A dangerous bill has been introduced in the Florida legislature. Misleadingly named the "Animal Rescue Act," Senate Bill 818 (SB 818) and its companion bill in the house, House Bill 597 (HB 597), if passed, would put homeless and unwanted animals at risk of being handed off to hoarders who pose as "rescues." The so-called "Animal Rescue Act" would force shelters to give animals to groups regardless of the geographical location of the agencies, increasing the risk of animals being inhumanely and illegally transported to unregulated groups across the country. The act also doesn't require rescues to be nonprofit groups, opening the door for animal abusers, such as those who collect and sell animals to laboratories, dogfighters, and other cruel individuals and enterprises. Hoarders posing as "rescues" now make up an estimated 25 percent of the estimated 6,000 new hoarding cases reported in the U.S. each year. The Animal Rescue Act would only increase the problem as it vilifies professional animal shelters, most of which already work with reputable placement groups and labor around the clock to find homes for and fight the widespread abuse and neglect of animals in their communities. Ask your legislators to oppose SB 818 and HB 597 today! Ask them to consider that the most humane and effective way to reduce the number of animals who must be euthanized at animal shelters in Florida is through prevention, by implementing a strong state law penalizing citizens who allow their dogs and cats to reproduce. CONTACT *Title *First Name *Last Name *Your E-Mail *Street Address *City *State/Province *Zip/Postal Code Sign me up for PETA E-News and special announcements from PETA. MESSAGE *Subject Dear [Decision Maker], *(Edit Letter Below) Sincerely, [Your Name] By signing up here and giving us your details, you're acknowledging that you've read and agreed to our privacy policy.
pepa garcía

There are no 'alien' species on planet Earth - | Examiner.com - 0 views

  • They were cut down by so-called “environmentalists.” They were killed by those whose mission was supposed to be their protection. According to the local chapter of the Audubon Society, the trees were not “native” and had to be destroyed.
  • Invasion Biologists
  • believe that certain plants or animals should be valued more than others if they were at a particular location “first.”
  • ...23 more annotations...
  • When the species that were there “first” are competing for habitat with a species that came later, they assert that the latter should be eradicated
  • In championing such views, the movement paradoxically has embraced the use of traps, poisons, fire, and hunting, even when these cause harm, suffering, and environmental degradation
  • In San Francisco, on the Channel Islands, all across the United States, plants and animals are being trapped, poisoned, hunted, burned, and destroyed by people who claim the mantel of environmentalism
  • And it is getting worse and increasingly violent, both in rhetoric (fish they don’t value are called “missiles with fins”) and in deeds.
  • Even the science writer for the New York Times has weighed in, suggesting mass killing and the eating of animals that do not pass the arbitrary litmus test of worthiness by environmentalists.
  • In a losing battle to return North America to a mythical state that existed before European colonization, they are proposing a slaughter with no end.
  • Is this really what environmentalism should be?
  • To assert that the world must remain as it is today and to act on that assertion by condemning to death those species who threaten that prevailing order, does not reject human interference in the natural world, it reaffirms it. 
  • An authentic environmentalism would not advocate that humans seek out and destroy living things for simply obeying the dictates of the natural world, such as migration and natural selection. 
  • It would not condone the killing of those plants and animals who find themselves in parts of the world where, for whatever arbitrary reason—be they economic, commercial, or aesthetic—some humans do not want them to be. An authentic environmentalism would recognize that such determinations are not for us to make, because in seeking to undo what nature inevitably does, we merely exacerbate suffering, killing and the destruction of natural places we claim to oppose, with no hope of ever gaining the ends we seek. It is to declare an unending war on nature and our home.
  • we put all living creatures, including ourselves, in danger as well
  • And just as disturbing, we open the floodgates of expression to our darker natures, by teaching others disdain and suspicion of the “foreign” and reverence for the familiar and the “native.”
  • The same forces of nature which created the world we live in today are shaping it even now.
  • Our actions, and our presence, being as much a part of that system as any other living thing that ever was, will shape and mold how that future will look
  • Yet there is no compelling reason to assert that any one outcome would be more preferable than any other.
  • Why is the starling less worthy of life and compassion than the spotted owl?
  • Why does the carp swimming gracefully in a Japanese Zen garden inspire peace and serenity, but when swimming with the same grace and beauty in Lake Michigan, such horror, disdain, and scorn?  Because some humans among us say it is so? Because they impact narrow aesthetic or commercial interests?
  • As perhaps the most intelligent and without a doubt the most resourceful species yet to evolve on our planet, humans have a moral obligation to ensure that we use our unique abilities for good, and not harm.
  • We are obligated to consider how our actions impact the other earthlings who share our home. And to determine, with all of our gifts of intellect and compassion, how we can meet our needs in the most generous and considerate means possible.
  • Sadly, as a species, we have yet to comprehensively and collectively determine how we might do this.
  • But that, in truth, is our most solemn duty, and the end every environmentalist should be seeking.
  • On a tiny planet surrounded by the infinite emptiness of space, in a universe in which life is so exceedingly rare as to render every blade of grass, every insect that crawls, and every animal that walks the Earth an exquisite, wondrous rarity, it is breathtakingly myopic, arrogant, and quite simply inaccurate to label any living thing found anywhere on the planet which gave it life as “alien” or “non-native.”  There is simply no such thing as an “invasive” species.
  • We must turn our attention away from the futile effort to hold or return our environment to some mythic state of perfection that never existed toward the meaningful goal of ensuring that every life that appears on this Earth is welcomed and respected as the glorious, cosmic miracle it actually is.
pepa garcía

The Politics of Pet Dogs and Kennel Crates | Psychology Today - 0 views

  • Apparently, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) recently began an ad campaign condemning the use of crates for dogs, under any circumstances. Thus a recent half page ad in the Wall Street Journal has the heading "Be an Angel for Animals" and goes on to say "Don't ever crate or chain them."
  • "No matter what a pet shop owner or dog trainer might say, a dog crate is just a box with holes in it, and putting dogs in crates is just a way to ignore and warehouse them until you get around to taking care of them properly."
  • PETA is not against the practice of crating, but it is actually against the practice of pet ownership.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Thus they state "we believe that it would have been in the animals' best interests if the institution of 'pet keeping'-i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as 'pets'-never existed."  They also go on to say, "This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering".
  • The crux of their argument against pet keeping seems to be that we are "depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to." I must admit that I found this to be particularly puzzling and unsatisfying. My wife and I have raised five children, and have nine grandchildren, and when they were young they were taught to obey simple commands and requests as part of their socialization. Our children were only given the opportunity to eat and drink according to our scheduling, and certainly were not allowed to urinate anytime and anywhere that they chose during the period of their toilet training. We certainly did not feel that we were engaging in child abuse by utilizing these basic child-rearing practices. To treat a dog in much the same way that we treat our own children, including providing the love and support that they need, does not appear to me to constitute animal abuse, or an argument against the keeping of pets.
  • It seems to me that their actual desire for banning crating is that in so doing they would make keeping dogs in the house more difficult and the housebreaking of puppies less reliable.
  • This advances their anti-pet agenda by taking away some of the pleasure of pet keeping and in that way it would further their programme aimed at denying us the companionship of our dogs and cats.
  • Tying a dog out for a few minutes on a shopping trip does not constitute dog abuse, but legislating against such a common practice could discourage people from having dogs since it would mean they could not take their pets with them when they move around town. This appears to be the kind of thing that PETA really wants to advance— to bring about an end to the keeping of dogs and cats as pets—not the protection of animals.
pepa garcía

ASPCA Funds Poultry Production Operation; Birds treated "with dignity and compassion" s... - 0 views

  • The Farm Forward board chair, Steven J. Gross, is father of University of San Diego theology professor Aaron Gross, who founded Farm Forward in 2007 and is chief executive officer. For approximately 10 years, 1998-2007, Friedrich and Steven J. Gross represented PETA in a variety of farm animal advocacy campaigns.
  • the lack of heritage breed birds is a significant barrier to the development of high-welfare poultry rearing.
  • Suzanne never mentioned that she and the ASPCA had already arranged to help finance a poultry operation and promote chicken and turkey consumption.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Responded Humane Farming Association founder Brad Miller, “It is simply delusional to think that getting humane organizations into the business of promoting meat from heritage breed chickens will result in even the slightest reduction of animal suffering. The ASPCA decision to fund the commercial production of chickens for meat raises a number of troubling issues,” Miller continued. “Beyond the obvious ethical issues from the animals’ standpoint, there is also the matter of using charitable dollars to further the commercial interests of a privately owned, profit-driven poultry company. This is just the latest,” Miller charged, “in a growing trend on the part of several major animal organizations to, in effect, merge with the livestock industry.” Miller noted that Farm Forward has previously promoted a variety of federal and state legislation that HFA regarded as more likely to entrench the status quo in animal agriculture than to bring about meaningful change.
  • “A commercial animal production operation is not an alternative to factory farming, but an extension of it. In this instance, chickens and turkeys are being mass-produced in mechanical hatchery incubators, raised motherless for human consumption by the thousands, and slaughtered, i.e., factory farmed.
  • “In addition to cruelty and commodification of animals being falsely represented as ‘humane,’ ‘compassionate,’ ‘anti-factory farming,’ etcetera,” Davis added, “is that these relatively smaller farms seek to grow and expand. Regardless of what size they are, they do not reduce the amount of resources needed to raise and slaughter animals
  • “It is unethical for an ‘animal welfare’ organization,” Davis concluded, “to suggest to the public that millions and billions of people can continue to eat the same number of animals, as long as these animals are raised ‘humanely’ on non-factory farms. Humans will never set aside hundreds of millions or billions of acres of land to accommodate billions of animals living ‘free range,’ yet this is the false prospect being offered to a public that wants to believe that incompatible desires and realities can be reconciled.”
  • If you think it is wrong for the ASPCA to use charitable donations to fund and promote poultry slaughter, expand poultry breeding and hatchery facilities and pretend that a factory farm is Not a factory farm, while doing NOTHING to promote genuine compassion and respect for these birds,
pepa garcía

Inside the mind of the octopus | Orion Magazine - 0 views

  • have developed intelligence, emotions, and individual personalities. Their findings are challenging our understanding of consciousness itself.
  • more than 95 percent of all animals are invertebrates,
  • Athena’s suckers felt like an alien’s kiss
  • ...25 more annotations...
  • an octopus can taste with all of its skin
  • but first they go senile, acting like a person with dementia
  • Octopuses die after mating and laying eggs
  • “You’d chase them under the tank, back and forth, like you were chasing a cat,”
  • Octopuses in captivity actually escape their watery enclosures with alarming frequency.
  • Some, she said, “would lift their arms out of the water like dogs jump up to greet you.”
  • How do you prove the intelligence of someone so different?”
  • Small brain size was the evidence once used to argue that birds were stupid—before some birds were proven intelligent enough to compose music, invent dance steps, ask questions, and do math.
  • BIOLOGISTS HAVE LONG NOTED the similarities between the eyes of an octopus and the eyes of a human.
  • Three-fifths of an octopus’s neurons are not in the brain; they’re in its arms.
  • “It is as if each arm has a mind of its own,”
  • Octopuses have the largest brains of any invertebrate
  • the skin of the cuttlefish Sepia officinalis, a color-changing cousin of octopuses, contains gene sequences usually expressed only in the light-sensing retina of the eye
  • In other words, cephalopods—octopuses, cuttlefish, and squid—may be able to see with their skin.
  • “Home,” Mather found, is where octopuses spend most of their time. A home, or den, which an octopus may occupy only a few days before switching to a new one, is a place where the shell-less octopus can safely hide: a hole in a rock, a discarded shell, or a cubbyhole in a sunken ship. One species, the Pacific red octopus, particularly likes to den in stubby, brown, glass beer bottles.
  • octopuses who dismantle Lego sets and open screw-top jars.
  • This octopus wasn’t the only one to use the bottle as a toy.
  • not only can these animals play with toys, but they may need to play with toys.
  • researchers who cut off an octopus’s arm (which the octopus can regrow) discovered that not only does the arm crawl away on its own, but if the arm meets a food item, it seizes it—and tries to pass it to where the mouth would be if the arm were still connected to its body. 
  • “Octopuses,” writes philosopher Godfrey-Smith, “are a separate experiment in the evolution of the mind.”
  • the natural lifespan of a giant Pacific octopus is only three years
  • Except to mate, most octopuses have little to do with others of their kind.
  • we have to change the way we think of the nature of the mind itself to take into account minds with less of a centralized self.”
  • “I think consciousness comes in different flavors,” agrees Mather. “Some may have consciousness in a way we may not be able to imagine.”
  • This time I offered her only one arm. I had injured a knee and, feeling wobbly, used my right hand to steady me while I stood on the stool to lean over the tank. Athena in turn gripped me with only one of her arms, and very few of her suckers. Her hold on me was remarkably gentle.
pepa garcía

CAPA Modified - Parvo is Not a License for Shelters to Kill « YesBiscuit! - 0 views

  • Parvo is preventable and treatable and every animal shelter has an obligation to both prevent and treat this disease.  Parvo in shelters is prevented through the practice of vaccination prior to or immediately upon intake, good housing practices and standard disease prevention cleaning protocols.  The disease is further prevented by ensuring the community’s dog owners have easy access to low cost vaccinations for their pets.
  • Treatment options for parvo dogs include in-house care if sufficient resources exist to provide isolation and appropriate veterinary care.  If the facility is not equipped to provide treatment, parvo dogs may be transferred to another shelter with appropriate facilities or to a private veterinary clinic.  Donations may be solicited from the public if necessary.  The media can help in educating the public and spreading the word about the shelter’s efforts to save lives.  The days of blanket killing of shelter dogs for parvo or exposure to the disease are over.
  • Killing dogs who have tested positive for parvo without providing treatment is unacceptable.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Killing dogs who have not been tested or treated, who have been “diagnosed” by someone other than a veterinarian, who are asymptomatic but have been exposed or who are merely “suspected” of having the disease is also unacceptable.  What are your local shelter’s protocols for handling parvo dogs?
  • Austin Pets Alive has a ward set up for parvo dogs, run by volunteers.
  • Shelters who fail to vaccinate all animals prior to or immediately upon intake are failing to prevent the spread of disease.
  • Shelters who fail to utilize standard disease prevention cleaning protocols and/or maintain good housing practices are failing to prevent the spread of disease.
  • Prevention and treatment are not luxuries. 
pepa garcía

A commendable legislative measure to spare more pets - Our Take - BradentonHerald.com - 0 views

  • intends to phase out euthanasia and progressively increase the pet “live release” rate from 61 percent to above 90 percent sometime next year. Only terminally ill, injured and suffering pets as well as vicious dogs will continue to be euthanized.
  • Manatee pet rescue and animal welfare organizations aim to boost pet fostering and adoption and promote free or low cost spay and neutering programs.
  • Thus, it would be illegal for shelters to kill animals when a qualified non-profit rescue organization expresses a willingness to spare the creature.
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • requiring public animal control agencies and shelters maintain a registry of private rescue groups willing to take animals earmarked for euthanasia.
  • Animal advocates point to a No Kill Nation statewide survey of rescue groups that shows 63 percent of the organizations encountered a government shelter that rejected a collaborative approach and killed animals instead.
  • helters have a variety of rescue access policies, with half the respondents saying the criteria sometimes depended on the whims of staff on duty
  • That is poor public policy.
  • An additional benefit is a savings for taxpayers as shelters lower operating costs by releasing animals to rescue groups.
  • Bennett cites both those savings and the additional shelter revenue from adoptions as rescue organizations would be charged a fee for saving animals.
  • The city and county of San Francisco saved almost $500,000 in animal control costs with a similar rescue access law and transferred 4,000 additional animals to private groups, according to Florida-based No Kill Nation.
  • One of the keys to increasing pet adoptions is marketing
  • writes a popular weekly column for the Bradenton Herald titled “A View to No-Kill” t
  • One of the most popular features on www.braden ton.com are the image galleries of available pets.
  • Animal Services posts images of adoptable animals at www.mymanatee.org/pets
  • a group of volunteer photographers is joining forces to boost the no-kill movement by shooting more becoming images and posting those at a new website, www.picture themadopted.com,
pepa garcía

Effects of Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws - Houston animal shelters | Examiner.com - 0 views

  • These laws are not having the desired effect i.e. a reduction in kill rates in local animal shelters.
  • One of the programs of the No Kill Equation is high volume, low cost spay/neuter services:  "Low cost, high volume spay/neuter will quickly lead to fewer animals entering the shelter system, allowing more resources to be allocated toward saving lives."  
  • increased voluntary sterilization does help reduce the number of animals entering shelters
  • ...19 more annotations...
  • MSNL do not decrease the number of animals entering or being killed in shelters.
  • MSNL have resulted in more abandoned animals, higher shelter admissions, higher kill rates, lower compliance with licensing and rabies vaccination laws, and radically increased costs for animal control. 
  • People become afraid to get pet licenses because proof of sterilization is required. 
  • They are afraid to go to a veterinarian for rabies shots or medical care because veterinarians are required to report them
  • People abandon their pets because they fear fines and penalties.
  • Numerous studies have shown that the primary reason people do not sterilize their pets is costs
  • When the result of not sterilizing is an unaffordable fine or confiscation/impoundment of the pet, animals die.
  • more than 80 percent of owned cats in the US are already sterilized
  • This means that the majority of unsterilized cats are unowned strays.
  • MSNL would do nothing to increase the sterilization of unowned cats and would not reduce their deaths in shelters.
  • Also, MSNL are a nightmare to enforce.
  • hey burden already underfunded, understaffed animal control departments with more responsibilities.
  • Each community must hire more animal control officers to enforce them so an enormous amount of additional money is spent to enforce a draconian law when a much better use of those funds would be to provide low cost or free spay/neuter services.
  • immediately after passing MSNL, kill rates began to rise in L.A.
  • after MSNL were passed, for the first time in a decade, impounds and killing increased;
  • successful no kill shelters have stopped the killing without these laws.
  • Even though the author claimed that the economic downturn has caused kill rates to rise in L.A., clearly this isn’t the correct explanation.
  • All of these shelters dropped their kill rates without MSNL.
  • It is obvious that Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws are not a factor that helps to stop the killing in shelters. 
pepa garcía

Do You Wear Wool? - 0 views

  •  
    Shearing is generally seen as an innocuous procedure, like getting a haircut, even as a kindness by humans who relieve the sheep of those hot, heavy fleeces. It may come as a surprise to learn that wild sheep shed their wool naturally, and that it is only through selective breeding that farmed sheep have become dependent on humans for such a basic aspect of their welfare. Instead of growing a thick coat for winter and shedding it in summer as they would do in nature, they are now subject to the vagaries of wool prices and the schedules of farmers, leaving them vulnerable to extreme weather conditions. An estimated one million sheep die in the 30 days after shearing. Following the deaths from hypothermia of 1200 sheep near Bairnsdale in April 2004, a livestock manager advised, with a noted lack of concern, that "it was not unusual for freshly shorn sheep to die in the cold weather". Similarly, a British industry spokesman remarks enthusiastically that "winter shearing is the future of sheep farming. You take their coats off, they have to eat more to keep warm. You end up with a better meat-to-bone-and-fat ratio."
pepa garcía

ASPCA Announces President and CEO Ed Sayres' Intention to Step Down - MarketWatch - 0 views

  • Ed has established the ASPCA as a leader in providing sheltering expertis
  • Under Ed's leadership, the organization's membership base has tripled to more than 1.2 million
  • revenues have quadrupled to $148 million in 2011
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • "I joined the ASPCA to bring the life-saving model I championed in San Francisco to NYC and beyond
  • As a pioneer of the "no-kill" model of animal sheltering
  • which exhorts community groups to collaborate to stop the killing of healthy or treatable dogs and cats in animal shelters
  • Mr. Sayres was recruited to the ASPCA in 2003 to bring no-kill to New York City
  • At that point, only 33 percent of the animals in New York City's shelters made it out alive. By the first quarter of 2012, that figure had risen to approximately 80 percent.
  • Mr. Sayres has been the guiding force behind the ASPCA's effort to build collaborative partnerships across the country with municipal and non-profit animal welfare agencies so that they may end the killing of healthy and treatable dogs and cats.
pepa garcía

Op-ed: Creating a No Kill Norfolk | AltDaily : Creating and celebrating local culture i... - 0 views

  • in Norfolk, Virginia, seven out of 10 cats and almost half of all dogs are still being needlessly killed. Why? Because shelter officials are mired in the 19th century model of animal control based on an “adopt a few, kill the rest” mentality.
  • And we aim to change that.
  • We’ve requested that the City Council pass an ordinance requiring Norfolk to run its shelter in line with those of the most successful communities in the nation, by requiring simple, commonsense and cost-effective alternatives to killing that most animal lovers would be shocked to learn are not already being comprehensively implemented voluntarily.
  • ...15 more annotations...
  • One of the proposals is to make it illegal for Norfolk shelters to kill animals using taxpayer money when qualified non-profit rescue organizations are willing to save them at private expense.
  • All it will require are foster care,
  • That number now stands at over 58,939—a 370% increase in annual lifesaving, all at no cost to taxpayers.
  • Another of the Norfolk proposals would end the practice of killing animals simply because the mandated stray holding period has passed.
  • Before the California law went into effect, only 12,526 animals were being transferred from shelters to rescue groups statewide every year.
  • working with rescue groups,
  • marketing and adoptions
  • Can anyone with even a hint of common sense or compassion actually say it is better to kill baby kittens than have volunteers bottle feed them?
  • Right now, excluding laws imposed by health departments regarding the use of controlled substances, the disposition of rabid and potentially aggressive animals and mandated holding periods, shelter directors in this country have essentially unlimited discretion as to how they operate their facilities.
  • They can exclude members of the community from volunteering.
  • They can prevent other non-profits, such as rescue groups and other shelters, from saving the lives of animals in their custody.
  • And when volunteers or rescuers go public with their concerns, they are terminated.
  • Where shelters are not willing to do these things voluntarily or do so on a limited basis when they should be doing it for every single animal, every single time, we must pass laws forcing them to do so.
  • when all you ever do is all you’ve ever done then all you’ll ever get is all you’ve ever gotten.
  • Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the very definition of insanity.
pepa garcía

Twitlonger: Anyone who claims that ethical veganism, as it is represented in the abolit... - 0 views

  •  
    "No mainstream group has adopted ethical veganism as its exclusive, or even a, central focus. An ethical vegan would not support any animal exploitation. Therefore, to say that ethical veganism is a SIC is to fail to understand the nature of ethical veganism or the fact that SICs rest on distinguishing among various forms of animal exploitation and promoting the notion that some forms are worse than others and, by implication, that other forms of exploitation are morally desirable or morally acceptable. One can, of course, use the expression "veganism" to apply only to diet in the sense that one who does not eat any animal products may be considered to have a vegan diet. This use of "vegan" is more restricted than the notion as I have developed it in my abolitionist theory. Promoting a vegan diet is more like an SIC than is promoting ethical veganism and the abolition of all animal use. But the practical reality is that if people rejected eating any animal products, we would see a rejection in all sorts of other animal use. The most significant form of animal exploitation--the form that "legitimizes" all the others--involves using animals as food. If you dislodge that use, you dislodge all others."
pepa garcía

News: Ask the Experts: Gary Steiner, John Howard Harris Professor of Philosophy, discus... - 0 views

  • If we really understand what it means for a being to have moral status, it's something that animals have a right to; they have a right not to be killed and eaten for food and used in a variety of other ways to satisfy human desires.
  • I'm very extreme about this. Animals have just as much right not to be killed and eaten for food, or to be enslaved, as you or I have. That's what I mean when I say that humans and animals are morally equivalent.
  • Veganism is a moral imperative; in my book I call it the vegan imperative.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • One has to think about is what's morally right, not what's economically advantageous. Are we going to let economics trump what's right?
  •  
    One has to think about is what's morally right, not what's economically advantageous. Are we going to let economics trump what's right?
pepa garcía

@garylfrancione - TwitLonger - When you talk too much for Twitter - 0 views

  •  
    "I received a question: isn't it better to be a non-vegan who rescues than one who does not? Yes. And it's better to be a serial murderer who does charity work on Thursdays than a serial murder who does no charity work at all. But that does not address the morality of murder or the inconsistency of murdering while doing charity work! My point is that those who rescue animals but who continue to eat them necessarily (even if not explicitly) regard the moral value of the animals they save as greater than the moral value of the ones they eat.  Please understand that I think that doing rescue work is fantastic and I have great respect for those who do it. (I have done TNR/fostering.) Many rescue folks work 24/7 helping unfortunate animals who will otherwise be killed in shelters or otherwise come to a horrible end. It is precisely because I do have a high regard for those who rescue/foster that I raise these issues. Rescue should not be just a matter of which animals are our "favorites." If someone were to rescue dogs but trapped and poisoned cats, we would surely find that odd. But the same analysis applies to those who do any sort of rescue work but then consume animal products.
pepa garcía

Forks Over Knives - The Official Movie Website - 0 views

  •  
    Dr. Campbell, a nutritional scientist at Cornell University, was concerned in the late 1960's with producing "high quality" animal protein to bring to the poor and malnourished areas of the third world.  While in the Philippines, he made a life-changing discovery: the country's wealthier children, who were consuming relatively high amounts of animal-based foods, were much more likely to get liver cancer.  Dr. Esselstyn, a top surgeon and head of the Breast Cancer Task Force at the world-renowned Cleveland Clinic, found that many of the diseases he routinely treated were virtually unknown in parts of the world where animal-based foods were rarely consumed.  These discoveries inspired Campbell and Esselstyn, who didn't know each other yet, to conduct several groundbreaking studies.  One of them took place in China and is still among the most comprehensive health-related investigations ever undertaken.  Their research led them to a startling conclusion: degenerative diseases like heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and even several forms of cancer, could almost always be prevented-and in many cases reversed-by adopting a whole foods, plant-based diet.  Despite the profound implications of their findings, their work has remained relatively unknown to the public.
1 - 20 of 277 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page