U.S. Funds Animal Sex Experiments, Not Heart Disease Research

Budget cuts, sequesters and human heart health be damned — the American government will let nothing stand between it and handinglaboratories money to do abhorrent, disgusting things to animals.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) spends about $15 billion every year — close to half its budget — for experiments on animals. I wrote about some of the dumber experiments forCare2 last year.

When NIH’s budget was recently cut by five percent, it had to choose which projects to stop funding. It elected to tighten the belt on the three-generation, 65-year-long Framingham Heart Study, which studiescardiovascular disease –the country’s “leading cause of death and serious illness.”

The Framingham Heart Study uses taxpayers’ money to save taxpayers’ lives. It has “led to the identification of the major…risk factors [for heart disease] — high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, smoking, obesity, diabetes, and physical inactivity — as well as a great deal of valuable information on the effects of related factors such as blood triglyceride and HDL cholesterol levels, age, gender, and psychosocial issues.”

The NIH gouged$4 million out of Framingham’s $9 million contract. If battling heart disease — and getting great results — isn’t what NIH prioritizes, what does it consider worth investing in?

Seriously sadistic sex stuff with rodents, especially if the animals are snuffed out at the end.

Here, courtesy ofPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,are a few things NIH is still funding. Together they would cover the amount pulled out of the Framingham Heart Study more than three times over.

*Mice and rats electrically stimulated after penises mutilated and injected with chemicals: $2.8 million
Johns Hopkins experimenters cut all the skin off the penises of live mice and rats, electrically stimulated their penises with electrodes for up to five minutes, and injected their penises with various chemicals, then checked whether they could sustain an erection. They then killed the animals and cut their penises apart.

* Mice’s sex drive tested after brains burned: $1.5 million
Boston University experimenters locked female mice into restraint devices, drilled holes into their skulls, and burned lesions into their brains. They then recorded the amount of time the injured females spent sniffing urine samples from castrated versus intact males.In a subsequent experiment, the researchers put the females with males and measured the females’ sexual receptivity. Experimenters then killed and dissected all of the mice, including the males.

* Rats’ sex drive tested following Prozac injections and removal of ovaries: $2 million
Texas Woman’s University experimenters injected female rats with antidepressant drugs and placed them with male rats. They observed and measured thefemales’ sexual receptivity. Then they surgically removed the rats’ ovaries and injected them with sex hormones, and again observed their sexual behavior.

* Hamsters’ sex drive tested following brain damage: $1.8 million
U.C. Berkeley experimenters cut into the skulls of female hamsters and implanted tubes in their brains and pumps in their scalps. They pumped saline or hormones related to sexual behavior into the females’ brains, and videotaped the animals as they could see, smell, and hear but not touch a male hamster. Experimenters used brushes to stimulate the female hamsters, and observed their sexual receptivity. Then they killed them and cut their brains apart.

* Rats’ interest in drugs tested following brain damage and sex withdrawal: $4.5 million
University of Michigan experimenters measured the time it took for male rats to mount females, insert their penises and ejaculate. The experimenters then restrained the rats, cut into their skulls, implanted tubes in their brains, and pumped in a chemical that would block the rats’ ability to process sexual pleasure. The experimenters watched the rats having sex. Then they withheld sex from the rats for one to four weeks and measured the rats’ interest in an amphetamine reward. Experimenters killed all the animals and dissected their brains.

It seems more important to NIH that Americans can reliably get off than that they don’t die young of heart attacks. Being humane, as in not torturing and killing helpless, conscious animals, isn’t even on the radar screen.

Photo credit: Wikimedia.org


Jim Ven
Jim Venabout a year ago

thanks for the article.

Helga Ganguly
Helga Ganguly1 years ago

Midgets. Mental midgets.

Helga Ganguly
Helga Ganguly1 years ago

The NIH is a stumbling block to discovery of real benefit and a gold mine for these mental medgets.

Carrie-Anne Brown

thanks for sharing

Lynda H.
Lynda H2 years ago

Funny how every time I ask for verification of claims, I get nothing but silence...

Anita Wisch
Anita Wisch2 years ago

Sad what we fund in the "name of science".

Lynda H.
Lynda H2 years ago

Dianne, yes, cover-ups happen - too frequently - but eventually the truth comes out.

I live in Australia, Dianne! Tell me the university where your ‘friends and associates’ work and I’ll personally check it out.

Dianne Turner
Dianne Turner2 years ago

Lynda H, firstly yes you can report things to the authorities but don't tell me cover-ups aren't often resorted too! I'm not sure of the protocol in The States but things are vastly different here in Australia and yes we too have sadists who torture/abuse animals! But why study the sex lives of rats then try relating it to humans; our genealogy is vastly different and to deliberately inject libido inhibiting drugs, then to make them abstain from sex unless offering amphetamines-where is the practical research in that? WAKE-UP; NOT EVERYTHING MAKES SENSE OR IS DONE HUMANELY!

Lynda H.
Lynda H2 years ago

Dianne, if your friends/associates are deliberately being cruel to animals, they you should report them to the authorities. I can’t imagine being friends with someone who is deliberately cruel to animals!

DNA/genetic testing, tissue cultures, computer models - they are all essential tools of research, and they are getting better, more sophisticated as time goes on. But they cannot predict accurately the reactions to certain drugs, nor affects on reproduction and future generations. Physiology is not so predictable. No animal is provided to researchers if the hypothesis can be tested without animals. However, if the hypothesis appears to be accurate and of benefit to humanity (and that includes animals) then it must BY LAW be tested on animals first. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Code (point 3).

Lynda H.
Lynda H2 years ago

Alison, there ARE nasty, horrible people who torture animals. These are psychopaths and people with severe psychological/emotional disorders. There are ‘power’ issues, suppressed helplessness, anger, hate, emotional numbness, drug abuse - all sorts of reasons why people torture animals. They don’t care about the animal, other people, society, or anything other than themselves: they know they are doing wrong and don’t want to get caught, so they do it in private, or with a small group of like-minded sadists.

A young man or woman decides in high school that they want to study medicine. Why? It’s damn hard work - probably the most complicated and exacting of all the sciences. It doesn’t pay anywhere near as well as law, business or politics, the hours are long and the responsibility almost overwhelming. Why do they do it? Because they want to do good. They want to play a part in easing suffering or curing a disease, condition or illness that causes suffering or premature death.

Does this sound like a psychopathic/emotionally-disturbed sadist to you?

Why would they “torture” animals in a lab filled with other people, all there to “do good”? Why would they risk their licenses, privileges and reputation? Why would they allow an animal to become stressed or suffer when they know that it will immediately invalidate the results?