Friday, February 08, 2013

James Cromwell Arrested For Protesting Cat Torture

James Cromwell partnered up with PETA and their spokesperson Jeremy Beckham and busted into a board meeting at UW-Madison. The two entered the meeting shouting and holding up signs to protest the torture of cats at the University Of Wisconsin. Apparently the university kills up to 30 cats a year in an effort to improve hearing for those who are deaf. The people meeting in the board room didn't even seem to care and the police were there a minute later. Cromwell, who was nominated for an Academy Award for Babe will be charged with disorderly conduct.

65 comments:

Patty said...

At first I thought this was James Cameron and thought about how he treats his ex's and thought you have got to be kidding. Then I looked at the picture and thought "Gosh, he got old" Then, I re-read the name. Coffee!

Vera L- said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Vera L- said...

I've never watched Babe, so to me he will always be the neti pot using spouse of...what's her name on 6 feet under.

Good for him, poor kitties!

ethorne said...

Every time I see him I hear, "Show me your mossy banks."

PuggleWug said...

He was wonderful in Babe! Very touching. He played creepy pretty well in American Horror Story. Good for him!

ReesesPeace said...

If he needed bail money, I'd send him my last dollar! Good for him!!

I can't imagine how anyone could do to that any animal, but I'm sitting here with my 3 fur babies cuddling up to me and purring away and I just can't... I'm starting to tear up just thinking of it, so I'll stop.

EmEyeKay said...

Arrested for prison cat torture. That's how I read the headline. Too much AHS, I guess.

Schmucky Putz said...

Yesterday it was the washed up, out of work actress, on the oil rig. Today it's the has-been, old fart. Wow, these Hollywood idiots really lose their marbles when their careers hit the skids.

katydid said...

I too have never seen Babe but loved him in Six Feet Under. He was good in AHS but maybe too good I read this as he was torturing the cats too! Sounds like a good man, I love my kitties! Shame on UW.

LottaColada said...

Wasn't he also Prince Phillip in "The Queen"... Or am I confusing him with someone else?
I'm pretty sure it's him, great movie by the way.

Empress of Socks said...

PETA kills far more than 30 cats a week and its not for any cause other than "pets are bad". I'm sure the mothers who can now hear their children's first words or the kids who can now hear their teachers and don't have to move cities to go to schools for the deaf are very appreciative of what these people are doing at the expense of a few cats. No doubt your local humane society also euthanized far more per week and you support them as in it for the greater good.

KendraWM said...

I don't know I love my animals, have always had cats, dogs, rabbits but I am the first to say if experimenting on one of my pets would have found the cure to my moms illness, I would have been the first to line them up.

Like it or not the options are use animals for medical research, use humans for medical research or use nothing and keep your fingers crossed. Cadavers can only do so much. At some point you need something with a heart beat.

And if you know anyone who ever had a bypass you can thank testing on dogs for them being alive today.

If they really wanted to protest how about go after the reckless breeders and puppy mills. That would have a much bigger impact or kill shelters that don;t give the animal more than a couple of days to be adopted.

Years ago in our paper there was a editorial comic strip, it was three chalk outlines of bodies and one of a dog, with the caption "Can you believe they killed the dog!"

JSierra said...

Babe traumatized me as a child. First he is separated from his mom who is about to become breakfast, then they almost kill babe for dinner and end up eating the duck instead, and evil Rex goes on a rampage abusing his dog wife and attacking the poor sheep so the farmer chains and drugs him, then crazy dogs attack the sheep and the farmer tries to kill Babe again *shudders* I will never forget the terrifying and confusing moments of animal and people friends attacking each other.

The only movie worse than Babe is Homeward Bound. Why won't anyone help those dang animals! Was it really necessary for Shadow to fall into a dark muddy hole and almost die, again?

wahoowifey said...

Worked with him once on a film in the summer of 97'. He was sooo nice to everyone and very down to earth. Really great guy and now I like him even more. My cats are my children!

Sunny said...

@ J Siera
Spoilers!!!!!!!!!! :)

Barton Fink said...

In portland 20 yrs ago, there was a researcher whose research consisted solely of drilling holes (with a power drill) in the heads of cats, then watching them stagger around and die. She was funded in the multiple millions.

That was the case that opened my eyes to the dark side of research animals. During the same period, researchers gave cats feline immunodeficiency virus and watched them die, learning literally nothing about HIV or antiretrovirals for human use.

Animal research is important, but abused massively. Ethical oversight totally needs to be strengthened in this area.

Kimberly said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kimberly said...

I would be more upset about the dog being killef than people. I don't like people

Laura said...

Goog James, good. I loved the movie Babe! On my all ttime favorite list, now I like the farmer even more.

Laura said...

*Good!! FFS

rejectedcarebear said...

@JSierra- Milo and Otis fucked me up as a child! How could anyone not look for them?! I think this is why I still bring home stray animals.

Comma Chaser said...

Love this story. I'm sitting here with a couple of fur people right now, and they approve this story.

Comma Chaser said...

@LottaColada. Yep, that's him in the Queen as Philip. Personal favorite is LA Confidential.

Terrier Pines said...

Good for him. The "study" that the cat was part of was torture plain and simple. Appalling that no one stopped it and that group SHOULD have it brought to its attention.

Nellie said...

!!!!! What???

God I am so naive.

jfwlucy said...

Animal research has led to such terrible, awful things as more effective safer medicines, surgeries, discoveries, and machines to help humans live fuller and happier lives. People who condemn animal experimentation out of hand generally do not understand the object of the research and how it might apply in the real world. It's like when Sarah Palin tried to make a joke out of researching on fruit fly genetics, and then it came out that these genetic studies were key in the efforts to improve treatment for trisomy/retardation disorders such as that which affected her youngest sun. That same cat research in Portland you mention led to http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/10/stem-cells-safe-for-rare-brain-d.html this experiment, which will lead to advances in treatment for MS and Parkinson's disease. You want to go tell the mom of some kid with MS that her kid is going to die because you condemn animal research? Be my guest.

B626 said...

He was great in The Artist too.
Played the French guy's chauffer.
Gawd that French guy was HOT.
Where was I? :)
James Cromwell certainly going up a few notched in my book.

smash said...

Jsierra- damn homeward bound!!!!! I cried at that shit everytime!!!

luckylass said...

US government funded organizations who conduct research on any vertebrate organisms (fish to humans), like universities, have to undergo an incredibly rigorous approval process to make sure the organisms are being handled in the MOST ethical way possible. It is expensive, difficult to get and maintain the approval.

I have no clue how this works in non-goverment funded organizations.

I love animals, but to animal research and then human clinical trials are necessary to advance medicine.

Often the animals are taken from shelters and were to be euthanized anyway. Intro Anatomy and Physiology students dissect euthanized shelter cats before they move up to dead humans. Your future doctors need to learn it someway.

smash said...

Jf- your last statement says they "will" find treatments not they "have". Big difference.

Jazzy said...

Yay! You go Rolo Tomasi!

jfwlucy said...

They have, smash, did you even read my link? The study where they drilled holes in the children's brains and inserted stem cells DID lead to increased myelinization in their brains.

And hello, progress comes in stages. The fact that we have treatment for ANY disease whatsoever doesn't mean that it sprung full-blown from some perfect imaginary reservoir of scientific discovery.

Jeneral said...

This is no way to get your point across.

smash said...

JF- actually I had a spouse who worked at a medical research facility. They tested diabetes medications, alternative chemo treatments and the list goes on. They tested on primates, chimps, rats, mice and I believe something small like fruit flies. I am not against all medical testing and I realize we need live subjects to test these experimental treatments on. My argument is they to do not to be using cats. Rats and mice have worked well until recent years. So thank you for trying to "learn" me something new.

jfwlucy said...

So wait, you are okay with primates but not with cats? I don't understand that at all, since primates are more intelligent and have more feelings than cats, particularly chimpanzees.

I'm not trying to learn you anything -- just making statements of fact. You implied a) that the experiment hadn't accomplished anything, which it had, and that b) research which hasn't yet yielded all the information it has to give is somehow less worthy than more advanced research. Both of which statements are untrue.

smash said...

I am NOT ok with primates or cats or dogs or any mammal being used for testing. I was trying to get the point across that I know a lot more about medical research then you think. I am 100% behind aborted fetus stem cell research though. But that would never be government funded like other tests because of how controversial it is.

I never said research had no benefit. I do not see the benefit of a private or public funded "university" doing medical research.

yodelay said...

"That'll do, pig. That'll do" Gets me every time! Love that movie!

If he feels that strongly, more power to him.

Audrey said...

Unfortunately, from what I understand, we need to test on animals in order to create better medicines for humans. That said, I wish we didn't have to and anytime we test on ANY animal, I would hope we do so as humanely as possible.

chopchop said...

So he was okay with injecting Chloe Sevigny with syphilis but not cats?? Say it ain't so Dr Arden!

:-P

Seriously, I've loved him since Babe. He's seriously awesome. And this happened in my state!

All about Eve said...

I understand and appreciate that we need to test on animals but we need to make sure the experiments are completely necessary and done in an ethical way. I love cats and will maybe get another one in the future, my lovely Lucy, a white Persian, died almost two years ago, still miss her :(

bonnie blue-blade said...

NO ANIMAL SHOULD HAVE TO SUFFER...that is the point..euthanizing is painless...this is TORTURE...thank you @Kimberly...people are selfish, self-centered and SO DEFENSIVE...they cannot rationalize or make enough excuses for hurting innocent animals. you either love animals or you don't...don't tell me you love animals and eat a fucking cow...testing and furs are the worst but any pain inflicted on ANY animal is WRONG but if you choose to do it then you DO NOT love animal...PERIOD

bonnie blue-blade said...

animals*

Boriqua said...

So proud of him. He'll always be Farmer Hoggett to me. :)

And @yodelay -- Me too! I tear up every damn time. It's Babe's happy little sigh that does me in.

luckylass said...

You use and benefit from so many things that have all resulted from animal research. Yeah, not getting polio - you can thank animal research for that vaccine.

We are mammals and therefore need test subjects that are similar to us. Cats, dogs, mice, primates are >95% genetically identical to us. A fruit fly is <50%. To put it in perspective, a fruit fly has only 8 chromosomes. We have 46.

bonnie blue-blade: I love animals and I bought a cow direct from the rancher. My friend who was the the cows vet. It had a lovely life and has now given me life. I also teach pre-med/vet students about heart anatomy with sheep and cow hearts. I teach them about neurology using sedated live frogs. A computer program will not teach you how to do surgery on humans or animals.

smash - why shouldn't universities conduct research? And why did you put universities in quotes?

Andrea Gallegos Balderas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jason Blue Eyes said...

George from my favorite show of all time - Six Feet Under can do no wrong by me. Keep fighting the fight James.

I'm a cat person too.

Ingrid Superstar said...

Schmucky (6:33 AM) - If you're going to be some kind of wannabe outrageous pop culture commenter, at least do some research. James Cromwell has been working regularly FOREVER. It's not like he was going to be some hot flash-in-the-pan hunk, he was always just a respected character actor. Hardly washed up. Now if it was Zach Galligan or C. Thomas Howell doing this...

RocketQueen said...

Well I'm applauding James Cromwell.

I know a lot of you will disagree, but I'm just going to leave this here.

Animal testing is wrong, even if there so called parameters and guidelines. It isn’t some juvenile cry-fest over fluffy cute animals, it’s a real and tangible effort to have numb, callous people look at where compassion can teach us. Why be so excessive with what we test? Why restrain rabbits and smear chemicals in their eyes when a cross section of human testers could wear the product properly, and report back results?

People love to cite animals having been used for research since the inception of modern science. Tradition should never be a reason to continue a practice, but a great opportunity to examine whether it is worthwhile. I can cite slavery, “witch” killing, and a myriad of other practices that ended because the repetition of this only served to underscore how horrifying and wrong the practice was.

Universities, labs, research facilities all have different rules - if any at all- and those govern only “basic needs” of the animal. It does not specify how an animal is to be “humanely” tested on, since there would be no way to carry out this task. “Animal research is only performed when absolutely necessary, and the amount of paperwork and ethics forms that must first be filled out is phenomenal.” Also- BULLSHIT. Is it “absolutely necessary” to force feed dogs pesticides, force muscle atrophy and starvation to see if a pet food can “reverse” conditions? Is it also necessary to do vivisection to investigate how an organism works when a video or computer program can replicate results? What do you consider necessary and ethical?

Oh and mice, rats, cold blooded animals and other small test subjects are so frequently used because THEY ARE NOT covered under the animal welfare acts you claim protects them. Also- these “absolutely necessary tests” are not required by law in commercial industry, and are often disguised as other human tests. The reality is- animal testing often produces misleading or simply inaccurate results.

Regardless of my bias, there are still a few glaring issues with animal research:

How can we be aware that the animal research will have the same effects on a human? (we can’t.)
Are the benefits truly worth the inhumanity? Are there literally NO OTHER WAYS to find our results? (dissections and vivisections in schools for instance- it’s already been proven that computer or 3d models teach the lesson more effectively.)
Is our observational data (since animals cannot report details of the test) enough to glean the correct data?

Are so called “ethics” and “humanity” regulations ACTUALLY observed and adhered to? Are they really as enforceable as you claim? (no, I have already detailed that many animals are not covered by animal welfare laws, and how many researchers are able to skirt regulations.)

At the end of the day, there are new technologies every day that are eliminating the need for animal testing, but it is cheaper for big pharma and schools to use animals. Doesn't make it right. Thank goodness several countries and many cosmetic companies are agreeing to use other methods. One day we'll be ashamed of using animals when we didn't have to. Of course we had to at one point. We don't anymore. We can grow as a race and still be kind.

/stepping off soapbox

O'Really said...

He just played a main character on American Horror Story. His career has not hit the skids.

luckylass said...

RocketQueen- so many of your comments are incorrect. Some of which I have brought up already. As a scientist and educator I am intimately involved with many of the subjects you have brought up.

In the US, research including their research methods on vertebrates has to be cleared by IACUC (http://www.iacuc.org/) internal and external committee members. This includes research involving fish, mice, birds, amphibians, reptiles, cats, dogs, primates, and other mammals but does not include bacteria, worms, coral, insects, shellfish, plants, fungi.

Just some questions for people to ponder:
Did you want your obstetrician to learn about delivering babies on the computer?
All of your baby products (formula and baby food included) result from animal research. Sure there are "cruelty free" ones. You know how they exist? They do not test their ingredients because other companies/entities have already determined that they were safe.
Just because something is natural doesn't mean it is safe for use. Eat a green potato or a berry from a bella donna plant and see what happens. Everything must be tested at some point of time for safety.

Don't be naive folks. More than half of us wouldn't be alive without the medical advances that animals have afforded us.

Don't get me wrong, I looked at the pictures of the cat with neurological sensors on its head and it tugged on my heart. I could never DO that research, but can see the value of creating better implants for the deaf.

None of this research is done in excess this I CAN ASSURE YOU! Nothing about science is easy or cheap. It is about being efficient. Maintaining a single cat to study could cost 1000's upon 1000's of dollars. I know that can be hard to imagine, but I am being 100% honest with you. Sadly, though, results must be repeatable. You can't study just one individual. And even when you do this research, the results might not end up being helpful to humankind. That is the nature of science.
No one is doing this because they enjoy torturing animals. Why go to school for 8 years to torture animals. And believe me, they aren't doing it for the money. I would bet that most of you makes more than these PhD's.

And this is nothing to the EU, who have much better toxicity laws in place.

luckylass said...

"How can we be aware that the animal research will have the same effects on a human?"

We can - animal trials are completed first, then there are human clinical trials. Then approval.

smash said...

Lucky lass- a friend of mine worked at a research facility at UW doing research on mice and rats. The research was to show if animals get addicted to cocaine. Everyday he dosed mice and rats with cocaine. I do not think a college/university needs to be involved in cocaine research or even health research. They are students, he was a trained professional who assisted the students. I agree we need to teach medical professional correctly but I do not think live animal test subjects are the answer.

As for vaccines, if the animal is the carrier and that is how humans get sick that is one thing. My ex would give the primates the whatever it was they were testing, get them pregnant and test the offspring. Birthcontrol alone is something that has had years of research but still women have terrible reactions depending on their immunity. Each person is unique just like animals, it is hard to blanket statment.

I am not trying to argue with you. This is something that actually interests me. Excuse any typos.

bonnie blue-blade said...

"don't be so naive"(they are only animals after all)...."as a scientist"(I know so much more than you uneducated people who post here...in fact I don't even know what I'm even doing here when there is an animal somewhere I could be torturing or maybe convincing people they should be tortured...for the "greater good"... @lucky lass...thank you so much for proving my point...and being SO condescending while doing so

luckylass said...

bonnie blue have you been vaccinated?

bonnie blue-blade said...

Have I been vaccinated?.You really should have given that a bit more thought don't you think? Isn't that something you should be asking my mother since I had no say in it...don't bother asking me any more questions...I don't like you or people like you ... anyone who thinks it's okay to hurt an innocent animal for any reason is a piece of shit in my book and can fuck off

luckylass said...

Smash - no worries about typos. I am full of them. So much research is conducted in universities in the US and abroad. It is how we teach future doctors and scientists. They learn by doing and science is advanced. I bet it is much more controlled and therefore ethical than in private organizations since so much of the funding is dependent on the govt. And believe me it is not easy to convince the govt it is important enough to give you money.

Much research being conducted is misunderstood by the public, because it is super complicated AND as scientists we are generally terrible communicators (and come off as condescending fucks - something I will not deny bonnie blue-blade). I am 100% positive that the research on the effects of cocaine on rats is so much more than getting them high and then killing them. For example here is what some of the research at UW Madison is finding using mice: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18061591
Its complicated stuff, no doubt, and difficult to explain to people that haven't taken biology since high school or as a non-major in college. And shit, alot of it is super hard for me even to understand.

Anyway, I really do not mean to come off as condescending. But it is aggravating to read so many people bash the research that they benefit from. I really hopes to provide some insight into the discipline. I love animals and I do respect life. I respect and appreciate the organisms (down to bacteria and viruses) that have improved our quality of living.

luckylass said...

I hope you get shingles

MadLyb said...

This is really sad. Corporations rule our world, and we are allowing ourselves to become (or we already are) their slaves.

My daughter called me yesterday to tell me she is doing a prominent PETA demonstration where she's likely to get arrested. And if you watch a certain animal show early next week, you might see her if she isn't dragged out before the camera's catch her.

I don't agree with a lot of what PETA does, even as a vegetarian, but I think that human's treatment of animals on this planet is inexcusable. (Not even getting into human's treatment of other humans). Knowing that pacifist types like Lucy Lui and James Cromwell are being punished for giving a shit about the planet and the life on it while total assholes get off scott free because they are wealthy is very disheartening to watch. Maybe I'm just an asshole, but my theory is seeing all the injustice in this world has made me choose to be this way.

smash said...

Thank you for your actually very nice answer! :) like I said and as you said it is a very complex subject. I still think we shouldn't have stopped funding stem cell research. THAT I feel, is really the future of science. Have a really Good Friday night lucklass.

For a moment I thought you said you hope I got shingles. Haha, I had this talk with my bf last night. Since I had chicken pox, I can't remember if I got vaccinated but I got it anyway, I totally have a high chance of getting shingles :/ facts of life. Haha.

Scallywag said...

I love animals and grew up with cats as pets, but I have a dear friend with a deaf 4-year-old. If animal testing under humane controls can help provide hearing for her child, I can't be against that.

WUWT? said...

When my cat was terminally ill, I was trying everything the vet suggested as possible tests and treatments, trying to get more than the month and a half we had left. When I mentioned blood transfusions and chemo/radiation to my mom, she freaked out. "They do that for CATS?!" I had to remind her that the only reason they do it for humans is they did it for animals first (as experiments), and it's about time animals reaped the benefits and not just the sacrifice of that research.


luckylass said...

Smash - if you are still reading this thread, I definitely did not wish shingles on you. And really I don't wish that on anyone. I was enjoying my second strong White Russian at the time - in a robe no less.

luckylass said...

WUWT? - I agree with you 100% and thought I would share a project that one of my students (pre-vet) is currently proposing. She is interested in applying the information we know about human genes that control hip development (which prevent or promote human hip dysplasia) to dogs. Her goal is to find a simple genetic screening test so that we can wipe out hip dysplasia in dogs. Using human research to help dogs!

Little Miss Smoke and Mirrors said...

James Cromwell is a terrific actor. He can play evil as well as beloved. I respect him even more now that I know he's a friend of the animals.

timebob said...

I donate to the Best Friend's Society. They are a no kill compound and took in the Michael Vick dogs and rehabilitated them. If they can't adopt them out they live their life their on the sanctuary.

It isn't as sexy as having a model 'go naked than wear fur' but it does a lot more for animals that need to be taken care of and loved.