Sheep on Meth Are Shocked With Tasers - In Safety Study

Nicely put.

Humans are omnivores. We eat what we find and can produce. That includes cute little lambs and ugly little frog's legs and lots of stuff in between. I do my best to source my meat from local farmers that keep their animals hormone-free and antibiotic-free, and for the most part the animals are free range.

It's your choice to be a vegetarian or vegan. If it's a spiritual matter for you, then kudos to you for doing what you think is right. I am also doing what I think is right, within my own limits. My preference is to keep eating meat, but to do my best to make sure it was cared for and killed in the most humane way possible.

And what about their cardiovascular systems during this harsh and unnecessary experiment?

"Animals given methamphetamine demonstrated signs of methamphetamine toxicity with tachycardia, hypertension, and atrial and ventricular ectopy in the 30-minute period immediately after administration of the drug. Smaller animals (n = 8, ≤ 32 kg, mean = 29.4 kg) had supraventricular dysrhythmias immediately after the ECD exposures. Larger animals (n = 8, > 68 kg, mean = 72.4) had only sinus tachycardia after the exposures. One of the smaller animals had frequent episodes of ventricular ectopy after two exposures, including runs of delayed onset, nonsustained six- to eight-beat unifocal and multifocal ventricular tachycardia that spontaneously resolved. This animal had significant ectopy prior to the exposures as well. Thoracotomy performed on three smaller animals demonstrated cardiac capture during ECD exposure consistent with previous animal studies. In the larger animals, none of the methamphetamine-intoxicated animals demonstrated cardiac capture. Two control sheep showed evidence of capture similar to the smaller animals. No ventricular fibrillation occurred after the exposure in any animal."

Basically some of the smaller animals ended up with an irregular heartbeat after the administration of a taser while under the influence of meth (so I guess they learned kids+meth+tazer=not good). None of the animals (both the test and the control group) circulatory systems were stressed in a way that they were stopped or received long term damage.

Your forgetting that we live in a world where we eat cows, chicken, goat, sheep, deer, fish, and all kinds of animals. So don't get too sympathetic over a drugged up shocked sheep...millions of delicious animals die everyday.

That still doesnt make it any less wrong! I can understand eating a burger, but i cant understand why this experiment even took place.

...you said it well, my friend..

You are awesome, Brad. I am still not at the point where I can be so kind and well-spoken when I see such atrocities.

It's cruel, you're right

Your forgetting that we live in a world where we eat cows, chicken, goat, sheep, deer, fish, and all kinds of animals. So don't get too sympathetic over a drugged up shocked sheep...millions of tender delicious animals die everyday.

I never forget that people uneccesarily eat the flesh of other species, despite the damaging effects to human health, the environment and our limited fresh water suppliers. Animals used for meat, dairy & eggs are indeed terrorized and suffer in pain for much off their lives. I reject the use of animals for food in the same way that I reject the use of animals for this experiment.

The people that shock the sheep have all been shocked themselves. All employees of, and users of Taser (including police) undergo 'testing' of the product so they know its power. You are fat and stupid...

mmmm...too many against oppressions here...my head hurts...but, free our little soft, fluffy baa baa's...mmm-kay...

No, you are the stupid one. Yes, cops do get tazered as a part of their training, but the significant difference is that they consent and they are willing participants. Forcing an animal to take methamphetamine and then subjecting it to torture when it has absolutely no idea what is going on- and who would NEVER agree to be a subject in this study- is incomprehensible.

It's definitely more interesting than the bug zapper...

jejeje

after all that training............the cop is still human...people react like that due to our instinct of "self preservation"...what you do is SUPPORT your local cop instead your local CRIMINAL..

Why don't we all start supporting our local justice. Try not to make it a "you're either with us or against us" issue.

An old saying, when I was drinking or using drugs I never looked for trouble but every time I found trouble I was drinking or using drugs.
This is not some holier than thou statement it is the truth, very rarly does one find trouble if they are straight. I enjoy a blunt now and then but I never seek confrontation

Post deleted due to poor reading comprehension..

Sorry. I first read this post on my smart phone screen which was zoomed in at the time and i missed the entire left half inch of text. In particular the phrase "try not to" was obscurred. What you said is not at all what I thought you said. My apologies.

You're a hostile one, aren't you. I'll google what I please. The "with us, against us" phrase however, I have a pretty firm handle on.

My point was that you can't lump all cops into the good guy category or lump all ALLEGED criminals in the bad guy category. There are occasions when tasering is warranted, and occasions when it is abused. It's called "shades of gray" which depend on individual circumstances. You can google that phrase. BTW, your "because we are not the Taliban" is non-sequitur. What point are you trying to make?

oops. misread your post. It has been edited. Please see original for details.

No worries. Glad we are not at odds in this discussion.

you're real real sick.

the hell?

lol cops wanna see what they can get away with before going on suspension...

The testing your suggesting is illegal. Granted this would be taking it to the extreme but under this frame of logic then, Mengele could have forced his victim to sign waivers and his crimes could have had an aura of legality.

The animals themselves were anesthetized because the test wasn't to see if they felt pain ( as that was not the point of the study and would be cruelty for cruelty sake), but to see if their cardiovascular system, stressed by the effect of meth, would be pushed to the limit by the influx of electricity. Basically, would the tazer act like a defibrillator?

While not a supporter of tazing animals nor the usage of meth in any way, I am hard pressed to see how this research could have been done without the usage of animals or in a more ethical manner.

But because they were anesthetized, you won't see the full effects. Pain and physical discomfort have very strong affects on the cardiovascular system because people in an extreme pain tend to "clench" putting an obscene amount of strain on their hearts. My dad gave himself a heart attack when tending to an ingrown nail (I think that's what it was, I was really little, but there was some problem with one of his finger nails that he was bent on solving).

It is animal cruelty because of the risk caused to the sheep. Doesn't matter if they were anesthetized first, because the same results to their cardiovascular system would have occurred. Besides, it's animal abuse in that the animals were not consulted first to see if they were willing to volunteer their bodies, perhaps their lives, for some experimentation.

I find you funny.

I'm just not a fan of redneck science. I really cannot fathom how this test corresponds to any real world scenario. They measured vital signs on an animal that has been knocked out and besides being alive and high on meth the sheep has little else in common with the average thug. It's a sloppy, irresponsible study. My suggestion of using real meth-heads was made in anger and it was a way of illustrating just how ridiculous these tests were.

A side note: I would advise officers to be sure they aren't in a house that doubles as a meth lab when they tase a suspected meth-head...I'm sure they would know better though.

Who the hell said that this test was based on a real world scenario? Why would the researchers try to create one in this situation? To establish a link between two factors (in this case a circulatory system under the influence of meth and getting shocked with a taser) requires the elimination of all other factors...otherwise its fucking pointless. Seriously...what the holy heck are you talking about dude? Yeah...lets call the scientific method "redneck science" and do away with it.

Duly noted.

most of them carry pepper spray too, but it has problems. it's not very directional for one thing and tends to get everywhere. If you've got to wrestle with someone who has just been pepper sprayed you can pretty much assume you are going to be feeling it too.

You can form an "immunity" to pepper spray. Hell, some people are unaffected the first time. It works on bears so well because their sense of smell is 900 times stronger than a bloodhounds.

...beam me up as well "A"...

points for being the first to notice the animals were anesthetized while tasered.

I'll upload your position to the Mothership. +^'d

it's a perennial problem in law enforcement as well as other professions. Keeping the people out of the profession that are drawn to it for it's potential for abuse. Pedophile teachers, necrophiliac morticians, pyromaniac fire fighters, carpet bagging politicians, it's all the same problem.

"How abt getting rid of the tasers and using batons to subdue suspects?"

And if they have a knife? Or maybe a lead pipe? Why should the officer be forced to put himself in even more danger in order to subdue some tweaker on a meth binge? Let's face it, tasers will not be outlawed. They are an effective way of restraining violent offenders. The problems occur when some idiot cop on a power trip decides to use his taser on a 10 year old or an elderly person with a heart condition. Police departments need to put restrictions on which officers are allowed to carry tasers or at least provide more training on when it is appropriate for them to be used. Also, unless you can think of a better way to test the effects on someone high on meth, the sheep will have to do.

"I for one think that electrocuting people should be illegal.. its invasive and does internal damage."

So beating someone into submission with a heavy stick won't cause internal damage? I'd rather be shot with a taser than beaten senseless with a baton.

yep. they've done research. tasing is still safer than batons, even when the batons are wielded by experts. Batons are also dicey and dangerous to use. Their range is very short. the Manriki-kusari (a weighted throwing rope) was developed by imperial Chinese police forces and is still in use by police in parts of asia, including iirc, Japan, but it is even more difficult to use than a baton or tonfa.

"First of all that picture is scary. "
unsurprising. It's a piece of CGI from a horror film. It has nothing to do with the actual study.

what is the point of this? are you promoting veganism through horror, or are you just an asshole?

I'm sure if you wished to display your humanity by volunteering yourself as a test subject the company would have something to say.

thank you for your high handed moral judgment. Please keep it in mind the next time some fundamentalist duchebag tells you your going to hell or something. I can't see any major difference myself between this language and the kind of stuff that fred Phelps and westboro baptist come up with.

Tell me, how should I handle the douchebag that can't see the difference between screaming at a funeral "GOD HATES FAGS", or telling someone who gets a kick out of torturing animals that they suck? I'm only asking because I don't want to offend this person with my high-handedness.

Main Entry: high–hand·ed
Pronunciation: \-ˈhan-dəd\
Function: adjective
Date: 1631

: having or showing no regard for the rights, concerns, or feelings of others

"...who gets a kick out of torturing animals that they suck? .."

And where do you see them getting a kick out of torturing animals? They anesthetized them before testing the tasers. That's like saying a surgeon gets a kick out of dismembering people. The assumption that these people are somehow evil because they disagree with you is grossly unfair.

Whether anesthetized or not, they are unwillingly drugged and tasered. These are actions that endanger the lives of helpless sheep and it is most certainly abuse. Tasering does do damage to the body as does meth. If I were to grab someone off the street and do the same thing to them, would it not be considered abuse? I know that some people think that animal testing is okay, but I wholeheartedly disagree because my empathy is not limited to the human species... I would therefore suggest that I am not high-handed ": having or showing no regard for the rights, concerns, or feelings of others", I am quite the opposite. Please don't get me started on the treatment of animals raised for slaughter. I do not blame people for ingesting meat. I think it is part of the natural food cycle, but the abuse of animals during their life is sickening to me. You may feel differently, but I still feel that if you enjoy or condone the blatant mistreatment of animals, you suck. IMHO.

I'm sure on some level at least, surgeons do enjoy cutting people, or they would have never been able to finish their residency. Just guessing.

"These are actions that endanger the lives of helpless sheep and it is most certainly abuse."
Really. Endanger them more or less than sending them to the slaughterhouse? More or less than releasing a domesticated and helpless animal into the wild? (domestic sheep are almost as helpless as domestic turkeys) You want to what? Make them pets? Become a sheep hoarder?

"I still feel that if you enjoy or condone the blatant mistreatment of animals, you suck. IMHO."
There's that word enjoy again. Where on earth are you getting "enjoy" out of any of this?
While I think the tweaking of the sheep was on the edge, I see no other indications that this study was done in an unethical manner. The sheep were well treated, anesthetized before the testing so they felt no pain, and none of them died.

Lets let a group like the ASPCA or the USDA define abuse huh? It's what they do.

I'm actually a bit tired of this discussion. I think I made my points of my opinions. Defend it all you want... we will disagree. I don't want to be a shepherd, but I don't think that tasering and drugging is acceptable either. I told you that I don't mind them being slaughtered for food, but their treatment in life is what concerns me. I said "enjoy", because there are some sadistic people out there who do "enjoy" watching or abusing animals. You can't really say with 100% confidence that these animals felt no pain or had no physical damage, either during or after the testing. Regardless, in my OPINION the test itself was immoral behavior.

as someone who works in the operating room, comparing surgery to this ridiculous "experiment" is the most retarded thing I have ever read. Humans sign consents for surgical procedures, you moron. These sheep would have never opted for this if they were given a choice.

RIGHT ON.

since this sounded so "humane" to you, can we do this experiment on you next? Please? I would love to tazer you.

I want next!!

Forming a queue, eh?

"I'm actually a bit tired of this discussion"
well you are losing after all.

"I think I made my points of my opinions."
Then why are you defending them again? The very statement proves it's inaccuracy.

"said "enjoy", because there are some sadistic people out there who do "enjoy" watching or abusing animals."
Sure. There are also some people who are sexually excited by sniffing used bicycle seats, but there is no evidence that the people who did this test are either one. I could as easily start making allusions to a bycicle seat sniffing fetish on your part based on the likelyhood that you have at some point in your life owned or had a family member who owned a bicycle. It's silly.

"in my OPINION the test itself was immoral behavior."
I have never contested that it is what you think, I contested whether your opinion was valid based on the reasoning you were using. My contention has always been that the reasoning was what was bad.

not all of them. In most emergency situations someone has to do it for them. Also you failed to comprehend my comment. I was not comparing these experiments to surgery, I was comparing the unsupported allegations that anyone who would perform these procedures must be a sadist to someone who performs similar behaviors with humans. I could have just as easily used veterinarians as an example, and none of their patients sign forms either. I did not use that example because the people who did the test almost certainly were veterinarians and it makes the whole thing confusing.

it is best that if you start throwing around terms like moron that you actually make sure you understand what you are reading.

rofl. you had to upmod that yourself. no one up mods dittos.

Making you how humane? Actually I'd be fine with this procedure. I wouldn't feel a thing after all. Besides, I've had doctors do worse to me when I was awake.

As for the whole sadism thing though, the only actual evidence of anyone anywhere near this discussion enjoying causing pain to others is your statement here. The sadist is you.