Komputer for Alle 1998 #6/1998 CD 6 (Gul).iso/web/ffa/wwwenv~1.org/arrs/digest/news66~4.htm/text0000.txt

Text File | 1998-04-02 | 124.0 KB | 2,917 lines

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Wednesday, February 18th, 1998

McDonald's and RSPCA plan animal welfare link
By Hugh Muir

THE RSPCA and McDonald's have held exploratory talks about a "kitemark"
scheme to prevent cruelty in the rearing, slaughter and transportation of
animals.

Representatives from the organisations met at the hamburger chain's London
headquarters to discuss the possibility of the company joining the
society's Freedom Food initiative. The meeting follows criticism of
McDonald's in the marathon "McLibel" trial at the High Court, where the
company was judged to have been cruel in its treatment of pigs, cattle and
chickens.

But the talks have angered animal rights activists, who fear the society's
name may be used to improve the company's image with environmentalists.

Angela Walder, a branch official and former council member, said: "It is no
good us saying that things will be better if they use our cattle. Whatever
they did with us would just be a drop in the ocean. McDonald's want to give
themselves respectability by aligning themselves with
Freedom Food."

The Freedom Food scheme obliges members to follow RSPCA rules about the
care of animals at all stages of the food chain. In return, they are able
to publicise their produce as being RSPCA- approved.

It is understood the two parties, which met two months ago, had a previous
meeting in 1994. Since then, McDonald's has been in touch with other
companies involved in the scheme, including Tesco and the Co-op.

Mike Love, a McDonald's spokesman who attended the meeting, said: "It is at
the very earliest stages. We met them in 1994 but at that time they didn't
have all the criteria for every product. It was really a case of knowing
what they were doing and looking at what credibility that has.
áááááááááááááá
We believe we have the highest standards but if research showed that there
was consumer demand for that sort of accreditation, it would make sense to
be in a position where we could get it. Our research shows that people do
have a concern about these issues but people trust our standards."

He said there has been no noticeable change on the public's reaction to
McDonald's since the McLibel trial. "There has been no effect positively or
negatively."

A liaison could aid McDonald's, which uses a million pounds of beef a week
and last year used 14.2 million chickens as well as eggs costing ú18 million.

The company was clearly stung by the judgment of Mr Justice Bell last June,
who found for the company against a leaflet issued by the group London
Greenpeace. The judge concluded that hens and chickens and pigs reared for
use by McDonald's were cruelly restricted in their movement over the last
few days of their lives. He also upheld claims that some chickens were
still alive when they had their throats cut.

He described an allegation that the company was culpably responsible for
cruel practices in the rearing and slaughter of some of the animals as
"true in substance and in fact".

A spokesman for Freedom Food said the organisation - a subsidiary of the
RSPCA - attended the meeting as part of its remit "as a catalyst for change
within the farming industry".

"Freedom Food recently responded to a request from an RSPCA council member
to contact McDonald's as one of the largest users of farm animals. While
the meeting was interesting to both sides, it was of an entirely
exploratory nature with no current commitment on either side to take
matters further at this stage."

The involvement of McDonald's would be hugely beneficial to Freedom Food,
which crept into profit last year.

⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 22:15:10
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Death sentence for dog trapped by 'Catch 22'
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Wednesday, February 18th, 1998

Death sentence for dog trapped by 'Catch 22'
By David Graves

A DOG has remained in legal limbo for six years on the canine equivalent of
death row because the terms of the hastily drafted Dangerous Dogs Act have
not allowed its release, despite a court ruling.

The mongrel's predicament, which has so far cost the taxpayer more than
ú160,000 in legal fees and ú40,000 in kennelling costs, has been used as a
graphic symbol of the "chaotic inconsistencies" of the leglislation by dog
breeders, lawyers and animal welfare experts.

Now the dog, called Judd, will die from cancer in a secret police kennel
after a magistrate yesterday refused to order its release unless he was
properly registered under the Act. To become registered, it would have to
be neutered and vets have warned that it would not survive the surgery
because of its illness.

Gary Dunne, Judd's owner, had wanted it to be freed on compassionate
grounds to die at home in "peace and dignity". As it is, the mongrel has
only two to four weeks to live because of a malignant growth on the spine.
Mr Dunne argued that the dog, now eight, could not be considered a public
danger.

Mr Dunne, who said he was "heartbroken" by the court's decision, had hoped
to take advantage of last year's amendment to the Act, under which a dog
could be registered retrospectively. But the change came too late for Judd.

Christopher Pratt, stipendiary magistrate at Marylebone in central London,
agreed that Judd did not constitute a public danger but said it could not
be released without proper registration. He ordered that Judd should be
destroyed if it is not registered within two months.

The case had become a cause celebre among many dog breeders and lawyers,
who maintained that the original legislation was rushed and ill-conceived.
Trevor Cooper, his lawyer, said: "Mr Dunne is an owner who has never given
up on his pet in six-and-a-half years but perhaps now the dog has given up
on him."

Judd was seized while being walked by Mr Dunne on Hampstead Heath, in
November 1991, two days before it was due to be registered under the Act,
which was about to become law. The following month, magistrates found Mr
Dunne guilty of having an unmuzzled dog in public and Judd was condemned to
death.

He appealed and in June, 1992, a judge at Knightsbridge Crown Court quashed
the magistrates' order and said that Judd should be freed because it was
seized before the Act came into force when, technically, an offence had not
been committed.

It was then that Mr Dunne came up against the law which condemned his pet
to spend most of its life in a concrete pen.

Because the deadline for dogs to be registered had passed while Judd was
locked up, police said they could not release it since they would have to
seize the dog again immediately for being unregistered with the Index of
Exempted Dogs.

Since his pet's seizure, Mr Dunne, 28, has seen it just once and that was
last week. Judd still recognised him.

It was this legal "Catch 22" which so antagonised opponents of the
legislation. There are hundreds of dogs still being held around the country
under the terms of the Act while costly legal battles are fought.

The Home Office does not collate national figures but in London 64 dogs are
being detained in secret kennels. Since the legislation was introduced,
kennelling costs of detaining dogs is estimated at ú3 million and more than
900 dogs have been destroyed.

Mr Dunne, a builder, of Stoke Newington, north London, had arranged to take
Judd to a vet to have it tattooed, micro-chipped and registered - the
requirements of the Act. "I always accepted he looked a bit of a muscly
dog," he said. "That said, he was very friendly and never aggressive. But
the police said he looked like a pitbull type and would not release him."

The Act was passed on Aug 12, 1991, only 33 days after being introduced by
Kenneth Baker, then Home Secretary, after a spate of incidents in which
dogs attacked children and adults.

Although four types of dog were named, three breeds are virtually unheard
of in Britain and the full force of the law fell on "any dog of the type
known as the pitbull terrier".

Originally, destruction was the only option which the Act gave the courts
when hearing the case of an unregistered "pitbull type" dog or one caught
in public without a leash and muzzle. Under the Act, all pitbulls had to be
registered, given third party insurance and neutered by Nov 30, 1991, and
tattooed by March 1 the following year.

Failure to comply, even by owners who did not believe their dog to be one
of the breed, incurred a mandatory death sentence on their pet. Ministers
hoped that the registration and neutering would kill off the 10,000 pitbull
population within a generation.

However, opponents claimed that the Act could apply to any short-haired
muscular mongrel - an estimated one million dogs. Critics maintained that
dogs were convicted on the basis of their looks and were guilty until
proven innocent. When problems implementing the Act became clear, the Home
Office advised police to make more use of the 1871 Dogs Act, which allowed
courts to spare a convicted dog's life.

Last year amendments to the Dangerous Dogs Act were passed in the Commons.
The mandatory death sentence was relaxed to enable courts to be given a
limited discretion in deciding whether dogs should be destroyed. They also
enabled the Index of Exempted Dogs to be re-opened where owners had
legitimate reasons for not having registered their dogs.

Defending the Act, Tom Sackville, then Home Office Minister, said it had
been deliberately "draconian" to deal with a deeply unpleasant problem.

That was not a view shared by Mr Dunne and many other dog owners last
night. There remained substantial disquiet about legislation which however
well intended, had provided so many pitfalls for the police and pet lovers
alike.

⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 06:06:29 -0800
From: "Linda J. Howard" <[e-mail]>
To: "AR NEWS" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ann Landers Column - Doggie Debate
Message-ID: <01bd3c76$68d15a40$266faccf@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

ANN LANDERS
By Ann Landers

Tuesday, February 17, 1998
Page D15 The Washington Post

DEAR READERS:

It seems that I am in the dog house big time. Remember the letter from
"Between a Rock and a Hard Place"? She had a dog and four cats and married
"Jim," who is allergic to animals. He yelled at the dog and said it was
stupid. She added, however, that Jim was otherwise a wonderful husband and
father to their 2-year-old son. I took the position that her husband's
well-being was more important than the animals' and she should find them a
good home.

I thought that was a reasonable response, but the readers didn't think so.
The first major volley came from "Sally" in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. She
wrote, "That marriage is doomed. A woman who would banish her dog to the
kitchen for a man, after the faithful pet had slept for eight years at the
foot of her bed, is an idiot." Here's more:

>From Detroit: Your reader whose husband is allergic to her pets doesn't need
a marriage counselor, she needs an allergist. My cousin had a similar
problem when she brought a dog into the family. The "problem" turned out to
be a godsend. The vet suggested an allergist, and my cousin's family has
been living happily ever after.

Beverly Hills, Calif.: It isn't easy to "find a good home" for an older
animal. If "Rock" takes the dog to a shelter, it is likely to be put to
sleep. In the event the dog is adopted, it will spend its remaining years
heartbroken, wondering what transgression caused it to be discarded by its
beloved owner. -- Holly Browde

Massachusetts: As vice president of our local animal welfare agency, I must
object to your response to "Between a Rock and a Hard Place." I see too many
"dumped" animals that for some reason become an inconvenience to their
owners. I doubt that a man who yells at his wife's dog will turn out to be a
great husband or father.

Klamath, Calif.: Please tell me why the wife should be the one who makes all
the adjustments. Her husband certainly knew before he married her that she
had pets, but apparently, he didn't show any signs of animosity until after
the wedding. If that man makes his wife give up her pets, she will always
feel resentment, and it will most certainly have a negative impact on their
relationship. -- Joyce Kellogg

Altamonte Springs, Fla.: That woman says her husband is "faithful, smart,
ambitious, a good provider and a wonderful father" to their 2-year-old son,
but where's the compassion for the woman he married and her pets? I think
he's a self-centered, abusive pain in the neck. People who treat animals
poorly usually treat people the same way. I know from experience.

Umatilla, Fla.: Have you visited a pound or shelter recently, Ann? The
chances of finding a good home for those pets is about zilch. A better
alternative is to talk to the vet about new shampoos that reduce the dander
that most people are allergic to. If the cats need to be kept outside, they
can use a heating pad in a special cat shelter on stilts like the one I use.
My cats love it in the winter.

Palmdale, Calif.: How could you tell that woman she'd be a fool to put an
animal ahead of her husband who is "faithful, smart, ambitious, a good
provider and a wonderful father"? Excuse me, but a man who is abusive, even
if it's verbal, not physical, is not a good father or husband, and no amount
of brains or faithfulness will make up for his boorishness. If he yells at
the dog, how long will it be before he does the same thing to his 2-year-old
son? Get with the program, Annie.

Dear Readers:
I would never advocate getting rid of a good husband and father in favor of
a pet, no matter how beloved. I agree, however, that the man should try
allergy shots before giving up. My thanks to all who wrote. -Ann Landers


Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 06:10:34 -0800
From: "Linda J. Howard" <[e-mail]>
To: "AR NEWS" <[e-mail]>
Subject: "How to Keep Pets Out of Jail" - Washington Post article
Message-ID: <01bd3c76$fa8883a0$266faccf@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

How to Keep Pets Out of Jail
By Lawrence G. Proulx

Tuesday, February 17, 1998; Page Z09
The Washington Post

No one likes to see a cat or dog behind bars, and that's why Sandy Laden, a
Bethesda veterinarian, thought it worth her time to call the other day.

A lot of people are ignorant of the rabies vaccination laws, she said, and
as a result their pets sometimes end up doing a stretch in solitary.

Here's why:
Rabies is a viral disease of mammals that is spread by bites and sometimes
by mere contact with an infected animal's saliva. For people it is nearly
always fatal, although it can be blocked by injections if they are given
soon enough after the bite. Vaccinations of domestic animals against rabies
protect not only the animals, but also people. That's why the law is so
strict.

Since cats and dogs are the animals people interact with most, and since
they tend to keep other animals away, a well-vaccinated pet population forms
a sort of cordon sanitaire against the rabies virus. It's remarkably
effective. In 1977, for instance, there were only four cases of rabies in
human beings in this country, according to the federal Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. (This doesn't mean that only four people were
exposed to the virus but that the combined defense of animal vaccinations
and shots for exposed people works very well.) Since 1980, there have only
been 36, and of those 21 were associated with bats.

Pet owners know that vaccinations are important for an animal's health, but
they can be lax in keeping up with the shots. And that's how they risk
seeing their darling pet put in lockup.

A pet's first vaccination is usually given by four months of age. Most
people have no trouble with this one, because without it the pet can't be
licensed. Generally the pet will need a booster shot a year later, and then
booster shots every year or every three years (depending on the vaccine the
veterinarian uses) for the rest of its life.

These boosters are essential in maintaining the pet's immunity to rabies.
Nonetheless, Laden said, "a lot of animals are overdue for rabies shots."

Overdue animals -- and their owners -- get into problems if they are "bitten
or get into a fight or have an exposure to a potentially rabid animal," said
epidemiologist Elizabeth Barrett of Virginia's Department of Health. This is
not a hard scenario to imagine. "This area, and just about the whole East
Coast, is a rabies endemic area," said Laden. Raccoons in particular often
have rabies.

Suppose your dog or cat is let out, maybe only in your back yard, and it has
a run-in with a raccoon. "Then, if your animal is not current, you have two
options," said Barrett. The first is to euthanize your pet, so your only
real choice is this: The animal gets an injection of rabies vaccine and is
put into six months' strict isolation; it "cannot have any human or animal
contact," she said.

Strict isolation is just what it says, confirmed Clifford I. Johnson,
Maryland's public health veterinarian. The animal is enclosed behind a
double door, with one person "just opening the door and putting food in and
not really handling the animal." The owner can build a cage at home or pay
to keep the animal at an approved facility.

Johnson urged hunters and anyone else who might handle wild animals to get a
pre-exposure injection of rabies vaccine. Moreover, people should not handle
stray cats or animals that have been hit on the road, he said. Last month, a
woman was observed tending to a raccoon in the southbound lane of the
Ritchie Highway in Anne Arundel County. The raccoon tested positive for
rabies and authorities scrambled to find the woman. "Channel 2 (in
Baltimore) apparently ran a story and the woman contacted them," said Robert
Weber, director of community and environmental health for the county. "We
have since talked to her. It appears she did not handle the animal with a
hand. She only used her foot to kick it into a box. So it does not appear
there was exposure."

To keep your pets' potential exposures harmless, keep up with their shots.
"People need to hear this," Barrett said. "There's too many unvaccinated
cats and dogs out there."


⌐ Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 98 07:03:56 UTC
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Birds Might Battle in Boxing Gloves
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Honolulu, USA:á A legislative committee is willing to legalize cockfighting -
as long as the fighting roosters wear tiny little boxing gloves into the ring.

Illegal cockfights, normally duels to the death, are believed to be common
in Hawaii.

The state's House Agriculture committee voted 4-2 Monday to approve a
legalization bill, despite protests that cockfighting is a blood sport
and that approving it in any form could lead to legalized gambling.

House Agriculture Chairman Merwyn Jones defended the measure as a way
to create jobs in economically depressed areas by helping to promote
gamecock breeding and exporting.

Under the bill, game cocks would be required to wear padded protective
mitts in place of the sharp metal leg spurs they usually wear as weapons.

Legal cockfighting is still a long way off in Hawaii, however.

The bill must pass a floor vote and be approved by the House Judiciary
Committee before it heads to the state Senate for approval.

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 08:11:53 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Group seeks to outlaw fur farming in Norway
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Group seeks to outlaw fur farming in Norway

OSLO, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Norway's main animal welfare group on Tuesday
launched an unprecedented lawsuit aiming to outlaw fur farms in a nation that
is among the world's top producers of fox and mink pelts.

Lawyers for the animal protection society Dyrebeskyttelsen filed a suit
against two of the nation's 2,000 fur farms in a test case alleging cruelty to
animals in the production of fur coats, stoles and hats.

``This civil case is the first time there has been a test of whether fur
farming is legal in Norway,'' Tatiana Kapstoe, head of the group, told
Reuters.

``Norway is one of the world's biggest producers with about 19 percent of
skins in the world fur trade. We want it banned,'' she said.

Unlike many other western nations, fur farming in Norway has not aroused wide
opposition from environmentalists.

Kapstoe said she expected the allegations to come up in court in three or four
months' time. If the court ruled in the group's favour, fur farming could be
banned across Norway.

The lawsuit alleges that cooping up animals alone in tiny wire-floored cages,
sometimes with barely enough room to turn round, violates laws outlawing
cruelty to animals. Norway produces about 400,000 fox skins and 275,000 mink
pelts a year.

In neighbouring Sweden, for instance, animals must at least be allowed contact
with other animals and be able to dig in the ground.

The Norwegian fur farmers targeted by the lawsuit brushed aside the
allegations of cruelty.

``I think I have right on my side and have a relaxed attitude to this,''
farmer Baard Arild Braathen told Norway's NTB news agency. He said he farmed
as a hobby with up to 500 animals, alongside a job in the state railway firm.

Dyrebeskyttelsen won a lawsuit in 1996 that forced an egg producer to remove a
picture of a contented-looking hen strutting free in a yard from boxes of eggs
produced from caged birds in battery farms.

18:37 02-17-98
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 09:55:28 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fur Sales are Down
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

The fur industry has admitted internally that December fur sales were a
disappointment and that January was a disaster. Major retailer Neiman Marcus
has admitted that sales are down considerably in January, as has Henig Furs
which operates 20 stores in the Southeast.

Andrianna Furs, who did $22 million in 1996, did only $10 million in 1997.
This major Chicago area retailer is now filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection and is closing 2 of there 3 stores.á Millions of dollars that they
owe to fur wholesalers will go unpaid.

Mink skin prices are down 25 to 35% from last year, largely due to the
economic crisis which has devestated the Korean fur trade.

It is important that we drive these points home to local media so that they
won't fall for the "fur is back" propaganda again.á The industry generated 700
news stories that reflected their point of view this year.á We can't allow
that to happen again.á

Please contact us anytime you need facts for media stories.

J.P. Goodwin
Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade
PO Box 822411
Dallas, TX 75382
214-503-1419
[e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:13:46 -0500
From: Wyandotte Animal Group <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: CNN:á Judge Throws Out Veggie Libel
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

> JUDGE THROWS OUT VEGGIE LIBEL;á LAWSUIT CONTINUES

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Texas cattlemen cannot use their state's
"vegetable libel" law in their beef defamation lawsuit against TV talk show
host Oprah Winfrey, making their suit tougher to win. The 1995 Texas
"vegetable
libel" law protects perishable foods against false and defamatory statements.
However, U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson did not throw the case out as
defendants had requested. Jurors will return on Wednesday to hear the lawsuit
as a common-law business defamation case.

-->Are cows perishable?
.....
<http://cnn.com/US/9802/17/oprah.veggie.ap/>http://cnn.com/US/9802/17/oprah.
veggie.ap/


Jason Alley
Wyandotte Animal Group
[e-mail]

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 17:31:27 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Clemens Purtscher)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (A) Lower Austria bans fur farming
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-ID: <[e-mail]>

Good news from Austria. Yesterday the State government of Lower Austria
decided to ban fur farming totally. Lower Austria is the 6th of the
nine
states in Austria to ban fur farming. These decision marks the end of
fur
farming in Austria.

The last Austrian mink farm which is situated in Lower Austria will
have to
close down in the next weeks. This means that in Austria only a few
very small chinchilla farms are left. These have to close down before
2001.

Kind regards

Clemens Purtscher
RespekTiere
--- OffRoad 1.9s registered to Clemens Purtscher
--

***********************Black*Box Online Community***********************
* palazzo - die virtuelle Bastelwelt |
<http://www.blackbox.at/palazzo/>http://www.blackbox.at/palazzo/ *
************************************************************************
Black*Box FirstClass BBS: [phone] (Modem) |
<http://www.blackbox.at/>http://www.blackbox.at
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 08:33:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Wildlife Advocates Allege "Grave" Legal Problems With Killing
á Deer in Cemetery
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, February 18, 1998

CONTACT: Michael Markarian, 301-585-2591
áááááááá Bonnie Holba, 314-398-8388


WILDLIFE ADVOCATES ALLEGE "GRAVE" LEGAL
PROBLEMS WITH KILLING DEER IN CEMETERY


ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI -- In an 8-page comment letter submitted to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, a group of animal protection organizations and
Missouri citizens criticized the Draft Environmental Assessment for the
management of white-tailed deer at the Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery.
The wildlife advocates claim that the proposed killing of deer violates the
National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation
Act, and should be immediately halted.

The groups also pointed out that the Draft Environmental Assessment failed
to justify the need for the proposed action and did not provide sufficient
site-specific data on the deer population and its impacts to substantiate
the need for sharpshooting or other lethal management techniques. In
addition, it did not provide sufficient analysis of the impacts of the
proposed action on the deer population, employees of the cemetery, people
who enjoy observing deer, and local residents.

Wildlife biologist D.J. Schubert wrote in the letter criticizing the Draft
Environmental Assessment, "Much of its analysis is speculative and appears
to be designed to set forth a 'worst-case' scenario for which there is no
supporting evidence. Its consideration and analysis of alternatives is also
deficient and biased towards the use of lethal techniques to reduce the deer
population."

Michael Markarian, director of campaigns for The Fund for Animals, said,
"The sacredness of a cemetery should be treated with peace and tranquility.
It is a ghoulish idea to allow sharpshooters to trample over graves and
disturb the peace of the dead with the sound of gunfire."

Bonnie Holba, founder of the All Creatures Animal Sanctuary and a member of
the St. Louis Animal Rights Team, added, "Local residents do not want to see
our deer killed. There are humane ways to solve deer problems, including
repellents, fencing, roadside reflectors, and reduced speed limits.

Groups signing onto the letter include The Fund for Animals, a national
animal protection organization with 3,000 Missouri members, and the All
Creatures Animal Sanctuary, based in Foristell, Missouri. Copies of the
8-page letter and its attachments are available upon request.


# # #


<http://www.fund.org/>http://www.fund.org

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 98 12:41:04 PST
From: "Linda J. Howard" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Dissection:á "Animal Rights Activists Target Schools"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

February 18, 1998 áááááááááá<<<http://www.washtimes.com/>www.washtimes.com>>

Students, parents grow squeamish about dissection in biology class
Animal Rights Activists Target Schools
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Virginia McCord
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The middle schooler's scalpel slowly cut into the skin of the helpless,
but fortunately dead, frog. She asked herself: "Is the animal being
tortured or am I?"
áááááAnimal dissection, long a staple of junior high biology classes,
may seem like torture to the student who is used to raising frogs from
tadpoles and setting them free instead of cutting them into shreds on a
black-topped science lab table.
áááááEducation and values are clashing over the practice of dissection,
as baby boomers' children are becoming increasingly sensitized to animal
rights or, like first daughter Chelsea Clinton, opting to go vegetarian.
áááááFor instance, students at Crossroads Middle School in Santa Monica,
Calif., took matters into their own hands last year. Students for the
Rights of Animals, a group of animal rights activists at the adjoining
high school, felt that dissection should not be practiced among younger
students in the middle school. The high schoolers made their protest to
middle school principal John Sullivan.
áááááMr. Sullivan told the high schoolers if they could provide a
compelling argument against dissection, he would abolish it.
áááááAfter students explained that 3 million frogs are killed for
dissection in American schools each year, Mr. Sullivan changed the
dissection policy after consulting with his teachers.
áááááNow, the school employs computer simulation exercises instead of
dissection.
ááááá"Education needs a revolution," Mr. Sullivan said. "We need to
start listening to alternative methods of doing things."
áááááFew schools have followed Crossroads' example, although many
students find dissection repugnant.
áááááJonathan Balcombe, an associate director for education on animal
research issues for the Humane Society of the United States, has heard
from many of these students.
áááááIn fact, he said, dissection is "not appropriate" before college,
especially since frogs used for dissection die quite painfully. The
frogs are drowned in alcohol and take an agonizing half-hour to die, he
says.
áááááMany people schooled in the 1960s and '70s also remember pithing,
another painful killing method, where a sharp object is inserted into
the head of the frog and moved around to destroy the brain.
áááááMr. Balcombe hopes that students nationwide will ask for a
no-dissection policy at their schools. He wants to present alternatives,
such as charts, three-dimensional models, CD-ROMs and computer
simulations. It's more important, he says, to observe live animals than
to dissect dead ones.
áááááHe does not pretend that these other techniques will teach students
exactly what animal dissection could, but he feels that they still
provide a positive and beneficial experience.
ááááá"It's a different experience than cutting into preserved tissues,"
Mr. Balcombe says. "If the objective is to come away with a knowledge of
anatomy, the simulations do serve a purpose. Repetition is the most
important aspect of learning, and you can only dissect an animal once."
áááááThe National Association of Biology Teachers disagrees with this
philosophy. "No alternative can substitute for the actual experience of
dissection," its statement says.
áááááMost schools around the country support this stance. For instance,
Peter Munroe, a seventh-grade life science teacher at the Potomac School
in McLean, Va., believes dissections have an important place in the
school's curriculum.
ááááá"I do believe in dissections very much," Mr. Munroe says. "I tell
the kids the animals are grown and killed for dissection." His classes
dissect earthworms, crawfish and starfish.
ááááá"The students have never made any serious objections," he said,
adding that if a student objected, he would excuse the student from the
exercise. This has never happened.
ááááá"I do not think computer dissections are remotely like the real
thing," Mr. Munroe said.
áááááThe National Science Teachers Association also supports dissection
in schools. Executive Director Jerry Wheeler says dissection is not
meaningless killing, but a method for the scientific study of life.
ááááá"We are not just destroying a life," Mr. Wheeler says. "We are
doing a dissection, but it is for a reason. I think it is inappropriate
to use alternatives."
áááááEven though he will allow students to excuse themselves from
dissection, "The student who chooses not to dissect throws away a very
valuable experience," he says. The NSTA's position paper on dissection
is available by writing the association at 1840 Wilson Blvd., Arlington,
Va., 22201.
áááááAlthough most schools in Washington practice animal dissection,
most allow students to abstain when they oppose dissections.
áááááJoanne Belint, a chemistry and biology teacher for Emerson
Preparatory School in Northwest Washington, leads her high school class
in the dissection of fetal pigs and sheep hearts. Although no student
this semester has objected to the practice, two students in the fall
semester asked not to participate in the dissection. They received
alternative reading materials.
ááááá"I do understand what people's objections could be to dissection,
and I do believe there are valid reasons not to do it," Mrs. Belint
says. "It is completely up to the student whether or not he chooses to
participate in the dissection activities."
áááááThe Sheridan School in Northwest Washington is one of the few
schools in the District of Columbia that abstains from animal dissection
in middle school. John Kinabrew, the middle school science teacher,
decided independently to refrain from animal dissections in his
classroom.
áááááMr. Kinabrew believes most students enjoy dissection but says the
subject is becoming too touchy for him.
ááááá"Most children do enjoy dissection after they get into it," Mr.
Kinabrew says. "I just don't feel comfortable advocating it because the
controversy isn't worth the academic benefits."
áááááMr. Kinabrew now employs computer simulation as an alternative.
áááááHowever, "Some computer simulations are adequate for delivering
content," he says, "but they do not supply nearly the excitement level
as the real thing." The debate over animal dissection is far from over.
The HSUS says six states have passed dissection-choice laws or
resolutions: Florida, California, Pennsylvania, New York, Louisiana and
Rhode Island. Maine voters rejected such a law in 1989, but its state
education department has adopted dissection choice as a policy.
áááááLaws are pending in Illinois, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Last
year, Maryland passed a law requiring its schools to publish
alternatives to dissection.
áááááAlthough other states remain undecided on the subject of animal
dissection, it is clearly a concern for many Americans. Since its
inception in 1989, the toll-free Dissection Hotline -- 800-922-FROG --
based in Chicago, a nonprofit service designed to inform students,
teachers and parents about alternatives to dissection, has received more
than 150,000 calls, mostly from students.
áááááPat Davis, the hot line's director, says distraught students call
her. "I asked my teacher for an alternative," one student told her, "and
he said I had to dissect or I would fail."

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:17:10 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: SF Chronicle: Fowl Flu May Pose Big Threat
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Scientists Warn Fowl Flu May Pose Big Threat
Saturday, February 14, 1998

Scientists have fully identified the genetic makeup of the lethal
bird flu virus that killed six people in Hong Kong and warn that
the outbreak may be a harbinger of a ``fowl plague'' to come.

In two reports that will appear in today's British medical journal
the Lancet, researchers describe not just the arrangement of
molecules that compose the virus, but also the flu's startling
clinical features that make it unlike any other form of influenza in
recent memory.

The good news, say scientists at the World Health
Organization's Influenza Centre at Erasmus University in the
Netherlands, is that tests now confirm that the virus was not
transmitted human-to-human. Had the avian virus infected
anyone already ailing with a human influenza virus, the
microbes could have exchanged genes. This would have so
altered the bird virus that it would have become easily
transmissible from one person to another.

In an accompanying Lancet commentary, influenza expert Dr.
Robert Belshe says ``fowl plague'' is a genuine threat,
especially now that it's clear a bird virus can jump to humans
without first being made less virulent in other animals, such as
pigs. ``We've had three (influenza) pandemics this century, and
it is very likely that we will have another,'' said Belshe, director
of immunology at the Center for Vaccine Development at St.
Louis University School of Medicine in Missouri.

⌐1998 San Francisco Chronicleá Page A4

Letters to the Editor should be addressed to:
[e-mail]

Due to space considerations, only letters of less than 250
words will be considered for publication. Please provide
your name and telephone number along with your letter.
You will be called if your letter is being considered for
publication.

The latest issue of The Lancet can be found at:
<http://www.thelancet.com/lancet/User/vol351no9101/index.html>http://www.th
elancet.com/lancet/User/vol351no9101/index.html

============================================

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:30:23 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: SF Chronicle: Jokes plague baboon bone-marrow recipient
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Overcoming an animal transplant
Barnyard jokes plague baboon bone-marrow recipient
By Charlene Laino
MSNBC

PHILADELPHIA, Feb 14 ù The well-spoken Californian has been called a
barnyard animal, even offered bananas on late-night talk shows. Citing
an atmosphere of prejudice, the AIDS patient who was the recipient
of the first and only baboon bone-marrow transplant said Saturday
that deep-rooted psychological fears remain the primary barrier to
animal-to-human transplants.

AIDS PATIENT Jeffrey Getty, who in late 1995 underwent a
controversial procedure in which his own bone marrow was replaced
with that of a baboon, told a scientific meeting here that he is often
treated as a sub-species, different from ô100-percent human beings.ö

But as the mouthpiece ôfor the unheard, silent voice of thousands of
dying people,ö Getty appealed to mankind to overcome their fears and realize
the benefits of cross-species, or xeno-, transplantation. Getty, of San
Francisco, is with the AIDS activist organization Act Up Golden Gate.

ôAs HIV continues to spread, as hepatitis B and hepatitis C start to
impact large numbers of people in communities nationwide,ö he said,
ôthousands of affected people have told me they believe pig liver transplants
will be the answer to their prayers.ö The ravaging hepatitis B and C viruses
attack the liver, often leading to total organ failure and death.

Having sat through three years of hearings to receive government
approval to perform the baboon procedure on Getty, Dr. Suzanne Ildstad said
many scientists agree that the benefits of xenotransplants are ôhuge, while
the risks are infinitesimal.ö With 300,000 Americans dying each year while
awaiting a heart, liver or other organ, America is in a crisis, and
cross-species
transplants are the best solution, said Ildstad, a surgeon at Allegheny
University of the Health Sciences in Philadelphia.

Why a baboon?

Unlike humans, baboons do not become infected with HIV. And since
specialized cells in the bone marrow are a primary means of defense against
outside disease, Ildstad reasoned that baboon bone marrow may have a
protective factor that could help AIDS patients.

While GettyÆs transplant was a failure from a scientific viewpoint ù he
rejected the baboon bone marrow in just two weeks ù his health enigmatically
improved. The amount of virus in his bloodstream bottomed out and his
immune system was stronger than it had been in years. More recently, though,
his immune system has again begun to decline, though by outward
appearances, he looks healthy.

And while he hasnÆt had a baboon cell in his body since three weeks after
the procedure, Getty said the jokes continue.

ôAt first I thought they were funny ù the banana jokes, the zoo jokes,
the part-animal jokes,ö Getty said. But by one year after the transplant, he
was hurt and angered by the remarks.

ôI thought they would subside,ö he said. Instead, he was asked on a late
night talk program if he would like banana, a gesture he told the host was not
appreciated. And a prominent British magazine published an article implying
he was a barnyard animal, he said, and that barnyard animals should be left in
the barnyard.

The prejudice continues

After introducing himself as a baboon transplant recipient to the audience
at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting here,
he paused, noting that ôsomeone is looking at me strangely.

ôWeÆre not quite ready for people to be part animal,ö said the
self-proclaimed xeno-activist.

But people need to remember, he said, that similar concerns surfaced in
the early days of human transplants. People were worried that a donor would
take on the persona of the recipient, he said, that a priest given a
criminalÆs
organ, for example, would become a criminal.

That never happened: In fact, human transplants are considered one of
the greatest breakthroughs in modern medicine. Now, Getty said, ôwe have to
overcome our concerns that xenotransplants open the door for the creation
of a new species.ö

=========================================

Posted by:

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:35:35 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: SF Chronicle: Getty fighting for interspecies grafts
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Oakland AIDS Activist's Latest Crusade
Jeff Getty fighting for interspecies grafts -- he got
baboon marrow
by Charles Petit, Chronicle Science Writer
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá
Monday, February 16, 1998

Two years after receiving a baboon bone marrow transplant,
Oakland resident and AIDS activist Jeff Getty is seeing his
health start to deteriorate again -- but not enough to stop him
from pinning a new label on himself: Xeno-activist.

That's xeno as in xenografts and xenotransplants, the surgical
transfer of organs between species -- particularly animals to
people. With science moving closer to being able to put not only
animal bone marrow but pig hearts, kidneys and livers into
people, debate is picking up on whether such practices might
endanger the general population.

Getty, 40, was in Philadelphia on Saturday to take part in a
symposium on medical prospects for xenografts during the
annual meeting of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science. There is no federal moratorium on
transplants from animals to people, and a recent review by the
Public Health Service endorsed further, well-monitored research
into it. But some authorities fear that wide use of animal organs
could introduce new viruses or other microbes into people
where they would mutate into forms highly infectious to
humans, possibly spawning epidemics against which modern
medicine and natural human immunology would have few
defenses.

Getty's position is firm. To him, to tell somebody that he is going
to die unless he gets a pig liver but that he cannot get one
``because some day it could start a pig disease epidemic, so he
must die -- that is unethical.''

The session was organized by Dr. Suzanne Ildstad of
Philadelphia's Allegheny University of the Health Sciences. She
designed the baboon transplant performed on Getty on Dec. 14,
1995, at San Francisco General Hospital with participation by
University of California at San Francisco doctors.

Getty, who was then moving into advanced AIDS, got an
injection of baboon bone marrow. The hope was that the
marrow might colonize his own bones and eventually create a
population of immune cells in his system that would not be not
affected by the human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, which
causes AIDS.

Although the baboon cells disappeared to below detectable
levels within a few weeks of the injection, Getty's health
improved considerably -- possibly due to the radiation and other
treatments Getty got at the same time.

``I had been at death's door,'' he said. ``But I got one pretty good
year out of it.''

In recent months, however, Getty's immune system has again
fallen to a low ebb, the viral load in his blood is rising, and sinus
and asthma-like breathing difficulties are returning. He keeps his
weight up with the help of human growth hormone and anabolic
steroids, and is taking several experimental medications to slow
the virus' attack.

For the time being, Ildstad has suspended experiments with
baboon or any other kind of transplants to treat AIDS. Her
concern is not safety -- but in finding a way to help the grafts
take hold. She wants to do additional basic research before
trying it again, perhaps in a few years.

In the meantime, Getty said his experience has turned him into a
crusader for animal-to-human transplants. His goal is to break
down what he says are psychological and irrational fears on
the part of many people. ``I'm the first,'' he said, ``but watch out,
there are more coming.''

Ildstad said at the conference that for some illnesses, animal
organs appear to provide the only hope. About half of heart
transplant candidates die because no suitable donor can be
found.

``The donor pool is maxed out,'' she said. ``The doctors are
asking (relatives of potential donors who have died or are
dying), but people are saying no.''

While no method exists to prevent a whole animal organ, such
as a heart or kidney, from being rejected, research programs
into xenotransplantation have already shown how to increase
success rates of human-to-human transplants between people
who are not good genetic matches, she said. In five to ten
years, she said, the extensive publicity campaigns that some
patients or their supporters undertake now to find suitable blood
marrow or other donors will become a thing of the past.

⌐1998 San Francisco Chronicleá Page A6

Letters to the Editor should be addressed to:
[e-mail].

Due to space considerations, only letters of less than
250 words will be considered for publication. Please
provide your name and telephone number along with
your letter. You will be called if your letter is being
considered for publication.

===================================

Posted by:

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:35:09 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: BBC News: Better Than Xeno
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

BBC News: Sci/Tech
Monday, February 16, 1998 Published at 10:05 GMT
Organ 'farming' moves nearer

Organ transplants could be transformed

Scientists believe they are moving closer to being able to grow live human
organs ready for transplant - just from a scraping of tissue.

Victims of organ failures may have access to unlimited supplies of
replacement organs in the future if work currently being carried out
proves a success.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual
conference heard that work in "tissue engineering" had advanced to
such a degree that replacement organs may soon be grown from
just one cell.

Tissue engineering aims to combine biology, medicine and genetic
engineering to encourage cells to grow into new organs either in the
laboratory or inside the patient. If successful it would eliminate the
need for organ donors.

The most advanced research to date has been investigating how to
replace bone.

Scientists at the USA's Allegheny Hospital in Philadelphia, have succeeded
in creating synthetic "bone scaffolding" into which bone cells can grow and
produce more tissue.

They hope to use the technique to treat severe bone fractures in the next few
years.

Replacing organs such as the heart or kidneys would involve a much more
complex process, but researchers told the conference they believed growing
live body parts would be possible in the future.

Eventually organs could be routinely farmed for transplanting, making donors
a thing of the past.

Posted by:



Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:33:30 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Philadelphia Inquirer: Defending xenotransplants
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Defending transplants across species

Animal-to-human procedure discussed at science conference.

By Huntly Collins
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

A California AIDS activist who received bone marrow from a baboon and a
Philadelphia surgeon who oversaw the controversial procedure are trying
to head off a movement by some scientists to temporarily halt animal-to-
human transplants.

Jeff Getty, who had advanced HIV infection when he got a baboon marrow
transplant in 1995, and surgeon Suzanne T. Ildstad said Saturday that such
cross-species transplants could save thousands of lives.

Each year, they said, an estimated 30,000 American transplant candidates
die because doctors can't find matched donors. About half of heart transplant
candidates die waiting for a donor heart.

"That's really the motivating force," said Ildstad, who heads an experimental
transplant laboratory at Allegheny University of the Health Sciences.

The two spoke at the annual meeting of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science at the Marriott Hotel in Center City. The five-day
conference will end tomorrow.

Except for a handful of experiments, most of the cross-species transplants
to date have put animal cells -- not solid organs -- into people. But recent a
dvances in genetic engineering have opened up the practical possibility of
organ transplants.

Such procedures, known as xenotransplants, face two major hurdles. One
is rejection of the animal organ by the patient's immune system. That problem
may be solved, however, through the new genetic engineering techniques.

The other hurdle is the possibility -- considered remote by most scientists
--
that some animal virus might be introduced into the patient and then be
spread
from that person to others.

The AIDS virus is believed to have jumped from a monkey to a human, setting
off a worldwide epidemic.

Fritz Bach, a leading xenotransplant researcher at Harvard Medical School,
recently called for a moratorium on cross-species transplants until the
safety
issues can be fully aired.

His concern, detailed in the journal Nature Medicine, was driven by new
laboratory findings that pig retroviruses can infect human cells.

The federal Food and Drug Administration took no action to bar
xenotransplants
following a hearing on the issue last month, but advocates fear that Congress
may impose a temporary ban.

"The threat of a moratorium is real," said Getty.

Getty said the new debate over xenotransplants was being "tainted" by what he
described as deep-seated psychological fears of putting animal organs into
people.

Since his baboon marrow transplant, Getty said he has faced a barrage of
jokes
about eating bananas and consorting with his friends at the zoo. Now, even
respected magazines such as the Economist of London are referring to
xenotransplants
as "barnyard science," he said.

The baboon marrow that Getty received failed to take hold after three weeks,
but
he and Ildstad assert that the experiment demonstrated the safety of the
procedure.

The baboon marrow was used because baboons can be infected with the monkey
form of HIV, but they don't get sick. It was hoped that the white blood
cells made by
he baboon marrow would put Getty's HIV infection into remission.

Since the experiment, he has been kept alive by new anti-HIV drugs. But he
said
those were beginning to fail.

While she's convinced that xenotransplants are safe, Ildstad is developing a
technique to allow people on the waiting list for solid organs to get organs
from
a mismatched human donor. The patient would get a bone marrow transplant
from the same person whoá donated the organ. If she can cross the barrier
between mismatched people, Ildstad believes the same technique can be used
to cross the species barrier.

Her technique processes the donor marrow in such a way that it engrafts
and does not begin attacking the recipient, a potentially lethal problem
known
as graft-versus-host disease.

Last week, Ildstad won FDA approval to transplant a heart, along with bone
marrow, from a donor to a mismatched recipient. She already has approval
to do the same procedure with kidney patients.

Ildstad said the transplants would be done soon at Allegheny's Hahnemann
Hospital.

Letters to the editor should be sent to:
[e-mail]

=========================================
Posted by:

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:35:51 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Biotech Firms Peddle Xeno
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Xenotransplantation; Cows, Pigs May Offer Transplant
Hope, Firms Argue

February 12, 1998

Cancer Weeklyá :

>From cow cells meant to block pain to fetal pig cells that may
rejuvenate damaged brains, scientists described their attempts
to transplant bits of living animals into people.

Earlier nine scientists wrote a letter urging a worldwide moratorium
on xenotransplants - animal-to-humanáá transplants - until the dangers
and ethics had been fully explored.

á "Despite the fact that lives of patients needing transplantation may
be lost with delay, we believe that the risks are sufficient to warrant
refraining from human xenotransplantation until public deliberations
on the ethical issues have occurred," they wrote in a letter to the
journals Nature and Nature Medicine.

á The main risk is that animal organs, especially pig organs, could
carry viruses that could mutate and cause epidemics across whole
populations, they said.

á But the need is urgent, with more than 55,000 Americans on the
waiting list for an organ transplant.

á "The demand for human cells, tissues and organs currently exceeds
the available supply," Dr. Amy Patterson of the FDA's Division of Cellular
and Gene Therapy, told a hearing sponsored by the U.S. National Institutes
of Health (NIH), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other
agencies trying to come up with a policy on xenotransplants.

á Several hospitals and private companies have turned to the possibility
of using animal organs for transplants.

á Experts told the meeting how they were getting around the most
immediate problem holding back xenotransplantation - rejection by
the recipient's immune system.

á Animals are genetically engineered so their organs appear human
to the immune system, their cells are encased in a plastic net that
keeps out attackers, or antibodies against the foreign tissue cells
are simply filtered out of the blood. "It's clear there are no major obstacles
which cannot be overcome, " Dr. David Sachs, Harvard Medical School
and Massachusetts General Hospital in Cambridge, said.

á Dr. Moses Goddard of Rhode Island-based CytoTherapeutics described
efforts with an implant that uses cells from a cow's adrenal glands to block
pain in terminal cancer patients. The cells secrete pain-blocking chemicals.

á The device, known as cellular replacement by immunoisolatory biocapsule
(CRIB), encases the cells in a porous membrane that lets in nutrients such
as oxygen, but filters out the antibodies that attack foreign tissue.

á Early safety tests show mixed results, with some patients saying their
once- unbearable pain had improved and others not getting any help at all.

á The company, which is working with Sweden's Astra, has done similar
experiments with genetically engineered hamster cells, injecting them
into the brains of Huntington'sá disease patients.

á Michael Egan of Diacrin Inc. and Dr. Stephen Fink of Genzyme Tissue
Repair told about their joint efforts to inject cells from the brains of
aborted
pig fetuses into the brains of Parkinson's and Huntington's disease patients.
But again, results were hit and miss.

á Xenotransplants are not new. In 1905 doctors transplanted rabbit kidney
cells into a 16-year-old boy with kidneyá failure. He lived almost two weeks,
Patterson said.

á In 1995 AIDS activist Jeff Getty of Oakland, California, was given baboon
blood marrow. The idea was that since baboons are closely related to
humans but don't get AIDS, the bone marrow might heal Getty's immune
system.

á Getty's body destroyed all the baboon cells, but Getty himself remains
healthy - perhaps due to new AIDS drugs.

á [Copyright 1998, CW Henderson]

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:35:22 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FDA Denies Xenotransplantation Moratorium
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Xenotransplantation Moratorium Denied
February 18, 1998

á Marketletter : The US Food and Drug Administration has rejected
calls for a moratorium on clinical trials of xenotransplantation "until
ethical issues associated with the transfer of organs from animals
to humans are resolved." Instead, the FDA has decided to proceed
cautiously with strictly controlled and supervised studies, reports the
journal Nature (January 29).

á Michael Friedman, acting FDA commissioner, said at a recent
meeting at the National Institutes of Health that the request for a
moratorium was " highly valuable," but added that "we believe that
it's important to set up a framework to responsibly conduct research.
And that's what we're endeavoring to do."

á In an article in Nature Medicine (February issue) Fritz Bach, a
researcher of xenotransplantation at Harvard Medical School and
a consultant to Novartis Pharma, joined six other public health
experts and bioethicists in urging a moratorium (Marketletters
February 2 and January 26).

á Following the meeting, Dr Bach said that he was "not sure that
[the FDA is] hearing the need for ethics to precede the technical
discussion. And they have not focused on [the public involvement]
that I and my coauthors feel should come first."

á However, David Onions, a professor of veterinary pathology and a
member of the FDA advisory subcommittee on xenotransplantion,
criticized Dr Bach's article saying that it "was written as if none of us
had ever thought ofáá those issues." Prof Onions was also author of
a paper which demonstrated that the pig genome comprised multiple
copies of endogenous retroviruses, which were able to infect human
cells in vitro.

á Prof Onions went on to say that over the past four years, the issues
surrounding xenotransplantation, including those of an ethical nature, have
been carefully debated. Revised guidelines to be issued later
this year, which bring all clinical trials under the watchful eye of the
FDA, have been tightened up to reflect such considerations, he added.

á <<Marketletter -- 02-23-98>>

á [Copyright 1998, The Marketletter Publications]
áá

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:41:37 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER: Cloning Cautions
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Scientists caution cloning humans
By Faye Flam
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

If, as many people predict, human cloning is looming in our future,
then who should and who shouldn't be allowed to be cloned?

University of Pennsylvania ethicist Glenn McGee is proposing a
system that would, in essence, bar anyone who wants to make
a copy of him or herself.

"It may sound kind of weird to say, the people we would turn
away are the people who want it most," said McGee, who works at
Penn's Center for Bioethics.

McGee drew up his proposal, called "the adoption model" for human
cloning, in collaboration with sheep cloning pioneer Ian Wilmut. Wilmut
is the father of an adopted child.

"If you set out to make a copy, you wouldn't treat that child as an
individual," Wilmut said. "For me personally . . . I still have not heard
a suggested use for copying a person that I find acceptable."

McGee and Wilmut presented their opinions on human cloning Friday
at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science in Philadelphia.

Wilmut said he did foresee some important uses for cloning techniques
in medicine -- uses that would be banned under some of the proposed
cloning laws drawn up in Congress.

Cloning technology could someday allow doctors to create bone marrow
or tissues that could help people with Parkinson's disease or muscular
dystrophy, he said.

Also, scientists have already employed tools of cloning to transfer the
nucleus of a fertilized egg -- produced from an egg and sperm -- into
the outer part of another egg. Such techniques allow some women with
defective eggs to bear children.

On Thursday, a Republican measure to ban human cloning collapsed
in the Senate amid fears that it would curtail important medical research.
Senate Democrats are offering a less restrictive alternative.

McGee said he unwittingly promoted the wrong idea of cloning last year
when he was quoted saying, "This is as close to a Xerox machine as we
are going to get in reproductive technology." Actually, he said, the news
accounts cut off the second half of his statement: "But it's not."

Cloning would not give people a copy, he said, it would give them a baby,
a distinct human being.

Clones would probably turn out less similar to their parent than identical
twins are to one another. Dolly, the sheep cloned by Wilmut, is 20 percent
bigger than her mother was at the same age, McGee said.

To create Dolly, Wilmut, of the Roslin Institute in Scotland, removed the
nucleus of a mammary cell from an adult sheep and transferred it to a
hollowed-out egg from another sheep. From that process, Dolly inherited
some genetic material that was present in the donor egg, meaning she
was not a 100 percent genetic copy of her mother, McGee said.

McGee and Wilmut stressed that the danger in cloning is not in its ability
to make copies of humans. The danger is that, in thinking they were getting
a copy, parents would be prone to treat a child as such.

Wilmut and McGee said people today focus on the rights of adults to
reproduce freely at the expense of the concerns of children.

McGee said would-be parents of clones should undergo interviews
similar to those required for people who want to adopt.

Under such a system, prospective parents would have to demonstrate
that they could provide for a child and that they wanted to be cloned for
legitimate reasons.

What would those legitimate reasons be?

McGee said some couples might find cloning the best option for avoiding
the transmission of some deadly genetic disease. Other couples might
suffer from a form of infertility that prohibits any other option for
having a
baby.

Wilmut disagrees on this point, arguing that most infertile couples could
find another option.

Art Caplan, another Penn ethicist who spoke at the science conference,
agreed with the underlying premise that restrictions should be aimed at
protecting the potential clone. "If I made a clone and took him down Broad
Street, who would be in danger?" he asks. "No one."

But the clone could personally face all sorts of dangers, Caplan noted,
beyond just the hazard of a narcissistic parent.

Although it is not guaranteed, a clone would probably inherit his father's
tendency to get fat, bald or to develop colon cancer or Alzheimer's disease,
and would therefore have an unusual window into his own future.

There's also the risk of what Caplan called, the "Woody Allen, Soon-Yi
syndrome." That is, if a woman cloned herself, the child may come to
resemble the mother in her younger days, and the father, with no genetic
link to the child, might be tempted to fall in love with her.

Wilmut and the ethicists speaking at the meeting agreed, however, that
the primary objection to human cloning today is safety. The technology is
far from being refined.

It took Wilmut 277 tries to get Dolly last year. And there have been no
other reports of animals born as a result of being cloned from an adult cell.

In any case, it is unlikely that people will be lining up to be cloned. Most
people look at themselves and want the genetic version of the American
dream, McGee said -- to pass on something better to their children.





Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:36:49 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Carter-Long)
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Pet Trade May Represent Emerging Disease Threat
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

B-Virus (Macaque Monkeys); Pet Trade May Represent
Emerging Disease Threat

February 18, 1998


á HerpesViruses Weekly : Macaques should be considered
unsuitable as pets because of the potential health hazard of
B-virus in bite wounds from these animals.

á In adult macaque monkeys, B-virus is highly prevalent (80
to 90 percent), and transmission of the virus may cause a
potentially fatal meningoencephalitis in humans, according
to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
researcher Stephanie R. Ostrowski and colleagues ("B- Virus
from Pet Macaque Monkeys: An Emerging Threat in the United
States?", Emerging Infectious Diseases [EID], January-March
1998;4(1)).

á The pet trade in various nonhuman primate species, and
especially the apparent increase in macaque species as part
of this trade, may constitute an emerging disease threat in the
United States, Ostrowski et al. indicated.

á In humans, B-virus disease typically is the result of bites or
scratches from macaques, and veterinary experts attest that all
these animals have a tendency to bite (Johnnson-Delaney,
Journal of Small Exotic Animal Medicine, 1991;1:32-37; and
others).

á Macaques are commonly used in biomedical research.
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 (Herpesvirus simiae or
B-virus) often infects Old World primates of the genus Macaca.

á Ostrowski et al. examined seven nonoccupational exposure
incidents that involved 24 people and eight macaques. They
found that four of the six animals tested for herpes B (67 percent)
were seropositive. Two of the pet owners refused requests for
testing.

á Children were more than three times as likely to be bitten than
were adults. Four (44 percent) of nine exposed children were bitten,
compared to only three (20 percent) of 12 adults. At least two of the
reported bites involved unprovoked attacks on neighboring children.

á "Much remains to be learned about the pathogenesis of B-virus
infections in humans," Ostrowski et al. wrote.

á In the reported, limited case series, one family (two adults and
two of three children) who were exposed to a B-virus positive
macaque had flulike symptoms. One of the adults had additiona
symptoms related to the site of injury that suggested B-virus
infection.

á In the other six cases, no suspect clinical symptoms were
observed, and disease-specific antiviral exposure prophylaxis
was not given.

á As of November 1997, no confirmed transmission of B-virus
in these selected cases has been documented.

á "B-virus is still rare, and diagnostic evaluation of clinical cases
of aseptic meningitis does not routinely include B-virus testing,"
wrote Ostrowski et al.

á Like Herpesvirus simplex virus infection in humans, B-virus
infection in monkeys is characterized by lifelong infection with
recurring reactivation and shedding of the virus in saliva or
genital secretions. Antibody titer to B-virus indicates infection,
but can neither confirm nor eliminate actual viral shedding at
the time of the bite, the authors noted.

á "Symptomatic infection with B-virus is rare; fewer than 40
cases were reported from 1933 to 1994 (Palmer, 1987; CDC,
unpub. data; and others). However, the consequences of
symptomatic infection may be severe. Viral infection rapidly
progresses to central loci in the spinal cord and, eventually,
the brain. Of 24 known symptomatic patients whose cases
were reviewed in 1992, 19 (79 percent) died (CDC; unpub.
data)," Ostrowski et al. wrote.

á Prior to 1987, most human patients who survived B-virus
infection had moderate to severe neurologic impairment. More
recently, the availability of acyclovir has prevented disease
progression in a limited number of patients, and in at least three,
treatment was life saving and reversed the neurologic symptoms
(Holmes etá al., Ann Intern Med, 1990;112:833-839; and others).

á "The high percentage of death in known cases of human B-virus
disease underscores the potential seriousness of all bite or scratch
exposures from macaques."

á Rapid diagnosis and initiation of therapy are of supreme
importance for preventing death or permanent disability in
surviving patients, the authors indicated.

á While incubation periods can be as short as two days, they
typically are from two to five weeks (Palmer, J Med Primatol,
1987;16:99-130; and others).

á "Owners of pet macaques are often reluctant to report bite
injuries from their pets, even to their medical care providers,
and may fail to appreciate that the premonitory headache and
flulike symptoms (which may lead them to seek medical attention)
could be associated with healed, often minor, bite wounds dating
back more than a month [Paulette, The Simian, 1996;Feb;6-8],"
wrote Ostrowski et al.

á Additionally, individuals bitten by pet and feral macaques are
more likely than those bitten in the workplace to need public
resources, delay seeking medical care, and have an initial
medical evaluation by care givers who are not especially familiar
with the potentially serious consequences of exposure to B-virus
(Paulette, 1996), the authors indicated. Occupational exposure,
on the other hand, typically takes place within highly structured
workplace settings and where health professionals are ready
to give rapid, appropriate, specific care at no public cost.

á Since October 10, 1975, U.S. Public Health regulation 42 CFR
71.53(c) has prohibited the importation of nonhuman primates
into the United States as pets. During 1987 and 1988, occupational
safety guidelines were issued (CDC, MMWR, 1989;38:453-454;
and others). And in 1990, the American Veterinary Medical Association
issued a policy statement that opposed keeping of wild animals asá
pets and advised veterinarians to discourage the practice.

á "Despite these continuing public health educational efforts,
nonhuman primates (including macaques) continue to be
marketed and kept as pets in many states."

á In Texas and Florida, macaque species have set up free-ranging
feral populations. It is not possible to safely control contact between
humans and the monkeys in these settings (CDC, MMWR, 1987;36:
681-682, 687-689;á and others), the authors noted.

- by Cathy Clark

[Copyright 1998, CW Henderson]

=================================
Posted by:

Lawrence Carter-Long
Science and Research Issues, Animal Protection Institute
email: [e-mail], phone: [phone] x. 215
world wide web: <http://www.api4animals.org/>http://www.api4animals.org/

"There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause
comedy in the streets?" - Dick Cavett

-----Long, but Important Warning Notice -----

My email address is: [e-mail]
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone sending unsolicited commercial
email to this address will be charged a $500 proofreading
fee. This is an official notification; failure to abide by this
will result iná legal action, as per the following:

By U.S. Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine.
By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section
is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or
$500, whichever is greater, by each violation.



Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:30:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Park Service Sued over Snowmobile Trail Closure Decision
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, February 18, 1998

CONTACT: D.J. Schubert or Howard Crystal, 202-588-5206
ááááááááá Andrea Lococo, 307-859-8840


PARK SERVICE SUED OVER
SNOWMOBILE TRAIL CLOSURE DECISION


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, The Fund for Animals, Biodiversity Legal
Foundation, Ecology Center, and several individuals filed suit against the
federal government for deciding not to close any snowmobile trails to
grooming prior to the completion of an Environmental Impact Statement on
winter use activities in two national parks. The lawsuit, filed in federal
district court in Washington, D.C., alleges that the government's decision
violates several federal laws, including the National Environmental Policy
Act and Endangered Species Act, as well as provisions of a settlement
agreement from earlier litigation over winter use in Yellowstone and Grand
Teton National Parks.

The settlement agreement required the National Park Service to propose
closing one or more trails to winter use in order to gather data for
analysis in the EIS. The proposal, issued in an Environmental Assessment
published in November, called for closing the Fishing Bridge to Canyon trail
segment this winter. Although this particular closure was specifically
chosen by the Park Service, in issuing its decision the Park Service
completely rejected both this and other alternatives designed to collect
data on bison use of areas without groomed trails, preferring instead to
permit all trails to continue to be groomed indefinitely. The plaintiffs
claim that this decision to continue trail grooming is inconsistent with the
settlement agreement, and is not scientifically defensible.

"This decision demonstrates that the Park Service is more interested in
placating politicians and local business interests than in protecting
Yellowstone's ecology and magnificent wildlife," states D.J. Schubert, a
wildlife biologist with Meyer & Glitzenstein, who is representing the
plaintiffs in this litigation. "The Park Service has wasted an opportunity
to gather valuable scientific data to improve park management decisions in
favor of continued snowmobile use and abuse of Yellowstone."

The plaintiffs contend that winter activities in the parks, particularly
trail grooming to facilitate snowmobile use, has resulted in significant
impacts on park wildlife, especially Yellowstone's bison, and park ecology.
Despite these impacts, the Park Service has permitted trail grooming and
snowmobiles for nearly thirty years without ever adequately evaluating the
environmental impacts.

The lawsuit, filed as a related case to the previous litigation, will be
heard by Judge Edward G. Sullivan. The complaint requests Judge Sullivan to
declare the agency decision to be in violation of federal law, and to
require a new decision regarding trail closures before the 1998-99 winter
season.

For a copy of the 14-page complaint, please contact D.J. Schubert at
202-588-5206.


# # #


<http://www.fund.org/>http://www.fund.org

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 12:20:44 -0800 (PST)
From: "Christine M. Wolf" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Wildlife in Democratic Republic of Congo
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


>á á
>áá GENEVA, Feb 17 (AFP) - Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)á
>President Laurent Kabila has vowed to protect wildlife, threatened
>by a lack of resources and widespread poaching, the World Wide Fund
>for Nature said Tuesday.
>áá Kabila held talks Monday with a WWF delegation following a visitá
>to the capital Kinshasa last week by the body's director general
>Claude Martin.
>áá "(Kabila) committed himself personally to alleviating theá
>structural and circumstantial problems that are ravaging the
>country's protected areas and bringing extremely endangered species
>like the northern white rhino ever closer to extinction," the WWF
>said in a statement.
>áá Most of the country's national parks are currently in a state ofá
>crisis following the seven-month war which brought Kabila to power
>last May in what used to be called Zaire.
>áá Garamba National Park, in the northeast of the DRC, is iná
>"extreme difficulty" because of increased poaching and a general
>lack of resources to ensure adequate patrolling.
>áá The park is the world's last wild refuge for the northern whiteá
>rhino, where about 20 live, WWF spokesman Javier Arreaza said.
>áá Around one third of the world's 600 to 650 mountain gorillas areá
>found in another park, Virunga in the east, while others live in
>Rwanda and Uganda.
>áá In terms of animal and plant species, the DRC is probably theá
>richest country in Africa, according to the WWF.
>áá After Brazil, the DRC is the country with the largest surface ofá
>tropical forests worldwide.
>
>




******************************************************************
Christine Wolf, Director of Government Affairs
The Fund for Animals phone: [phone]
World Building fax:áá 301-585-2595
8121 Georgia Ave., Suite 301 e-mail: [e-mail]
Silver Spring, MD 20910 web page: <http://www.fund.org/>www.fund.org

"The fate of animals is of greater importance to me than the fear of
appearing ridiculous; it is indissolubly connected with the fate of men."
ááá - Emile Zola

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 17:03:26 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Erik Marcus Speaks in Albuquerque
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Learn how simple changes in your diet can reduce your risk of heart disease,
cancer, diabetes and other degenerative diseases.á Learn how these same
changes will protect the environment and animals.á Animal Protection of New
Mexico, Inc. (APNM) is pleased to present Erik Marcus, author of the recently
published book:á "Vegan:á The New Ethics of Eating."á

Mr. Marcus will be speaking at the Wild Oats Education and Wellness Center (4
doors down from the San Mateo Wild Oats) on Friday, February 20th at 6:30 pm.
For more information, please contact Tisha at [phone].
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 17:15:36 -0500
From: Liz Grayson <[e-mail]>
To: ar-news <[e-mail]>
Subject: Universities reap windfall from research
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Universities reap windfall from
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá research

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá February 18, 1998
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Web posted at: 2:31 p.m. EST
(1931 GMT)

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá BOSTON (AP) -- North American
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá universities are cashing in on
faculty
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá inventions -- like titanium
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá orthodonture wire and grass
that
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá needs less mowing -- to the
tune of
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá more than half a billion
dollars a year,
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá according to a new report.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Schools in the United States
and
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Canada made $592 million from
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá royalties and licenses in
1996, the
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá report being released
Wednesday by
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá the Association of University
Technology Managers áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá said.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá That figure is up from $495
million the year beforeá and represents a 167
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá percent increase from five
years ago, the study says.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Thanks to products that range
from cutting-edge bio-pharmaceuticals to a
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá soap that protects against
infection from tick bites, academic institutions
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá have been awarded a record
2,741 licenses to develop products based
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá on their research.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá The study cites profitable
products such as high-yield hybrid cotton
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá patented by the University of
Arizona, orthodonture wire made from
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá titanium invented at the
University of Connecticut and grass grown at the
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of Nebraska that
needs less mowing, watering and fertilizer.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Developing and marketing these
products pumped an estimated $25
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá billion into the American and
Canadian economies and supported as
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá many as 212,500 jobs in 1996,
the last year figures are available.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá The growth comes even as
research spending by government and private
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá industry has slowed and
colleges and universities are seeking new ways
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá to raise money.

áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Income from revenues and fees
at universities and colleges in
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá 1996, according to the
Association of University Technology
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Managers:

áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of
California system: $63.2 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Stanford
University: $43.8 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Columbia
University: $40.6 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Michigan State
University: $17.2 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of
Wisconsin-Madison: $13.1 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of
Chicago: $12.5 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of
Florida: $11 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Massachusetts
Institute of Technology: $10.1 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Washington
University: $9.4 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University of
Washington: $8.7 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Harvard University:
$7.6 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Carnegie Mellon
University: $7.1 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Florida State
University: $6.5 million
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Tulane University:
$5.3 million



ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá "Look at it as a hard-earned
windfall," said Marvin Guthrie, the
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá association's president and
vice president of patents and licensing at
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Massachusetts General
Hospital. "There is a return all the way down:
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá people hold their jobs, the
investors make money, some of the money
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá goes back to the university in
the form of royalties and everybody
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá benefits."

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá The University of California
system alone made $63.2 million from
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá licenses and patents, Stanford
University $43.8 million, Columbia
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University $40.6 million and
Harvard University $7.6 million.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Critics worry that closer ties
between academia and the private sector may
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá transform universities into
industrial laboratories, focused only on
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá potentially moneymaking
research. Critics also fear that some schools
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá may soon put pressure on their
research faculties to only focus on those
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá areas most likely to turn a
profit.

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá "There's nothing wrong with
capitalizing on the results of research, but we
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá have to be careful that the
university doesn't turn into the development
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá arm (for industry.)" said
Jules LaPidus, president of the Council of
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Graduate Schools. "These
figures are one indication that there's been
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá movement in that direction."

ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá University authorities say
that license fees and royalties from patents
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá represent a fraction of the
$21.4 billion a year in research conducted by
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá the 173 universities and
colleges surveyed.
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:38:03 +0800
From: bunny <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (Australia)Victoria-duck hunting season
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The Weekly Times, Victoria (28/1//98)


Duck shooting season in Victoria will be four weeks shorter this year and
will run from March 21 to May 17. Shooters will be limited to a daily bag
limit of five birds, including a maximum of three teal and one blue-winged
shoveler. An additional five wood ducks will be allowed on opening day.

End

=====================================================================
========
áááááááááááááááááá /`\áá /`\ááá Rabbit Information Service,
Tom, Tom,áááááááá (/\ \-/ /\)áá P.O.Box 30,
The piper's son,áááá )6 6(ááááá Riverton,
Saved a pigááááááá >{= Y =}<ááá Western Australia 6148
And away he run;ááá /'-^-'\á
So none could eatá (_)áá (_)ááá email: [e-mail]
The pig so sweetááá |á .á |á
Together they ranáá |áááá |}ááá
<http://www.wantree.com.au/~rabbit/rabbit.htm>http://www.wantree.com.au/~rab
bit/rabbit.htm
Down the street.ááá \_/^\_/ááá (Rabbit Information Service website updated
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá frequently)ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá

Jesus was most likely a vegetarian... why aren't you? Go to
<http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/4620/essene.htm>http://www.geocities.c
om/RainForest/4620/essene.htm
for more information.

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
áááááá - Voltaire

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:02:38 +0800
From: bunny <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (Australia)Pest parrots poisoned-farmers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Cockies sights on pest parrots
by Karen Gunther
Weekly TImes 11th February 1998

Hundreds of Victoria's farmers have threatened to sue the state government
for income losses of up to $5 million in the wake of devastating damage done
by parrots.

The farmers, primarily grain growers, in the state's mid-west, have made an
urgent plea for laws to be changed to allow controlled poisoning of corellas
in time for autumn plantings.

Under the Wildlife Act, corellas come under the auspicesá of the State
Government and farmers believe there are legal grounds for launching a class
action against the government as custodians of the corellas.

"We're hoping to launch a class action on the basis of identifiable damage and
loss of income...and the government is responsible for controlling the birds,"
Dadswells Bridge cropper Brian Pfitzner said.

A report to Conservation and Land Management Minister Marie Tehan estimates
corellas and sulphur-crested cockatoos have caused between $3 million and $5
million damage to more than 500 Victorian farms in the past year.

The report was compiled by farmers, the Victorian Farmers Federation and
Landcare Groups after a meeting with Mrs Tehan in September last year at
which the Minister called for documented evidence of corella damage.

"It's devastating and its breaking some farmers. We will not stop on this
matter until we get a resolution. It will be open slather if the government
doesn't take action soon," said Stawell farmer Laurie Cossar.

Mr Cossar said he knew of farmers risking hefty fines by setting illegal
baits for the birds.

He said four farmers were fined last year for poisoning.

"Three of them were around the $1200 mark, but one was fined $9500. The
reason those farmers turned to poisoning was that their livelihood was at
risk,"

Mr Cossar warned that unless the government was prepared to change the
legislation which made it illegal to poison wild birds, farmers would be
forced to continue uncontrolled poisoning, as it was the only effective way
to deal with the problem.

"They can't fine all of us" he said.

DNRE program leader, plant industries at Horsham, Ken Dowsley, said it was
obvious corella and cockatoo populations had swollen to "plague proportions"
and were causing major damage on emerging crops in autumn during sowingá and
immediately after.

However, he said it was difficult to quantify the damage.

"It's an extremely random exercise," Mr Dowsley said.

Brian Pfitzner disagrees, saying there is an identifiable loss of income in
many cases.

Mr Pfitzner said he had suffered a $20,000 loss this season after having to
re-sow a corella devastated wheat crop.

A safflower crop was also decimated.

"Many farmers are suffering damage in the vicinity of $90,000 each year," he
said.

A spokeswoman for Mrs Tehan said the minister understood corellas posed a
problem.

She said the minister's office was working on a report which she expected
would contain recommendations on how to deal with the problem.

The report was due for release "sometime this month."

End

=====================================================================
========
áááááááááááááááááá /`\áá /`\ááá Rabbit Information Service,
Tom, Tom,áááááááá (/\ \-/ /\)áá P.O.Box 30,
The piper's son,áááá )6 6(ááááá Riverton,
Saved a pigááááááá >{= Y =}<ááá Western Australia 6148
And away he run;ááá /'-^-'\á
So none could eatá (_)áá (_)ááá email: [e-mail]
The pig so sweetááá |á .á |á
Together they ranáá |áááá |}ááá
<http://www.wantree.com.au/~rabbit/rabbit.htm>http://www.wantree.com.au/~rab
bit/rabbit.htm
Down the street.ááá \_/^\_/ááá (Rabbit Information Service website updated
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá frequently)ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá

Jesus was most likely a vegetarian... why aren't you? Go to
<http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/4620/essene.htm>http://www.geocities.c
om/RainForest/4620/essene.htm
for more information.

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
áááááá - Voltaire

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 22:28:58 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Oprah's Lawyers Open Defense Case
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Oprah's Lawyers Open Defense Case

.c The Associated Press

By MARK BABINECK

AMARILLO, Texas (AP) - Oprah Winfrey's lawyers opened their case against a
beef defamation lawsuit today with a display of bloody pictures of sheep
heads, cow heads, and euthanized pets headed for processing into animal food.

Today's graphic display came after the federal judge in the trial tossed out
part of the case filed under Texas' food defamation law. However, U.S.
District Judge Mary Lou Robinson rejected a defense request to throw the case
out entirely.

Jurors returned today to hear the lawsuit as a common-law business
disparagement case, which has a heavier burden of proof on the plaintiffs.

Cattlemen blame Ms. Winfrey's April 16, 1996, talk show about dangerous foods
- it included a segment on mad cow disease - for causing cattle prices to
plummet. They say the program cost them $12 million.

Their lawsuit complains that Ms. Winfrey and activist Howard Lyman gave the
impression on the show that U.S. cattle were at risk for mad cow disease,
found in English livestock and suspected in 23 deaths in Britain. Mad cow
disease and its human counterpart never have been detected in the United
States.

The photos were introduced today during testimony by Van Smith, a reporter for
City Paper, an alternative newspaper in Baltimore, who described studying the
rendering process for a 1995 article.

Scientists say mad cow disease is transmitted when infected animals are turned
into feed for other livestock.

The case is the first court test of any of the ``veggie libel'' state laws and
some experts had predicted it could become the Supreme Court test.

Robinson's ruling eliminated that possibility. She did not declare the Texas
law unconstitutional; she instead ruled the cattlemen had failed to make a
case under the law during the four weeks of the trial.

States passed ``veggie libel'' laws after Washington state apple growers
unsuccessfully sued CBS over a 1989 ``60 Minutes'' segment about the potential
dangers of a fruit coating called Alar.

Without a specific food disparagement law at the time, apple producers sued
under disparagement laws. The cattlemen find themselves in the same situation.

``It appeared to me (cattlemen) were stressing the `veggie libel' claims,''
said Bruce Johnson, the attorney who defended CBS. ``They were putting all
their eggs in the `veggie libel' basket, and the judge's decision apparently
cuts the heart out of their case.''

Cattlemen now must show Ms. Winfrey, her production company and Lyman meant to
damage the beef industry. Under the ``veggie libel'' law, they only had to
prove that knowingly false statements were made.

Attorneys refused to discuss the ruling, citing a gag order.

Defense attorneys have argued that livestock aren't perishable food, and that
the cattlemen's theory would allow any person who owned a cow to have cause
for legal action.

AP-NY-02-18-98 1309EST
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:31:36 +0800
From: bunny <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (Aust)New automated technology to kill animals
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

New abattoir attracts Japan

Weekly Times Victoria, Australia - 18th February 1998
By Megan Ball

A $1 million deal to commercialise Australian-developed abattoir automation
technology in Japanese meatworks could have pay-offs for local producers.

The deal between Food Science Australia - a joint venture between CSIRO and
Adisc - and the Japanese engineering company Advance Food Technology was
signed last week.

It includes technology to automatically restrain, stun and process meat and
carcasses to maximise hygiene and improve efficiency.

Food Science Australia's project manager John Buhot, said it would help
improve beef market opportunities for Australia in Japan and help develop
automation
in the Australian industry.

"By improving health and safety of meat production there, we are helping
reduce the risk of e-coli like scares and subsequent collapse in beef
consumption," he said.

"The Japanese are looking to make their abattoirs more efficient and at the
same time make meat cleaner and safer for consumers."

Mr Buhot said the commercialisation of technology would capitalise on years
of research funded by the Meat Research Corporation and CSIRO into abattoir
automation.
Australian levy payers who had contributed to the "book of knowledge"
on abattoir automation would benefit from the deal, he said.

"The returns from Australian research into automation in the processing
sector might not be where it was originally envisaged though"

Once commercialised, the technology would also be available to Australian
meatworks.

Meat processors spoken to by the Weekly Times said some of the technology
would be of benefit, but most was probably not applicable because processing
in the two countries was so different.

Ralph's Meat Company director, Jonathan Ralph said technology such as a
mechanical head meat remover would be useful in the domestic industry.

Royalties for the patents would go back into Australian research, Mr Buhot
said.

Since the failed $40 million Fututec venture, Australian research and
development into processing sector automation has been confined to the MRC
"gadgets" project. The project has sought to develop mechanical and
computerised technology for use in some sections of the meatworks chain
only, rather than a fully automated line.

End

=====================================================================
========
áááááááááááááááááá /`\áá /`\ááá Rabbit Information Service,
Tom, Tom,áááááááá (/\ \-/ /\)áá P.O.Box 30,
The piper's son,áááá )6 6(ááááá Riverton,
Saved a pigááááááá >{= Y =}<ááá Western Australia 6148
And away he run;ááá /'-^-'\á
So none could eatá (_)áá (_)ááá email: [e-mail]
The pig so sweetááá |á .á |á
Together they ranáá |áááá |}ááá
<http://www.wantree.com.au/~rabbit/rabbit.htm>http://www.wantree.com.au/~rab
bit/rabbit.htm
Down the street.ááá \_/^\_/ááá (Rabbit Information Service website updated
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá frequently)ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá

Jesus was most likely a vegetarian... why aren't you? Go to
<http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/4620/essene.htm>http://www.geocities.c
om/RainForest/4620/essene.htm
for more information.

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
áááááá - Voltaire

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 20:17:15 -0800
From: N Frumin <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], Dwight Greenberg <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá [e-mail] (Gary Clifton), [e-mail],
ááááááá Jami Kennedy <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
ááááááá Jerry McCawley <[e-mail]>, Jean Thorp <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Larry Ring <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Suzanne Myers <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Miki Sparzak <[e-mail]>, Monica Sudds <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Richard Hazell <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Rick Jordan <[e-mail]>, Bob Sunday <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá Bill & Wanda Elder <[e-mail]>,
ááááááá [e-mail]
Subject: (Australia)Pest parrots poisoned-farmers
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Cockies sights on pest parrots
by Karen Gunther
Weekly TImes 11th February 1998

Hundreds of Victoria's farmers have threatened to sue the state government
for income losses of up to $5 million in the wake of devastating damage done
by parrots.

The farmers, primarily grain growers, in the state's mid-west, have made an
urgent plea for laws to be changed to allow controlled poisoning of corellas
in time for autumn plantings.

Under the Wildlife Act, corellas come under the auspicesá of the State
Government and farmers believe there are legal grounds for launching a class
action against the government as custodians of the corellas.

"We're hoping to launch a class action on the basis of identifiable damage and
loss of income...and the government is responsible for controlling the birds,"
Dadswells Bridge cropper Brian Pfitzner said.

A report to Conservation and Land Management Minister Marie Tehan estimates
corellas and sulphur-crested cockatoos have caused between $3 million and $5
million damage to more than 500 Victorian farms in the past year.

The report was compiled by farmers, the Victorian Farmers Federation and
Landcare Groups after a meeting with Mrs Tehan in September last year at
which the Minister called for documented evidence of corella damage.

"It's devastating and its breaking some farmers. We will not stop on this
matter until we get a resolution. It will be open slather if the government
doesn't take action soon," said Stawell farmer Laurie Cossar.

Mr Cossar said he knew of farmers risking hefty fines by setting illegal
baits for the birds.

He said four farmers were fined last year for poisoning.

"Three of them were around the $1200 mark, but one was fined $9500. The
reason those farmers turned to poisoning was that their livelihood was at
risk,"

Mr Cossar warned that unless the government was prepared to change the
legislation which made it illegal to poison wild birds, farmers would be
forced to continue uncontrolled poisoning, as it was the only effective way
to deal with the problem.

"They can't fine all of us" he said.

DNRE program leader, plant industries at Horsham, Ken Dowsley, said it was
obvious corella and cockatoo populations had swollen to "plague proportions"
and were causing major damage on emerging crops in autumn during sowingá and
immediately after.

However, he said it was difficult to quantify the damage.

"It's an extremely random exercise," Mr Dowsley said.

Brian Pfitzner disagrees, saying there is an identifiable loss of income in
many cases.

Mr Pfitzner said he had suffered a $20,000 loss this season after having to
re-sow a corella devastated wheat crop.

A safflower crop was also decimated.

"Many farmers are suffering damage in the vicinity of $90,000 each year," he
said.

A spokeswoman for Mrs Tehan said the minister understood corellas posed a
problem.

She said the minister's office was working on a report which she expected
would contain recommendations on how to deal with the problem.

The report was due for release "sometime this month."

End

=====================================================================
========
áááááááááááááááááá /`\áá /`\ááá Rabbit Information Service,
Tom, Tom,áááááááá (/\ \-/ /\)áá P.O.Box 30,
The piper's son,áááá )6 6(ááááá Riverton,
Saved a pigááááááá >{= Y =}<ááá Western Australia 6148
And away he run;ááá /'-^-'\á
So none could eatá (_)áá (_)ááá email: [e-mail]
The pig so sweetááá |á .á |á
Together they ranáá |áááá |}ááá
<http://www.wantree.com.au/~rabbit/rabbit.htm>http://www.wantree.com.au/~rab
bit/rabbit.htm
Down the street.ááá \_/^\_/ááá (Rabbit Information Service website updated
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá frequently)ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá

Jesus was most likely a vegetarian... why aren't you? Go to
<http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/4620/essene.htm>http://www.geocities.c
om/RainForest/4620/essene.htm
for more information.

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
áááááá - Voltaire


----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Natalie Fruminááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá "There's no substitute |
| [e-mail]ááááááááááááááááááááááááááá for intellectual honesty" |
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 23:41:18 -0500
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Graphic pictures greet Winfrey jury
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Amarillo Globe-News
<http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/>http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Web posted Wednesday, February 18, 1998 2:02 p.m. CT

Graphic pictures greet Winfrey jury

By KAY LEDBETTER
Globe-News Farm and Ranch Editor

Pictures of sheep heads, euthanized pets and roadkill greeted jurors this
morning as they returned to the continuation of the cattlemen vs. Oprah
Winfrey lawsuit.

The lawsuit continues today in U.S. District Mary Lou Robinson's court, but
in a much diminished state.

Robinson, after hearing a day of arguments, granted the defendants' motions
to dismiss the case in part. The jury will not consider defamation and
false disparagement of food issues, Robinson ruled, but the trial will move
forward on the common-law business disparagement cause of action.

Defense lawyer Charles Babcock called Van Smith, a City Paper reporter from
Baltimore who had written an article on rendering plants in September 1995.

Smith and Babcock went through more than 50 pictures taken as the reporter
toured the Valley Proteins plant in Baltimore and followed a rendering
truck to the local animal shelter, a sausage plant and a slaughterhouse.

The pictures showed offal being emptied from the slaughterhouses. They
showed animal shelter workers in the euthanasia room; barrels of dead
animals in a refrigerated room at the animal shelter; waste meat from the
sausage plant; and dead sheep from the slaughterhouse.

Babcock used the pictures to back up a statement made by defendant Howard
Lyman on "The Oprah Winfrey Show."

Lyman's statement was, "well, what it comes down to is about half the
slaughter of ... animals is not salable to humans.

"They either have to pay to have to put it into the dump, or they sell it
for feed; they grind it up, turn it into what looks like brown sugar, add
it to all of the animals that died unexpectedly, all of the roadkills, and
the euthanized animals - add it to them, grind it up and feed it back to
other animals."

Babcock also said sheep were a part of this process, contrary to what he
said plaintiff Paul Engler earlier testified, that a voluntary ban on sheep
in the rendering plant was being followed.

Joseph Coyne, plaintiff's attorney, asked Smith what type of newspaper he
wrote for. City Paper is a free alternative weekly paper with a circulation
of 91,000 that Coyne said published "the bizarre and offbeat."

"Really gross, wasn't it," coyne asked Smith, referring to the pictures.
Smith agreed and also said Coyne was right when he said something had to be
done with the pets and animals that people do not take care of.

"There are a lot of elements in society that have to take responsibility
for this problem," Smith. "The rendering industry is quietly trying to take
care of it."

Without saying why, Robinson has taken the lawsuit out from under the Texas
False Disparagement of Perishable Foods law, or "veggie libel law."

The plaintiffs, in their response to the defendants' motions for dismissal,
said the general elements of a claim for business disparagement are
publication by the defendant of disparaging words, falsity, malice and
special damages.

The case focuses on comments made during a segment of Winfrey's April 16,
1996, television show on "Dangerous Foods."

Babcock argued Tuesday that there is no "clear and convincing evidence of
actual malice," that is, evidence that Winfrey and Harpo Productions knew,
at the time of publication, the statements were false.

Babcock said plaintiffs and their witnesses actually testified that Winfrey
seemed sincere and wanted to be fair to the industry.

Coyne said the program directly caused the price of cattle to drop and that
the plaintiffs suffered losses on the sale of their live cattle and the
sale of their cattle on the futures market.

He said the sale of cattle is different from that of a product such as a
car, where each maker or producer can identify specific products. With the
beef industry, the consumer cannot distinguish between the different
producers' products, which means the show was "of and concerning" these
plaintiffs.

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 23:44:26 -0500
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) False statements made on Winfrey show
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Amarillo Globe-News
<http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/>http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Web posted Wednesday, February 18, 1998 7:34 p.m. CT

False statements made on Winfrey show

By CHIP CHANDLER
Globe-News Staff Writer

The defense opened its case in the area cattlemen vs. Oprah Winfrey trial
with two witnesses disputing that false statements were made on the show.

Diane Hudson, executive producer of "The Oprah Winfrey Show," testified on
Wednesday that Harpo Productions Inc. did not broadcast anything on an
April 16, 1996, show with actual malice.

"Did you broadcast anything with reckless disregard, entertaining any
serious doubts about the truth?" defense attorney Charles Babcock asked.

"I did not doubt the truth about what we broadcast, no," she answered.

Babcock's questions went straight to the heart of the plaintiffs' recently
reduced case of business disparagement. On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge
Mary Lou Robinson took away two of the plaintiffs' claims against the
defendants: Texas' food disparagement law and simple defamation.

Hudson also testified that Harpo had no ill will toward the plaintiffs and
did not intend to interfere with their economic interests, two other
requirements to prove business disparagement.

"No. I did not know who these plaintiffs were, so I definitely had no ill
will," she said.

Winfrey, Harpo and Howard Lyman are being sued by a number of Amarillo-area
cattle feeders who say that several comments in the show's segment on mad
cow disease disparaged their industry. The plaintiffs were not named
specifically on the show.

Van Smith, a reporter with City Paper in Baltimore, testified about an
article he wrote on rendering plants. Smith said he saw sheep taken to a
plant despite a voluntary ban on using processed sheep in protein-enhanced
feed, backing up a statement Lyman made on Winfrey's show.

Under cross examination, Smith said he was not sure whether the sheep were
used for feed or other animal-derived products.

Later Tuesday, Hudson testified that the show prompted a number of
responses from the viewers, but that many focused on a segment on E. coli
rather than the mad cow segment.

A number of criticisms on the mad cow segment did come from ranchers, she
said. "It seemed to be a concerted effort," she said.

That helped lead to a follow-up show a week later, she said. Letters
prompted Harpo officials to look at the first show again and invite Dr.
Gary Weber, a National Cattlemen's Beef Association spokesman, back on to
make some further points.

Most of Hudson's testimony on the way the show was produced mirrored
Winfrey's testimony earlier this month.

Hudson tried to clarify a comment Winfrey made that implied that the show's
production system failed for the April 16 show.

Earlier this month, Winfrey testified, "This was the first time it didn't
work for us."

On Tuesday, Hudson said "I wouldn't say the system failed. . . . It is the
first time we've ever had anything like this result," she said, referring
to the lawsuit.

She also said she felt Lyman was expressing his opinion in several places
in the show.

Hudson denied that she told the producer who edited the April 16 show that
he should quit. A former Harpo employee, LaGrande Green, had testified
earlier that James Kelley said Hudson wanted Kelley to quit.

"I fired Mr. Green, so I think that has a lot to do with his testimony,"
she said.

Under cross examination, plaintiffs' attorney Joseph Coyne asked whether
any "lies or mistruths" on the show were the fault of former U.S.
Department of Agriculture employee Dr. Will Hueston, a guest on the show.

"There aren't any lies or mistruths in the show," Hudson replied.



</pre>



     <!-- END OF PAGE CONTENT -->







     <!-- END OF PAGE CONTENT -->



     </TD>


     <TD width=50 align=center>

     </TD>
</TR>



     <!-- THE BOTTOM TOOLBAR -->



<TR>

     <TD colspan=3 align=center fontsize=2>
     <a href="../SUB~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/sub.html">ARRS Tools</a>  |
<a href="../NEWSPA~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/newspage.html">News</a>  |
<a href="../ORGS~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Orgs.html">Orgs</a>  |
<a href="../SEARCH~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/search.html">Search</a>  |
<a href="../SUPPOR~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Support.html">Support</a>  |
<a href="../ABOUT/INDEX.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/about">About the ARRS</a>  |
<a href="mailto:[e-mail]">Contact ARRS</a>
     </TD>
</TR>




     <!-- END OF MAIN -->



</TABLE></center>









     <!-- THE UNDERWRITERS -->



<table border=0 width=100%>
     <tr><td>

 <center><hr width=285>
<Font Size=1>THIS SITE UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY:</FONT>
<BR>



<a
href="../../../tppmsgs/msgs21.htm#2179" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/cgi-bin/relocate.cgi?http%3a//www.outpost.com/promos/valentines/%2aCyberian+Outpost" target=_top><img
src="../../SUPPORT/BANNERS/OTHERS/CYBERIAN/2VALENT.GIF" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/support/banners/others/cyberian/2valent.gif" border=1
alt="Cyberian Outpost"></a>


<hr width=285>

     <br><font size=2>
     <b>The views and opinions expressed within this page are not
necessarily those of the <br>EnviroLink Network nor the Underwriters.  The views
are those of the authors of the work.</b></font>
     </center>
     </td></tr>

</table>



</BODY>



</HTML>









</BODY>







</HTML>