May 4, 2006

by Reb Yudel
Death for the honest anti-Darwinists....

... will come as they have the courage of their convictions to refuse to benefit from medical advances premised on evolutionary theory. Carl Zimmer tells an interesting tale of evolving proteins, diverging hominids, and a drug trial gone horrible awry. A paper published this week suggest a theory of what went on, and Zimmer concludes:

If it does hold up, it may offer a cautionary lesson about drug tests. Testing a drug on a mouse or a monkey may tell you something about how the drug will work in humans--but only if it acts on biology that we share with those animals. And in some cases, where a drug is affecting proteins that evolved after our split with chimpanzees, no living animal may offer a reliable clue. The more we learn about our evolutionary history, the more we'll understand about how drugs work.
If Klinghoffer and his supporters are correct, and Darwinism is just idolatry repackaged, I hope they appreciate that idolatry -- unlike, say, pig-derived medicines -- is yihoreg v'al ya`avor -- that is, it is better to die than transgress.

TrackBack
Comments
#1

Sir, you remain highly inflammatory and now you wish to say publicly that everyone who disagrees with Darwinism (um, that is say almost everyone except a few ivory tower radicals!!!!) should die.

Drug testing on mice is oftentimes highly productive because it brings data to bear on the efficacy of the drug on a living animal. You are here to tell us that if you disbelieve the Darwinian hypothesis, you cannot use a drug that might save your life. How bizarre!! What kind of logic is this?

On the other hand, Jews pray to a Creator for the bread that is on our table, the wine that we drink, for our lives and our well-being, for the rain, the the movement of the planets and our moon, for the well-being of our country, for the delight of the Sabbath day in rememberance of God's creation, and so much more. Therefore, I must ask you whether a Jew who agrees with the Darwinian hypothesis that states clearly that something must always come from something--can this Jew, can you, in good faith, pray to a Creator who you believe did not actually bring the bread and the wine and the world into existence? This is a direct and logical issue. How can a man pray to a God for creative acts that the man denies his God performed?


I would surely want to know if a drug caused cancer in a lab mouse, even as Zimmer says, this may be no reliable clue as to the effect on humans. It simply indicates that it causes cancer in mice in a laboratory setting. I would want to use a drug that has a proven record of NOT causing harm to mice. This does not mean that I therefore must conclude that mice biology and human biology are related or the same or evolved one into the other. It simply means that human beings are reluctant to experiment with new drugs on human subjects since such experimentation would risk human life. Such drug testing affirms human understanding that mankind is separate and different from animals and we believe, as a species, that risking the lives of mice for the betterment of mankind is an easy tradeoff.

Therefore, it is easy to argue that drug testing on animals affirms the special status of human beings, in the eyes of mankind. However, I would not wish to deprive drugs to those who believe that we are all animals. Those persons are honest and they lobby for no animal testing--period. **They** wish to deprive themselves of medical advances caused by testing on animals-- or least this is what they say. They suggest that they would rather die than transgress their morality.

Normal people separate the human from the animal and see the difference. You contort the issue and act with irrational hatred toward your political opponents.

Posted by: David N. Friedman at May 21, 2006 12:42 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?


type the word "captcha" (you would rather decode a crazy picture?)