According to Carol P. Mandell, DVM, a veterinarian and a diplomat for the
American College of Veterinary Pathologists, "Podell's protocol reveals that
in just one day cats will have three spinal taps performed on them. They will
be anesthesized for more than 24 hours and unable to eat for two days."
"Spinal taps can be dangerous. Bleeding around the brain, infection, and even
painful death are potential outcomes. In any event, all cats used in this
experiment will eventually be killed, some 6 months after the experiment has
begun, others after 12 months. For some cats, this gruesome experiment will
last two years."
Dr. Mandell also asks, "Also well know is that cats do not break down and
eliminate drugs similar to humans. Some human drugs can poison cats or cause
unusual reactions. So how can a researcher even consider that these
'experiments' will be relevant to HIV disease in people?"
OSU is slated to receive 1.68 billion dollars for this study.
Dr. Mandell has sent a letter to OSU's Board of Trustees expressing her
opposition to Podell's study. In that letter, Mandell wrote, "The feline
AIDS model will yield results of questionable validity that will be difficult
to interpret and extremely difficult to extrapolate to HIV disease. Frankly
I'm surprised and concerned that this protocol was approved by the Animal
Care Committee at the Ohio State University...any scientific data from such a
study would be, at worst, useless, and at best, of dubious validity."
Professor Podell says, "There's direct benefit to (human) patients." He
claims that the benefit of the experiment is to gain knowledge "allowing
earlier and more effective treatments for drug users who contract HIV." He
fails to point out that at the cellular level, where the real action takes
place, HIV and FIV work in significantly different ways. As do the human and
feline immune systems. He also makes no mention of the failed track record
of animal-based AIDS research.
There is still no vaccine and no cure for AIDS. Some of the blame for this
has to rest with the animal researchers who have funnelled billions of
dollars of research money - a lot of it funded by you - into dead ends.
Professor Podell and OSU are continuing in that fine
tradition. But it is only a matter of time before the hollowness of their
promises and their self-serving justifications for their experiments are
rejected by society. Already some AIDS activist groups have rejected animal
experimentation. They are frustrated and angry at profiteers who are
exploiting their plight. In December 1995, ACT UP San Francisco agreed by
consensus to support a ban on animal experimentation. More recently, Julio
Abreu, a spokesman for AIDS Action, spoke out against the Podell experiment,
as chronicled in Franny's earlier article. (See Sidebar Link)
This Podell experiment is a disgrace on several counts:
- It uses FIV, a poor model for HIV
- It ignores the myriad differences between human and feline immune systems
- It ignores the different ways that humans and cats respond to doses of
methamphetamines
- It ignores the fact that AIDS activists and other scientists have condemned
the research (and similar research)
- Its findings will almost certainly not help to find a cure for AIDS
- It uses up money - your money - that could be used for research methods that have proven
to be much more productive.
In vitro research, computer modeling, and clinical trials using humans are
what have produced all the AIDS understanding and treatment advances. But
testing on cats is easier. Cats are relatively cheap to breed, they stay
locked in their cages, and they don't talk back. And it's relatively easy to
get a research paper out of animal experiment. The animal experimenter can
take some already known concept, modify a variable, and publish the results
in one of the approximately 100,000 research journals out there. One cynic
has quipped, "a rat is an animal which, injected, produces a paper."
These cats will be destroyed in vain.
A Proposal
Professor Podell has said that he is willing to debate the experiment on
scientific grounds. That sounds good to me. I'd like to make it
interesting. If I could get Professor Podell to agree on ground rules for
voting on the winner of the debate, I'd like to propose the following:
- If he wins the debate, his detractors will impose a moratorium of not less
than one year on all protests or negative articles about his experiment. I am perfectly willing to discuss other penalties, as well.
- If he loses the debate, he stops the experiment. He and the university are
welcome to use the grant money for non-animal experiments if they're up to it.
I even have an opponent in mind (no, not me!)
EPILOGUE
Last week, I sent my proposal for a debate to OSU. For some reason, I haven't heard back from them yet.
|
HOSTGary
Forums Host
|
|
|