PETA is the sort of organization which I could write about all day. Their views are so extreme to the point of often being comical. (Don’t even get me started on their opposition to all research, their attempt to rename the town of Fishkill New York. (because it sounded like it advocated violence toward fish) or their ridiculous methods of protest.)

When PETA says that they want to protect the lives of ALL animals, they really mean ALL animals, in the most literal sense that could be taken. In other words, all members of the animal kingdom are represented by PETA. That, of course, is dependent on whether or not you can consider an entity which lacks a central nervous system to be represented, of course. Most of the the campaigns which get attention involve things like dolphins, elephants and other cute cuddlies, which people see can’t help but feel compassion for, but the reality is that PETA’s policy covers everything from insects to arachnids to insect larva.

My own feelings on animal treatment is that there should be attempts to treat animals humanly, especially where it comes to causing undue pain. Animal abuse and torturing or harming for no reason is not excusable. I personally volunteer at an animal shelter, because I have always had a love for dogs. And while we may not be able to completely understand how a dog a dolphin or a monkey sees the world and feels, I have no doubt that they do have enough feelings for it to be taken into account. BUT NOT FLEAS AND DUST MITES! This might come down to an issue of “where does one draw the line.” Well I can’t tell you where a reasonable place is to draw the line on what constitutes an entity with a “mind” or capable of “feeling”… But I can sure as hell tell you what side of the line a worm falls on.

Before taking a look at what Peta has to say, lets consider what we’re dealing with here. Insects are some pretty amazing creatures, especially in their ability to surive and thrive in a huge variety of environments. Without doubt, the role which numerous insect species play in ecosystems and their overall beneficial role to man and nature should be appreciated. But does that mean that, as single individual little bugs they should be treated with concern for the quality of life and the pain, suffering may endure as well as the value of their lives? I don’t really think so.

Studies of some of the lesser members of the animal kingdom, whether spiders, fruit flies or ants has shown that they can display some surprisingly complex and apparently cognitive behavior. But when one talks about such insect behavior it’s rarely in the context of a single individual, but rather of a large group. “Swarm intelligence” is not intelligence as we know it, but has more to do with the idea that a group of “dumb” individuals governed by a few very simple rules and mechanisms can end interacting in a manner which produces adaptable and complex behaviors as a whole. This has actually been the focus of some development of cooperative robotics, in which each individual member is very simplistic and “dumb” in logic, but can interact with others to work efficiently.

Looking at the nervous system of an insect, it’s actually quite amazing how much they are able to do with what they have. Though effecient and effective, it’s not really the sort of “brain” we think of that controls an insect. More akin to a small cluster of nerve cells, the brain of an insect responds rapidly to stimulation from exterior sensory organs. The rapid responses to this give almost instantaneous reflexes, which is why flies are so hard to swat. But the reason for this is simply because the so little is actually being processed. There’s no cognitive thought or consideration of what to do. For a fly’s brain it’s as simple as “Movement nearby means move.” And anyone who’s seen an insect repeatedly fly into the same pane of glass can tell that they’re not really putting a lot of thought into the concept of “Move toward light.” Additionally, direct chemical stimulation of the “brain” is a major part of such organism’s means of communicating and navigating.

To try to think like an insect or to ask what it is like to be a bee or fly is something of a misnomer. One may as well ask what it is like to be a handheld calculator, since those also take input and respond in a given way, based on relatively simple logic. To ask what a fly thinks of what it sees, one might as well ask what a motion detector thinks of what it sees. And that’s not limited to insects, of course. As far as invertebrates s go, insects are pretty advanced, having an actual central nervous system. Other animals, such as jellyfish and coral have only the most rudimentary network of nerve-like cells.

So lets take a look at a few things from PETA:

From this page:

Silk Production Causes Painful Death for Insects
The so-called “silkworm” is actually a domesticated insect who, in nature, goes through the same stages of metamorphosis—egg, larva, pupae, and adult—that all moths do.(6) Silk is derived from the cocoons of larvae, so most of the insects raised by the industry don’t live past the pupae stage, as they are steamed or gassed alive in their cocoons.(7) Approximately 3,000 silkworms die to make every pound of silk.(8)

Pharmaceutical companies have taken an interest in these insects, too, because they are perceived as inexpensive and easy to raise and can be genetically engineered to produce silk that contains human collagen.(9) Silkworms have also been transgenically modified to spin fluorescent-colored silk.(10)

Oh those poor worms… I mean larva. The silkworm is indeed the juvenile undeveloped form of a moth, which makes it even LESS developed. Would destroying the egg also be immoral? Oh damn those Pharmaceutical companies too! What the hell are they doing in on this. I can think of few things less ethical than killing innocent insects for reasons like trying to treat human health conditions. (That was sarcastic by the way)

And here’s an interesting news story: This one on a publicity ploy by Six Flags for a free park entry for those who would eat a cockroach

In a letter dated Friday and addressed to Great America General Manager Hank Salemi, Vergerio described the concept as “barbaric” and wrote that PETA asks “that you consider the cruelty associated with this promotion and either cancel it or replace it with a harmless alternative.”

“As a corporation that owns animal theme parks, Six Flags has no business encouraging the inhumane treatment of any animal,” the letter states. “Presumably, the cockroach was chosen for this ‘gag’ because of the species’ extremely negative image. However, this much-maligned invertebrate possesses keen senses, is quite docile, and has an amazing evolutionary history.

“Every creature on earth is ideally suited to its purpose, whether we know what that purpose is or not. It is unlikely that the purpose of Madagascar hissing cockroaches is to serve as appetizers for an unimaginative marketing scheme.”

I will admit that the concept is a bit nasty, but as part of the Six Flags “Fright Fest,” if it brings in business, why not? Is it really inhumane? If so, maybe PETA should be writing letters to all the landlords and homeowners who have intentionally gasses entire communities of cockroaches, although they may be a slightly different species.

And this PETA page offers advice on what to do if you have a pest problem at home:

Humane Ant Control
Now, the relationship between you and the ants in and around your home may be far from mutually beneficial. If so, there are a few simple things that you can do to solve any perceived problems with these tiny beings without the need for toxic chemicals and cruel traps.

“Cruel traps?” and apparently the problems are only “perceived.” However, if I have insects in my home, which potentially can eat away at structural wood, in the case of carpenter ants, and can spread disease to food in other cases, I’m not going to be all that concerned about the dignity and feelings of the ants. The page suggests removing attractions like unsealed food, which is good advice, but only helps so much once ants have arrived. It continues to state:

Because insecticides are potentially hazardous to all animals, including humans, you should never use them.

“Potentially hazardous” may be true, but when used properly, they are not only safe, but about the only way to effectively rid a structure of infestations. The site insists that using natural “replant” products around the perimeter of the home will help keep ants out. But again, this is only somewhat effective.

Another page speaks of the cruelty of honey, which causes great trauma and sometimes death to thousands of bees. This does not mention that worker bees only live a period of up to four weeks, but then again, aren’t their lives worth something too? No? Yeah, I don’t really think so either.

I could go on and on with this, because searching PETA’s website and others they sponsor turns up plenty of information on their campaigns for the lives and feelings of such “animals.” They encourage using products that reduce flea reproduction, rather than kill them, thus leaving your dog scratching and misserable for weeks until the population dies out. That seems cruel right there. They also speak out against inscet-based dies, beaswax and products which indirectly harm insects, arachnids and other creepy-crawlies.

The hypocrisies and ridiculous implications of this are pretty obvious. PETA claims that they advocate taking the lives of animals only when absolutely necessary for human health or basic needs. But what is “necessary”? With PETA’s logic, I would not be surprised if they advocated surgical removal of a tapeworm, in order to preserve the life of a creature which is killed by standard treatments. And what about preditory species? Do they get a pass. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to kill the predatory insects, because it would result in so many more lives saved.

And what of the animals which we cannot see and may be killing constantly? Fleas are barely visable, but what of dust mites? They are, after all, animals. They live on our skin and we may wash them down the drain when showering. We no doubt swallow them constantly and millions meet their death in vacuum cleaners and the near-boiling hot waters of washing machines.

Silly, yes? Ridiculous? Of course. What else would you expect from PETA?

 

---

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 25th, 2007 at 9:30 am and is filed under Bad Science, Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

---

View blog reactions