Monday, June 16, 2025

The sixth mass extinction event. Maybe a good thing?

Why aren’t we nicer, kinder, more caring, and less mean to each other? I wish I knew; it appears that our animosity toward each other has been with us for a long time, maybe forever. Our closest primate cousins, the chimpanzees, engage in wars with other chimpanzee groups. [Sandel AA, Watts DP. Lethal Coalitionary Aggression Associated with a Community Fission in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) at Ngogo, Kibale National Park, Uganda. Int J Primatol. 2021 Feb;42(1):26-48. doi: 10.1007/s10764-020-00185-0. Epub 2021 Jan 7. PMID: 34267410; PMCID: PMC8277110.]

Negative feelings about “others” seem almost baked into our genes. I grew up around people who routinely disparaged Blacks, Mexicans, Jews, and homosexuals. Slurs were common. Even now, decades later, I wince a bit when I hear someone referred to as a Mexican, even when they are Mexican. If we could pile up all the disparaging terms and all our prejudices toward other nationalities, races, creeds, religions, genders, sexual orientations, every word, act, and prejudice, it would be a mountain of ugliness. It would be a mountain that we would be wise to try and bulldoze flat. And if we do ever flatten that mountain, one much higher will remain.

On top of the disparagements of minorities and those outside the main stream we grow up hearing, are those using animals. She’s a pig. He’s a snake. Chicken, ass, worm, crab, hippo. She’s an animal. He’s an animal. They’re animals. These disparagements rest on our near universal opinion that there is a hierarchy that puts humans at the top of some sort of scale of value. We do this to other humans as well; at times it has been used as a justification for slavery, internment, and caste. Those in power always see themselves at the apex of some pyramid of importance and value. Acting on that belief has had costly consequences.

We are in the sixth mass extinction event. Unlike the previous five, this one is caused by the overgrowth of a single species, Homo sapiens. Although the episode is often viewed as an unusually fast (in evolutionary time) loss of species, it is much more threatening, because beyond that loss, it is causing rapid mutilation of the tree of life, where entire branches (collections of species, genera, families, and so on) and the functions they perform are being lost. It is changing the trajectory of evolution globally and destroying the conditions that make human life possible. It is an irreversible threat to the persistence of civilization and the livability of future environments for H. sapiens. Instant corrective actions are required.

Mutilation of the tree of life via mass extinction of animal genera Gerardo Ceballos https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8374-2656 gceballo@ecologia.unam.mx and Paul R. Ehrlich https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8753-9292

Authors Info and Affiliations

Contributed by Gerardo Ceballos; received May 2, 2023; accepted July 31, 2023; reviewed by Gregory P. Asner and David Tilman September 18, 2023 120 (39) e2306987120 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2306987120
We wouldn’t be facing mass extinction if we were nicer and more kind to the other animals. We may already be too late to save very many humans; which of us might survive will be a matter of luck. Our only real hope is a planet-wide decision to halt our exploitation of animals. That seems unlikely, but all of us have the option of embracing a low-impact vegan life style. We could, if we choose to, take personal steps to slow, maybe even reverse, this otherwise likely calamity.

But maybe, if we look at the big picture and consider the gazillions of animals who would thrive if humans were no longer around, maybe it would be best if we ignore or deride the predicted likely future. If we do nothing to avoid the worse case scenario, many animals are likely to benefit.

It seems to come down to this: If you want humanity will survive, you’ll have to embrace veganism. You’ll have to limit yourself to having only one child, or better, none. You’ll have to avoid air travel. You should plant a vegetable garden and dramatically reduce your consumption of almost all commercial products. If possible, bicycle rather than drive. Use mass transit. Reduce, reuse, and recycle.

It seems likely that few of us will do very many of these things, and in a twisted sort of way, for the animals, maybe that’s a good thing.

Tuesday, June 3, 2025

One of the Oregon National Primate Research Center's Silly Claims

Primate vivisectors and Oregon Health Sciences University administrators are freaked out by state legislators', the Governor's, and the public's swell of concern for the monkeys at the university's taxpayer-funded Oregon National Primate Research Center (ONPRC). There is a real chance that, finally, the hideousness will be stopped. (Finally, because there have efforts to close this hell-hole since at least the mid-1990s.)

They aren't going down without a fight. And, as is the case for every defense of experimenting on animals, ONPRC claims that experiments conducted on monkeys there have been "lifesaving."

Oregon news outlet KOIN
OHSU takes public stance against calls to close primate research center
by: Jashayla Pettigrew
Posted: May 1, 2025 / 06:01 PM PDT
Updated: May 1, 2025 / 06:01 PM PDT
"Oregon National Primate Research Center critical to advancing human health."

Here's one of their recent efforts to convince the public that they are doing important work: Scientists, OHSU leaders speak out to defend lifesaving research at ONPRC By Erik Robinson April 30, 2025 Portland, Oregon

They claim, as does every vivisector, that their use of animals will benefit humans, and thus, is worthy of continuing. Aside from their ugly frank biggotry, their claim of making important discoveries is plain old propaganda. A good example is the essay they included about Jamie Lo, M.D., M.C.R.
Recently, she and co-authors published research in nonhuman primates that definitively showed consuming THC, the psychoactive compound found in cannabis, while pregnant affects the lung development and function in their offspring.

She conducted the study because existing human observational data has only low to moderate evidence for harm. Given the limited safety data, she found that many patients are reluctant to give up using cannabis during pregnancy because it helps to reduce common prenatal symptoms such as nausea and pain.

In research with animals, it’s possible to tightly control and measure exposures while eliminating the use of other substances that confound observational studies in people.

“You can’t do that with a human study,” she said. “This is the kind of information my patients need to understand the potential risks to make the best decisions for themselves and their baby. The goal is to avoid repeating what we saw happen with nicotine and alcohol use in pregnancy before we had strong evidence along with public health messaging.”

It is highly unlikely that many doctors, if any at all, pay any attention to her publications. Why would they when there is a huge and ever growing body of research on the use of cannabis during pregnancy.

The Health Effects

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/24625/chapter/12

The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research (2017) Chapter: 10 Prenatal, Perinatal, and Neonatal Exposure to Cannabis

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.