My issue isn't whether its right, its the selective outrage. If you are mad at Fauci because people under him approved legal testing of the same sort that happens all the time, but you don't want to pass a law preventing this sort of thing, then you are a hypocrite.
Animal testing is 'how the sausage is made' and nobody wants to know how the sausage is made, because its gross and unsettling. Blissful ignorance is preferred.
You can be outraged. If you just found out that this sort of thing happens and you want to make sure it doesn't happen again, then sign petitions and contact your representative. You don't know what you don't know. But now that you know, what are you going to do about it? If all you do is use it to score on Fauci, then I submit that it was never about the dogs.
The study with the dogs heads in mesh cages has been corrected, the NIH didn't fund that one.
The University of Georgia study tested a vaccine for a parasitic disease called lymphatic filariasis, which the CDC lists as the second leading cause of permanent and long term disability in the world. Is intentionally infecting beagles and then putting them down worth curing something like that? That is subjective. If you don't want the head of the NIH to have the ability to make that call, then you need to lobby to change the law.
The aids drugs where they cut the dogs vocal cords...that's rough. I'm not defending any of it, but there are laws and exceptions for a reason.
If the testing was somehow unnecessary and violated animal welfare laws, then someone should sue or bring charges. If it was within the law, then we need to look at the justification and ask ourselves if it is worth it. I'd love to be outraged with you, but I unfortunately was aware that animal testing happens and how it usually turns out. I don't like it, but things have to be tested.
