Category: Uncategorized

Idiot Hometown Newspaper Story on Christian(!) Origins of Easter Eggs

The hometown paper ran a really embarassing story a week or two before Easter about the origins of Easter eggs. Never send a bad reporter to do a historian’s job — the reporter had obviously done some research about the history of Easter eggs, but had apparently stopped when she reached the Middle Ages. So the article was entirely about the Christian origins of Easter eggs, and even included an aside that even non-Christians could enjoy the fine art of coloring and otherwise displaying eggs for Easter.

Well, duh — people have only been mixing eggs and Spring festivals since long before Christ’s birth. When the whole egg coloring schtick became part of Christian celebrations of Easter is hazy, but by the time of the middle ages wealthy individuals were decorating eggs with gold leaf and others were dying eggs various colors.

But come on — does it really take much more than a passing knowledge of religious practices to realize that bunnies, eggs and Spring has a helluva lot more to do with folk and pagan fertility rituals than some lame reinterpretation to fit into a Christian framework? One of the most common Christian reinterpretations his that the egg represents Jesus’ resurrection. Others have it that eggs in Christiandom were often colored red to symbolize the blood of Christ.

The ability of Christianity to incorporate and recycle pretty much any other pre-existing religious ceremony or activity is amazing and one of its strengths (at least if you view the religion functionally), but that same aspect seems to leave many Christians unaware of just how much many of their traditional celebrations owe to non-Christian sources.

Researchers Offer Proof of Prion Infection, Possible Treatment Approach for Mad Cow Disease

Swedish researchers recently offered the most conclusive evidence to date that diseases such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob, scrapie and BSE are caused when abnormally shaped prions attach themselves to normal prions and cause the normal prions to become misshapen as well.

Although this is the method by which such diseases were believed to develop, this process had never actually be observed in animals. Researcher at the University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland set out to demonstrate this process in mice.

First, they created a genetically modified strain of mice that expressed an artificial prion that was easily distinguishable from other tissues (distinguishing prions from other tissue is otherwise a very difficult task).

Then, they exposed the mice to prion proteins responsible for scrapie in sheep. As they expected, the diseases prions attached themselves to the artificial prions in the mice.

But here’s the real kicker — the diseased prions took much longer to transform the artificial prions into diseased prions. The genetically modified mice survived almost three months longer than a non-modified control group when exposed to the scrapie prions.

Current research into treating CJD and others such diseases is focused on antibodies to create an immune response to the misshapen prions, but this finding suggests that another area to investigate will be the possibility of altering normal prions so they resist the efforts of the diseased prions.

Source:

Study Hints at Way to Treat ‘Mad Cow,’ Related Ills. Reuters, April 3, 2003.

Prion principle proved. Helen Pearson, Nature, April 4, 2003.

Iceland Announces Plans to Resume Whaling

Iceland announced in April that it plans to renew whaling under the same pretense as Japan — i.e. that the whaling will be for research. Under the terms of the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling, the International Whaling Commission allow its members to kill as many whales as it wants for research purposes.

Iceland says it plans to catch 100 minke whales, 100 fin whales, and 50 sei whales over two years, beginning sometime in 2003 or 2004.

Along with Japan, it would join Norway — which is exempt from the commercial whaling ban and never stopped commercial whaling — as the only three countries killing significant numbers of whales.

Iceland could also begin straightforward commercial whaling at any time, although it says that it will not do so until at least 2006. Iceland left the IWC in 1992, and was readmitted by just a single vote in 2002 (and even then, only because the Swedish represenative to the IWC misunderstood a procedural challenge that allowed the vote to take place). As part of its readmission, it was also allowed to lodge an objection to the 1986 moratorium which, along with Norway, renders it exempt from the moratorium.

Iceland also rejects portions of a number of conventions that deal with whales. It joined CITES in 2000, but objected to the ban on trade in the blue whale. It also objects to the listing of the Northern right whale under the Berne Convention, of which it is also a party. Both objections mean that Iceland is not bound by the terms of those conventions as they apply to those species.

Iceland has apparently worked out a deal with Japan to accept whale products from Iceland, without which there would not be a market for the number of whales Iceland is considering killing.

Sources:

Iceland’s whale hunting plans arouse suspicions. Reuters, April 5, 2003.

Iceland bids to resume whaling. The BBC, April 3, 2003.

Iceland Plans to Catch Hundreds of Large Whales. Environmental News Service, April 4, 2003.

European Commission Surveys Opinions of Animal Research in EU Candidate Countries

The Scientist recently reported on the results of a European Commission survey of public opinions of science in 13 countries that are candidates for European Union membership. The goal of the survey was to compare opinions in candidate countries with those of existing EU countries.

The 13 countries surveyed by Gallup were Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Turkey. A total of 12,274 adults from those countries were surveyed, and asked the following question about research involving animals,

And could you please tell me if you tend to agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Scientists should be allowed to experiment on animals like dogs and monkeys if this can help sort out human health problems.

Here’s how the answers broke down for each country,

Country

Agree

Disagree
Bulgaria
74
8
Cyprus
73
15
Czech Republic
54
31
Estonia
61
26
Hungary
71
22
Latvia
64
27
Lithuania
62
23
Malta
47
43
Poland
62
26
Romania
58
20
Slovakia
57
28
Slovenia
40
41
Turkey
65
17

The survey also offered an interesting insight into possible motivations/explanations for support of animal rights. This was just one question in a long series of questions about all aspects of science, including a number of questions designed to test the level of scientific knowledge of the individual being polled. Individuals polled were given a short quiz where they were read sentences such as “The oxygen we breathe comes from plants” or “Electrons are smaller than atoms” and then pronounce each sentence as true or false.

In comparing the answers to those questions with the answers about use of animals, there was a tendency for those with little knowledge of science to oppose animal research,

The analysis showed that this attitude is correlated to the degree of scientific knowledge possessed: people scoring high on the scientific knowledge scale are much more likely to find animal experiments justifiable if they are aimed at resolving human health problems (68%), while those who don’t know much about science are much less likely to agree (52%).

Compared to the current EU countries, the 13 candidate countries are far more supportive of medical research on animals.

A survey of the 15 countries that make up the European Union found that only 45 percent agreed that “Scientists should be allowed to experiment on animals like dogs and monkeys if this can help sort out human health problems,” while 41 percent disagreed. Overall, 63 percent of people in the candidate countries agreed with the animal research question, compared to just 22 percent disagreeing.

As Richard Ley of the British Pharmaceutical Industry told The Scientist, this could lead to medical research firms leaving existing European Union countries for the much more accepting climate in candidate countries,

This is a danger. The violence, harassment and intimidation activities of some animal extremists are bound to make companies look at the wisdom of continuing animal research in an environment where that is permitted.

Sources:

Opinions on science in wider Europe. The Scientist, April 3, 2003.

Candidate Countries Eurobarometer: Public Opinion in the Countries Applying for European Union Membership. European Commission, January 2003.

”Europeans and Biotechnology” Survey of Public Perception – EU. Animal Biotechnology, April 1, 2003.

Singapore's World Gourmet Summit Draws Controversy Over Foie Gras

The World Gourmet Summit, held in Singapore this April, came under a lot of fire and controversy for its decision to feature foie gras.

Animal activists, including Singapore-based AnimalWatch, criticized the inclusion of the delicacy on the grounds that its production is cruel. Activists maintain that geese and duck are cruelly force fed in order to fatten up the livers of the animals. Group such as Advocates for Animals, World Society for the Protection of Animals, Compassion in World Farming, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United States, also wrote letters to the organizers of the World Gourmet Summit asking them to drop foie gras off the menu.

Despite the protests, Summit organizers Peter Knipp Holdings and the Singapore Tourism Board decided to go ahead with the foie gras dinner.

Sources:

Foie gras on Singapore feast menu despite protest from animal rights body. AFP, April 2, 2003.

Animal rights groups slam summit over ‘inhumane’ dish. Melissa Lwee, The Straits Times, April 4, 2003.

Former Animal Welfare Charity Head Sentenced to 12 Years for Embezzling

Back in 2001, Wolfgang Ullrich was arrested and charged with embezzling more than $45 million in donations from the German and European Animal Relief Organization. This month Ullrich was sentenced by a German court to 12 years in jail.

Ullrich, 58, was convicted of 137 separate counts of fraud during his term as head of the animal group from 1994-1999. Ullrich had set up a front company in Switzerland through which he funneled the donations.

Source:

Wildlife boss jailed for duping animal lovers. ABC News, April 3, 2003.