ANIMAL RESEARCH T A K E S LIVES
- Humans and Animals BOTH Suffer
<< previous page | next page >>
contents | Chapter 4 index | index
The broader answer to the tragedy of vanishing wildlife, and ARSL's claim that vivisection can rectify or alleviate the critical environmental situation, is dealt with under the rebuttals to pages 2 and 11 of ARSL. On page 18 ARSL insists that if vivisection was halted it would be impossible to save endangered species "like the kakapo and the kokako".
The author repeats that habitat pollution and destruction is placing the continued existence of an alarming number of species in jeopardy. For many it is already too late. ARSL, in advocating vivisection instead of planet recovery programmes as the solution, accepts the ongoing carnage of the environment, spurred on no doubt by the anticipation of grant money. The author counters that saving species by nurturing the few pathetic remnants of once-thriving populations will not be achieved through the allocation of vivisection funds but by a drastic change of attitude toward irresponsible habitat destruction.
Were the publishers of ARSL sincere they would advocate the ploughing of funds into campaigns to stop discharge of chemical waste into the rivers, call a halt to logging, and pioneer re-planting strategies. But a glimpse at the credentials of the publishers of ARSL reveal that they are not in the business of healing for love, but vivisecting for money.