Civil discourse must be based in science

Well written Dean Armstrong! Not that it is difficult to make PETA look like the idiots they are, but he really out did himself this time to really make them look foolish.

PETA and SPAR … give it up. You guys do more harm to yourselves and always look incredibly foolish.

Just go to MSU’s Dairy Farm and see all of the Cows with holes punctured in their sides, so that researchers can stick their hands into the cows’ stomachs and analyze the digestive process. Are these “happy cows?”

Agricultural research is driven by the big AG/FOOD companies’ greed: pesticides, fertilizers, hormones, and Mad Cow disease. These CEO’s don’t care about the effect on the environment or on human health. They care about maximizing Yields, maximizing Output—muscle growth, milk production. MSU helps make it happen. MSU helps squeeze the maximum agricultural output out of fewer acres of mineral-depleted land. MSU helps raise the Carrying Capacity (k) of the Land—to artificially and temporarily OVERPOPULATE the earth. We should be concerned when COSTCO placed a 1 bag of rice limit on their customers just a couple of years ago. We should be concerned when we talk about using our primary food crop—corn—as well as our forests to fuel our big cars.

Who cares about how happy these farm animals are? They are our food! We tortured humans at GITMO for years! Guns, steak, and war is the American Way!

Sol Bilderberg

I’m vegetarian, and I’m disgusted by how much PETA lies and misinforms. They’re not out to spread the truth, they’re out to lie, distort, and muddy the waters. They’re taking my reputation with them, the same way Christians who think the world is 6000yrs old make me cringe.

Kudos for MSU telling them to

Sol- Please tell me you’re joking. I am not in Ag Science but I have the utmost respect for what these researchers do. They are helping to save lives from starvation and you criticize them for being cogs in the corporate machine? They aren’t overpopulating the earth, they are trying to solve a problem that comes along down the line after overpopulation already occured. What’s your solution? To just let people in the lower stratifications of society starve because we’re too busy with trendy causes to engage in research to save them? You have to be well-fed to have such an elitist attitude about conservation.

What I still don’t understand is how “an environment… that respectfully values all opinions” and “that is inclusive of the many voices that need to be heard” is best served by excluding PETA. I suppose in the later case your argument is that our voice doesn’t need to be heard, though there is an active animal group on campus that would like to hear what we think, and how you respond.

Last night we had what I thought was an excellent discussion. It was supposed to go 90 minutes, and went on for three hours. My talk was just 25 minutes; the remainder was discussion. To the credit of your department (and I assume you), many animal sciences students and professors were in attendance, though I think it would have been better with you there and participating.

I will be traveling today and won’t be able to check for responses to this post, but anyone who wishes to communicate with me can reach me at BruceF@peta.org.

Mr. Friedrich, I would first like to thank you for coming to our University and taking the time to stay and answer many questions. I would also like to point out that in your article in the State News a few days ago you said that the opposing side has stopped showing up. How do you feel about that now. By my rough estimate at the forum last night there were about 20-25 SPAR/PeTA supporters. That is a great turnout for the event. On the other hand there were around 150 production animal ag students and professors. Which side showed up? Mr. Armstrong gave many opportunities and suggestions on having a forum with him there. For the member of SPAR who said he didn’t have the courage to show up, you are an idiot. He gave you many suggestions and you never responded to him. We in the ag community are proud of our backgrounds and what we do. We are proud of Mr. Armstrong for everything that he has done for agriculture and for our university. I think that the overwhelming support at the forum last night proves that. Again, which side didn’t show up last night?

If anyone would like to get into contact with me my e-mail is colgrena@msu.edu I would be particularly interested to hear Mr. Friedrich’s opinion on the outpouring of support from the Ag community.

Dean Armstrong,

Thank you writing this article and standing up for the scientific community. I was one of the many Animal Science majors who attended last night’s meeting and while I didn’t stay for the entire 3 hour event, I was there for around half of it. I was genuinely surprised by one comment that Bruce had, which was for the Animal industries to be the first people to condemn animal cruelty; do not stand up for people who are abusive to animals and do not claim that it is “standard practice”. If we want to change the way consumers see us, we need to police ourselves and not allow others (who are going to paint it all over the internet) to do it for us. If we take the first stand against inhumane practices how can they say that we’re an industry that doesn’t care? So, thank you Bruce for giving us a direction that will allow us to better our industry.

Mr. Armstrong –

I think your argument would be better served had you actually accepted his invitation to debate instead of writing a letter to the State News.

It is unfortunate you cowardly declined.

While I was unable to attend last nights discussion I have to say upon reading what was said by Dean Armstrong my thoughts seem to match up with his quite well, and I am proud to be an agriculturalists. Don’t get me wrong growing up on a swine finishing operation with capacity for 2100 head of swine at anyone time probably gives me a few biases, after all my family’s livelihood is dependent on what many would call factory farming as there have probably been between 80,000-90,000 pigs go through my place. However I also pride myself on being forward thinking, and a man of science who tries to put personal bias aside. Believe me when I say mainstream agriculture does not want to harm these animals in anyway for several reasons.

First: It does not make sense economically. When stress levels are increased the body does not function properly. This reduces feed consumption, and feed efficiency. In other words it takes more feed for an animal to gain the same weight and the animals are on the property longer. Agriculture is like any other industry, supply cost money, and time cost money, and no one wants to drive down their profit margins. Additionally poor management practices decrease the quality of the products we raise, the same products that we eat as well.

Second: This is the most minor part of why animals are treated humanely in ag. When we as agriculture are raising animals we also must look at our public image. Consumers do not want to support heartless individuals, or tyrants, and there for will find other avenues for their food thus hurting American agriculture and the individuals in it.

Third: This is by far the most important reason of all that I have listed. We too have hearts in agriculture. While I have not made a pet out of all 80,000 or so pigs that I have helped raise I know that I am have been involved in about 80,000 lives. We have the utmost respect for the animals we raise. It is because of this that we do all we can to research how we can improve production WITHOUT increasing stress and, if we can, reducing stress to the animals. But how do we test this? Because of the fact that this is something that can’t be told by just interviewing the animals there are difficulties with assessing this. To combat this researchers with ag have developed ways of testing for hormones and other bodily chemicals that signify stress and other social concerns in the animals. Management practices are constantly tested with this in an attempt to find out if we are being humane, and the management practices in use today, while often demonize, have been scientifically shown to not increase stress, but in fact to reduce it because of a more stable hierarchy system in social animals herds, lack of difficulty for fresh food and water, and more constant environmental conditions which helps to minimize physical stress associated with it.

Don’t get me wrong there are aspects of the ag industry that need to change, and sometimes when those are pushed to the boundary some of us are called radical, much like Dean Armstrong said in his article, but the industry is moving forward in a constant battle to feed an ever growing population with an ever growing hunger for food, and energy, all while striving to improve the lives of the animals we raise.

Sincerely,
A concerned student of Lyman-Briggs

PETA and SPAR are animal rights organizations. Animal Rights means they believe animals = humans. Animal welfare is the concern for the well being of an animal.

PETA and SPAR believe that it is unethical, inhumane and a violation of the animal’s rights to raise and consume it. They do not wish to improve the conditions in which animals are raised for food, they want to eliminate the rearing of animals for food. They wish that every person on the Earth would be a vegan/vegetarian.

It’s not an issue of animal welfare when it comes to PETA and SPAR, it’s an issue of having the right to choose whether you would like to consume meat, milk and eggs, or not.

the only people who support PeTA are slutty floosies from Holyweird who think it’s trendy.

PeTA members are freaks, and nerds.

so WHO CARES about them?

Metallica Rulez, you would be foolish to discredit PETA that quickly. There’s a reason that more than 200 students turned up at last night’s speaking event. It’s because PETA is changing the way animal agriculture functions, to improve the lives of animals killed for this cruel industry.

They say that you can judge a person by the enemies. In other words, if you can get Ag students so riled up, just by mentioning the word “PETA”, that means that animal rights activists are getting things done.

http://www.meat.org

No wonder the ag kids get riled up, you firebombed one of our labs.

My hat is off to all ag students at MSU you did a great job. My thanks to you Bruce for making the trip to Michigan and showing these young agriculturist the importance of improved communication when it comes to why animal agriculture is a vital part of human life.

It is a disservice to the community, and now to the public at large, for Dean Armstrong to refuse to debate Mr. Friedrich. PETA is too influential an organization, with too many members, to ignore. If indeed Dean Armstrong believes PETA is unable to defend its positions scientifically, he should have proven that by engaging in the debate. By not doing so it appears he is instead unable to defend his own positions. If in fact he does believe he can defend himself, he should invite Mr. Friedrich back. MSU, and the public, deserves to know.

PETA is like your drunk uncle at a wedding. You know they mean well, but they are still embarassing… especially to people who have similar interests but choose to discuss them like adults rather than streaking or throwing paint on people.

First, what PETA members term “a debate” is anything but a true debate.

PETA a forum to expoit people who do not know and/or will not believe that people who raise animals and schools that conduct research want to assure the best treatment of animals and find the best methods of animal husbandry and to determine the best diets for optimum animal welfare and health.

The goal for PETA is to end all uses of animals, so it’s foolish to think they would enter into an honest debate of issues or ways to improve animal care.

The broad forum offered by Mr. Armstrong would provide education as to the facts of modern methods of raising animals, opportunities to discuss improvements, explore possible means to find and correct the rare cases of true animal abuses….and more! Yet this student group of PETA disciples refused the offer. Who involved in agriculture is surprised????

Excellent discussion, Dean Armstrong. I applaud your position for not debating PETA. I have read several comments alluding to how influential PETA is. I don’t understand how this could be when this organization comes up with ideas such as changing the name of Spearfish High School to Sea Kitten. Mr. Friedrich referred to a “newfound timidity” in agriculture to debate him or PETA. I disagree. Agriculture has a newfound target – HSUS. With PETA’s grandstanding approach, a debate would not make any sense because PETA cannot be trusted to have an intelligent debate. It would most likely be used as an oportunity to be a “complete press slut” as Ingrid Newkirk likes to say – and not an intelligent debate.

First off, why do people find it acceptable for a group to push their values on others, i.e. PETA claiming animals shouldn’t be used for food? If people do not want to eat meat, that is entirely their choice. But didn’t religion get pushed out of government because no one wants to offend anyone or worry about pushing beliefs on others? That I feel is the same thing. If the churches rallied together to shove religion back into government and school, there would be an outrage. If people want to eat meat, let them. People still smoke, drink, do drugs, and everything else…but there’s no major organization to stop these things.

Not only that, but doesn’t animal research IMMENSELY help medical science? I find it funny that they don’t want animals to be tested on, but how many show up at lab facilities and offer to take the animals’ place? But I’m sure they all still go to the doctor to get prescription drugs and medical treatments anytime something goes wrong.

PETA also sends out propaganda with no sources for their information. I got something in the mail the other day talking about how kittens and puppies are stolen from peoples’ homes only to be bludgeoned and drowned for the use of their fur, and it be sold under a different label. There are no sources to back reference this information. Unfortunately, stupid people believe everything they read if you just shove an old outdated photo of a cat in a cage in their faces.

PS-The cannulated steers (the ones with holes in their sides) is used to see if they are properly digesting their food to make sure they are getting the optimum nutrition they need. There is one we visited for a class, and its actually lived much longer than the average steer. He also is not in any pain. It’s somewhat the same thing as having a colostomy bag on your side after GI surgery.