i'm no guinea pig
here's an interesting article in Slate on the questionable quality of animal models in scientific research, and the dearth of research in earnest on the issue. it's an interesting question since the question is usually framed as human safety/animal discomfort vs. animal safety/human discomfort. but what if the science is more of a crapshoot than we initially thought, would it muddy the debate to have clearer info on how much testing on us beasties is really helping you out? i found this especially disturbing:
Dogs, it turns out—usually beagles, in particular—are man's best test animal, in that the same compounds frequently sicken dogs and their masters (though dogs tend to vomit more than we do).
here's what i find troubling: 1) incorrect use of 'masters' (we all know who's large and in charge) 2) paws of my bagels you damn dirty apes and 3) so i barf a lot when i eat too fast--you're not perfect either.
and do they actually use guinea pigs as, well, guinea pigs in research?