How NOT to support animal experimentation with the ALS ice bucket challenge

August 27th, 2014

“Trying to cure human diseases by relying on outdated and ineffective animal experiments isn’t only cruel—it’s a grave disservice to people who desperately need cures.” – Pamela Anderson via Facebook post, 8/20/14

I understand the purpose behind the popular ALS ice bucket challenge, and can see it’s great value towards raising awareness for the cause and in generating donations, but totally agree with Pam on this point, as does the ALS researcher that wrote a piece for HuffPost Science titled, In Defense of Pamela Anderson.

The FDA’s own statistics show that 92 out of 100 drugs that succeed in animal trials fail when used on humans. Apparently that’s particularly true for ALS drugs. In the last several decades, after alllllll their animal testing (they used to use primates but have since stopped and now primarily use rodents, zebrafish and fruit flies), only a handful of drugs even showed promise in clinical trials with humans.In the end, none truly ended up working for people.

The ALS Association has responded to people concerned about animal rights to say that, “The Association is committed to honoring donor intent. If a donor is not comfortable with a specific type of research, he or she can stipulate that their dollars not be invested in that particular area.”

Whether or not you are doing the challenge, if you are donating to the ALS Association please consider specifying that it not be used on animal experimentation. Or, consider giving to an alternative organization such as Compassionate Care for ALS.

Note that I am not being dispassionate or saying not to support ALS awareness or research, just asking people to support ethical research that’s actually *more* effective and directly helps humans. See further info in this blog post by PCRM.

The “humane” raising of cattle

September 27th, 2013

As part of a lifestyle change we’ve made, we’ve recently moved to a more rural location, surrounding by cattle. While we’re still within a town, we now have cows off our doorstep and in our back yard!cows

As a result, we’re getting an up close look at the “humane” raising of these animals intended for food. For the most part the animals do get to graze in pasture and live much more naturally than they would in a CAFO. But it’s not all sunshine and roses.

Observations thus far:

  • While many cattle are in typical farm pastures (think large, rolling hillsides), others are in smaller enclosures that just happen to have some grass and weeds. When it runs out the workers bring in supplemental hay.
  • The cows are herded around from place to place frequently (here they use four wheelers) and are goaded – even hit – if they do not comply with the worker’s desires. They are frequently moved from pasture to pasture, sometimes by truck.
  • Mothers and babies are separated and bellow for each other for DAYS. This is not an exaggeration.
  • Some animals in particular do not like being alone and call out for the others that they can hear in nearby pastures. If another animal is put in with them, they stop. Bulls are almost always isolated from the rest of the herd.
  • Cows are marked/branded and have ear tags put in without pain relief. They yell out while it’s happening and for quite some time thereafter.
  • Cows are sometimes left in pastures without access to shade or shelter, even when it’s 100+ degrees.
  • When something upsets the herd, they all get anxious. This typically includes a lot of loud mooing and pacing. It continues long after the initial upset has occurred., It’s easy to tell when they’re distressed, a very unsettling sound.

These cows are raised using the more “natural” methods embraced and approved by animal welfare organizations. They are considered “grass-fed”.  The treatment is Certified Humane. But it should never be considered compassionate.

While I will admit this is an improvement over veal crates and feed lot life, it’s still not enough.The animals are still treated like property, torn from their families, and have absolutely no say over their fates. There’s a reason they refer to animals as live stock.

It is beyond me how organizations that say they are dedicated to animals can promote this nonsense.  Humane meat is a myth. The best way to help farm animals is not to treat them better before killing them, but to stop eating them!

Best decisions – Baby-led Weaning

June 13th, 2013

It’s been ages since my son was a baby, but there’s one thing we did with him that I’m really glad we did but have never written up. It’s still not entirely common but is gaining more traction all the time.  It’s the idea of baby led weaning!

You’ll also see it called child-led feeding, baby-led feeding, baby-led weaning, BLW, etc. but it basically amounts to letting baby self feed solids instead of doing it for them, and keeping the solids in solid form rather than mashing or turning it into purees.  Skip the mushy cereals and go straight to things like bananas, avocado and steamed sweet potatoes.

It just made so much sense to me the more I learned about it. Just how the child has controlled their intake when breastfeeding, they control their intake of solids. They can’t accidentally ingest anything their body isn’t really ready for (e.g. can’t handle things like beans until they’ve got the pincer grip and precision to pick things up, can’t take bites until they have teeth, etc.). Plus, you want the baby to learn to manipulate the food in their mouth and chew, not just suck it down.

Baby gets to experience new textures, shapes, etc. along with just the colors and tastes. They get to feel like a part of the family, eating things that look like what everyone else is eating, which may make a difference in how much/well they eat. They may not consume a lot, but that’s not important in the beginning anyway. It’s really all about trusting the baby’s instincts!

The Baby Led Weaning Wikipedia page is great for explaining the basic concepts, but one of my best sources throughout was Kenniscentrum Borstvoeding (don’t worry, it’s in English). They have a chart on the site that explains what to introduce and when, put together by a nutritionist. The person that is known in the Western world for introducing the technique is Gill Rapley. She has books, a DVD, and more on her site that are also good.

My best tip, that I still remember after all these years, is to use a crinkle cutter when cutting things like vegetables (we got ours through Pampered Chef) as the edge it produces makes it easier for baby to hang onto things once they get all slobbery. :-)

All in all, BLW was a great experience for us and I believe it made a big difference in our son’s good appetite, variety of foods eaten, and early mastery of a regular cup and utensils.

Houseless and Happy

April 2nd, 2013

We are “homeless” right now, actually between houses. We’re downsizing – or rightsizing as I prefer to think of it – and are fortunate to have sold quickly,  but before we could get into our new place.

While most all our stuff is in storage and we only have a small portion of our belongings with us, it still seems like we have way too much. Now, once we get our new place and stuff back, we’re hoping to cull even more than we did for the move!!

Somehow we’re managing to cook just fine most of the time with one pot and one pan. Our son has access to only a small portion of his toys, and yet he’s only missed a couple of items.  I find myself scrutinizing each piece of clothing I have in my bag, a fraction of what is usually in my closet, wondering why I have so many shirts. I doubt we’ll maintain such a minimalist lifestyle going forward, but we’ll definitely be paring things down.

This interim time without a house has it’s reinforced what we already knew to be true, the idea that home is wherever we are. We don’t need it all to be happy, not even that favorite toy or our trusty home network. And maybe in some small way it’s helped prepare us for what we hope is a future filled with travel!

Cats, dogs, & allergies. Oh my!

September 30th, 2012

As I was growing up there were a lot of pets around, cats in particular. While I wasn’t allowed to have a pet at our house (other than a few brief forays into fish ownership) I had near daily interaction with cats and kittens at my grandparent’s house. I also kept ducks for a while and sometimes helped with the chickens.

When I got a bit older, I started volunteering for the local animal rescue group. I managed their website and Petfinder listings, took pictures, and occasionally transported animals. I was even the group’s Vice President for a short while. My husband and I permanently adopted four cats and moved them with us from house to house. We even made our home purchasing decisions in part on having a suitable space for the cats to play and enjoy the sun while we were away at work.

Our son came along and the cats became slightly less important in our lives but were still a part of the family. We saw them through some major illnesses and eventually one of the four died, succumbing to a lifetime of respiratory problems.

And then our son developed pet-induced asthma.

It was miserable to contemplate giving up our companions of 10+ years, but even more miserable what the pet exposure was doing to him. We had to visit the ER and give him medicine for the first time. He fought the inhaler with all of his strength, pretty traumatic on everyone. Our luck was no better with the nebulizer. We quickly made the the tough decision to seek new homes for our cats. Finding the right places was hard, giving them up was harder still. Around the same time we also found out that our son gets massive hives when dogs lick him, making dogs something we were then trying to avoid too.

Over time I noticed my opinions about cats and dogs starting to change. I still felt passionate about animal rights issues and helping animals find forever homes, but began to see most companion animals as a nuisance. I got irritated when there were dogs in public places (even places where they should be allowed) because it meant we had to safeguard my son from getting licked. The fact that family members had cats (included that same grandparent’s house from my childhood) was a major hassle and at times made visiting them near impossible. He could no longer stay over night at his grandma’s house. We now needed to check in advance if friends had pets. Etc. Etc.

I’ve now realized the pendulum may have swung a bit too far in the anti-pet direction. This really hit home earlier this week when my son told me he is somewhat afraid of dogs. He said he thinks they don’t like him. :( Is it any wonder given we’ve spent so much effort trying to avoid them? We clearly need to find a better way, some balance. His allergies are not extremely severe and do not need to be treated as such. We can probably take more liberal precautions and still avoid bad reactions.

I’d love for my son to grow up with an appreciation and love for animals like I have, in part because I believe it to be a foundational piece for veganism. Understanding that animals are sentient beings that feel pain, love and other human emotions makes it easier to extend them compassion. People that have empathy for animals are less likely to eat/wear/hunt/use them. Will this love still manifest if he has no animal interactions? Perhaps. But I’d like to hedge the bets.

Not back to school

August 16th, 2012

If our son were a school-going kid, today would be his first day of Kindergarten. Instead, it’s our first official “Not Back to School” day.

Overall, today looks like any other to him, and this is just how it should be. He’s following his interests, learning as he goes along, just like he’s done since he was born.

It’s a little different for me since I’m still de-schooling myself. I’m fighting the urge to do something to mark the event, like having him pose for an official first day picture.

We’ve talked a bit about the fact that other kids have to go to school now and so far he’s not expressed any interest in going too. Maybe he remembers his disastrous few weeks of preschool (before we looked into homeschooling) or perhaps it’s that we’ve got such a good thing going on at home that it hasn’t even crossed his mind.

Screen time

June 26th, 2012

It seems that one area where many natural-minded parents break ranks is on the topic of “screen time”. Some consider it a badge of honor that they don’t have a TV or limit their child’s computer time. They quote articles about how damaging it can be and how it ruins a child’s concentration. Some even send their kids to preschools such as Waldorf that forbid it!

We’ve taken a different approach. In our house, visual media is a just another activity choice. We have a TV, but without cable. It really only gets PBS channels plus one or two others. Some days our son watches many programs in a row, other days not so much. He rarely chooses the TV because he can’t watch what he wants, when he wants it, and will usually opt for a DVD or something from the computer so that he can fast forward/rewind, pause, repeat or skip parts as he chooses.

The majority of the time he’s doing one or more other things while he views a show, but sometimes he’s watching intently. Sometimes he even abandons the program or forgets it’s on. Often the choice is to play games, type or draw on the computer instead, still forms of screen time though. In getting his shows from the Internet he has so much to choose from!

Full episodes of nearly any show or movie, from many different countries, can be found on YouTube (though sometimes you have to be cautious about what you get). Almost every kids show has a web site with games, educational or otherwise, filled with fun activities.

I watch with him and pick up on what he’s most interest in to try and bring more about those topics into our lives. I can’t even count the number of things he’s learned about via watching or playing that I wouldn’t have thought to introduce or that wouldn’t have interested him in the same way.

He likely wouldn’t have been building oar fish out of Legos or telling Grandpa about the Midnight Zone this early in life without the Octonauts! And he wouldn’t have been using gestures he learned from Curious George to help him get his point across as he was learning to talk. We’ve had numerous interesting conversations featuring things that have come up on Spongebob. Plus he’s learned a lot of complex language concepts from the Alphablocks (it’s fun to hear him explain how “silent e” transforms vowel sounds). And you should see him laugh hysterically at the antics that Garfield gets up to with John and Odie! :-)

Whether to allow TV and other forms of “screen time” into your child’s life is a highly personal decision and depends in large part on your parenting world view. For some additional reading on the topic of TV and Videos that I found interesting, including commentary on whether to forbit or limit access, check out some of the articles and shared experiences on Sandra Dodd’s TV page.

The value judgements of government

March 20th, 2012

I listened to a radio program yesterday where callers were discussing their feelings about hate crimes, and whether it makes sense for offenders to get double or triple the punishment when an act is said to be rooted in discrimination against a protected group.

I didn’t agree wholeheartedly with what the callers or the panel was saying. And as the conversation evolved, I realized what was bothering me about the idea – that the legislation allows the government to make a value judgement on our behalf. While typically the justice system punishes actions, with hate crimes they are attempting to determine whether a crime was bias motivated and mete out extra punishment based on that determination. And it’s the government that gets to determine which groups deserve this protection, potentially to the detriment of other groups.

I understand the reasoning for such laws to be that by punishing more severely for bigotry, the government is saying that the action is not OK in our society. There is some perceived greater societal harm that comes from such acts that makes it worth taking extra steps to deter and punish. To be honest, I’m not sure how I feel about that.

A lot of the callers were making the First Amendment/slippery slope argument, saying that if we allow regulation based on thought where does that end? But the path my thoughts took extended to something bigger, to the role that the government plays in our lives and society at large.

In our representative form of government, we basically authorize others to make decisions on our behalf. Letting the government decide what’s important to us gives them a lot of power, and it makes the justice system vulnerable to political influence, with laws alterable by the whims of the current office holders.

Is this the way the system was designed to work? What if we don’t agree with the value judgement they have made? How do we come to a consensus on areas where society does not agree? What do we do as the values of a society change?

As with many other things, I take issue with giving this power to the government. I’d prefer they treat people equally, including criminals, just as I’d prefer they didn’t determine that particular people or relationships have more value than others. That owning a home or having a child is worth incenting. That certain substances are OK to use and some are not. That it’s OK to redistribute income between groups. That some subjects are important for kids to learn and not others. I guess it’s just the libertarian in me questioning (as always) how we got to this point of authorizing that power.

While thinking about this over my lunch break I came across an interesting piece called Social Welfare, State Intervention, and Value Judgments. It argues that the state cannot govern without making arbitrary value judgements, and thus discriminating against some for the benefit of others. It also purports that this becomes more acceptable when the state is attempting to economize on the value judgement. “Any activity, process, or institution will create gainers and losers and ultimately requires extra-economic criteria for its evaluation.”

With that in mind, some governmental decisions make much more sense than if economics were not considered. But is this really how legislators govern? If so, then what of the hate crime legislation? Is there an economic motivation for dis-incentiveizing bigotry?

I also ran across a book called, Government: servant or master? that attempts to answer some of the questions I’ve got swirling around in my head. From the back cover, “The authors do not shrink from debunking the exaggerated prestige of democratic government which instead of being a guarantor of private rights regularly violates them on the debased pleas of “public interest”.”

Too much to deal with in one blog posts, but definitely a topic I intend to explore further.

The corporate vegan

January 18th, 2012

Being a vegan in the corporate world can be difficult, especially if you live in an area where plant-based diets and respect for animals are not the norm.

Where I work, company lunches, potlucks and other opportunities to eat together, are not only common but are often used as motivation or given as a reward for a job well done. Yet for me, they are little other than a point of stress and I sometimes find myself looking for an excuse to avoid the event all together!

Since I’ve been with the same company for years now, my coworkers all know that I don’t eat meat, and some even know that I’m a vegan. Most are quite courteous in trying to choose restaurants with food they think I can order and they often try to make menu suggestions. But quite often the places chosen have nothing suitable to eat, which just makes for an uncomfortable situation.

If you are a vegan, it’s likely that you too will at some be put into a position where it’s necessary to eat with your workmates. If you find yourself facing an upcoming lunch or event, perhaps you can deploy some of these tactics that have worked well for me in past:

  • Check with the meeting organizer in advance to get the scoop on the meal situation. Will it be catered in? Box lunches? Dining out?
  • If you know you’ll be eating at a restaurant, ask for the menu is advance or find it online. That way you can take as much time as necessary to figure out what to order without holding up the order for the rest of the group and will know in advance if there’s not a good option.
  • If the meal will be brought in, bring your own food to eat at the same time.
  • Consider if there are likely to be snacks served (candy, cookies, etc. are common for all-day meetings) and bring something yummy for yourself plus enough to share with others.
  • If the event starts with lunch and the program or activity will follow, ask if you can join the group after the meal has already been served.
  • Use techniques one would normally employ at inhospitable restaurants such as ordering just a drink, appetizer, or other sides off the menu in place of an entree.
  • Consider asking if you can place a special order, especially good to do if they have something explicit on the menu saying they welcome alternate requests. Note that this may not be a good idea if everyone is in a rush, since special orders often take more time.
  • Make sure to have some non-perishable food with you, such as a piece of fruit or a packaged bar, in case things don’t go as expected. Sometimes even the best laid plans fall short.

While it would often be easier just to skip out all together, it is good to make an effort to participate in some fashion. Otherwise you may be branded as “not a team player” or miss out on some crucial bit of information. A lot gets discussed over lunch!

I am lucky to have had supportive and considerate supervisors during my time as a corporate vegan. If you are the manager of a vegetarian or vegan employee I’d extend the following tips to you:

  • Don’t make a big deal out of the issue, broadcast an announcement or bring it up as a major discussion topic for the team.
  • Understand your employee’s dietary preferences so you can make informed choices when choosing a location, restaurant or caterer for team meetings. Consider asking your employee for their input.
  • If you are not making the choice, coordinate with the meeting organizer to determine the meal plan and give input if possible. This will save your employee some work and stop them from always having to feel like they are always the only ones asking questions or demanding special favors.
  • When you are the one bringing the snacks, make sure to offer something that all your employees can eat. (It’s not as hard as you might think! Lots of junk food such as Oreos and Twizzlers are accidentally vegan, and you can always bring obviously vegan things like plain fruit or nuts.)
  • Be conscious of the fact that people may adopt the veg lifestyle for wildly different reasons. Don’t presume you know your employee’s reason.
  • Note that ethical vegans often hold deep-seated beliefs that extend to areas of animal welfare other than just food. You might consider this belief similar to that of a religious position in that it is a choice, but not one made lightly or to be discarded. In this vein, be aware of peripheral issues and things that may offend such as giving leather as gifts or wishing them a Happy Turkey Day.
  • Appreciate the diversity their veganism brings to your team! Variety of thought is always a good thing.

And to add in a lofty and random request here for facilities managers too, please try to make sure there’s at least one vegan thing in the vending machine!! Since packages  can’t show both front and back at the same time, Im thinking a vegan sticker or printed slide-in icon to go next to the price would be a great addition. :-)

For any readers that might be out there, what’s your experience been like? Any additional tips to share?

Unsheeply’s Law?

November 9th, 2011

I’ve observed a phenomena that I think deserves a new adage, similar to Godwin’s Law. If you’re not familiar, that’s the idea that given enough time any online discussion – regardless of topic or scope – will eventually involve comparison of a poster’s point to the beliefs held by Hitler and the Nazis.

Similarly, it seems that that any online discussion that involves animal rights, vegan or vegetarian diets will eventually include comments by someone asserting that they are going to go eat a steak or hamburger right now, usually in someone’s honor.

To those posters I say, I get it. You eat meat and you like it. There’s no need to claim you’re going to rush out right now to stuff your face, or pretend that the discussion has provoked you into doing it. And there’s really no need to graphically describe the animal parts you intend to consume. Just not necessary and does not add to the discussion.

But it is inflammatory, and that’s probably the point. It might serve as a diversion from any other more logical arguments in progress, drawing people away from the truth. And for whatever reason, trolling veg forums seems to be a popular topic among a small portion of the meat eating public.

In the same way that Godwin’s law can be cited to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons, my attempt at pointing this out is in the hope that it will reduce the incidence of such nonconstructive comments. Additionally, this law could be used to serve an automatic FAIL to win the argument on the person making the claim.

I’d love to see this on this list of adages named after people or things. So what do you say? Unsheeply’s Law? ;-)