Navy halts dog and cat experiments after PETA writes Hegseth about US taxpayer-funded animal tests
The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) penned a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Navy Secretary John Phelan Thursday, thanking the Trump administration for its ban on Navy-funded dog and cat experiments announced this week and requesting a broader ban on all animal testing in all military branches.
Phelan on Tuesday terminated all Department of the Navy testing on cats and dogs, saving taxpayer dollars and ending these inhumane studies.
"This is long overdue," Phelan said in a video posted to X. "In addition to this termination, I'm directing the surgeon general of the Navy to conduct a comprehensive review of all medical research programs to ensure they align with ethical guidelines, scientific necessity, and our core values of integrity and readiness."
PETA on Thursday further urged the Department of Defense to conduct a similar comprehensive, agency-wide audit aimed at rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in cruel and outdated animal experimentation.
Specifically, the international organization requested the Department of Defense (DOD) ban the use of animals in Navy decompression sickness and oxygen toxicity tests and prohibit the use of dogs, cats, nonhuman primates, marine animals and other animals currently permitted in Army weapon-wounding tests.
The weapon-wounding tests, which were banned during the Reagan administration, were reintroduced in 2020 when the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command (USAMRDC) issued a policy allowing for the purchase of "dogs, cats, nonhuman primates, or marine mammals to inflict wounds upon using a weapon for the purpose of conducting medical research, development, testing, or evaluation."
The Army in 2023, with encouragement from PETA, cut $750,000 in taxpayer funding for a brain-damaging weapon-wounding experiment on ferrets at Wayne State University in Michigan.
While reviewing other branches, PETA obtained public records showing decompression sickness experiments at the Naval Medical Research Command sliced open baby pigs, implanted devices and locked them in high-pressure chambers for up to eight days before killing them.
Researchers are also accused of administering a drug to a pig and inducing a severe escalation in body temperature and muscle contractions before killing the animal. Officials said potentially faulty sedatives may have prolonged the pig's suffering.
In another incident, a rat suffocated to death after an equipment malfunction, and the researcher failed to report the incident for 23 days, according to PETA.
The organization alleged the Navy has wasted more than $5.1 million in federal funding since 2020 for decompression sickness and oxygen toxicity tests on thousands of animals at Duke University, the University of Maryland in Baltimore, the University of California in San Diego and the University of South Florida.
"Pigs, rats and other animals feel pain and fear just as dogs and cats do, and their torment in gruesome military experiments must end," PETA Vice President Shalin Gala wrote in a statement.
"PETA appreciates the Trump administration's decision to stop the Navy's torture tests on dogs and cats, and we urge a broader ban across the Pentagon to end the use of animals in Navy-funded decompression sickness and oxygen toxicity tests, Army-funded weapon-wounding tests and DOD-funded foreign experiments."
PETA also requested in the letter that Defense Department officials prohibit funding of tests on animals at foreign institutions.
In one experiment in Canada, which is receiving $429,347 in DOD funding, a University of Alberta experimenter is using dogs as "models" of a muscle wasting disease.
In another ongoing DOD-funded foreign experiment in Australia, which is receiving $599,984, a James Cook University researcher is burning 30% of rats' body surface with scalding water and into their livers, inflicting an "[u]ncontrolled hemorrhage."
The Department of Defense, Secretary of the Navy's office and Navy Office of Information did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's requests for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Health Line
11 minutes ago
- Health Line
What to Know About High Functioning Schizophrenia
When a person's schizophrenia symptoms do not appear to interfere with their daily life, their condition may be referred to as high functioning schizophrenia. But this is not an official diagnosis. Schizophrenia is a complex and varied psychiatric disorder that affects each person differently. Some people have relatively mild symptoms that come and go. Others experience more severe, persistent symptoms that interfere with their daily lives. When a person with schizophrenia is able to live a mostly independent life, hold a job, and maintain relationships, their condition is often referred to as 'high functioning.' Language matters The term 'high functioning' doesn't have a clear medical definition. Some clinicians use it to refer to people who require a lower level of assistance for daily activities. But terms like 'high functioning' and 'low functioning' don't account for people's unique life circumstances, abilities, and strengths. It's best to avoid using this kind of language outside of a conversation with your healthcare professional. What is high functioning schizophrenia? High functioning schizophrenia is a term used when people with schizophrenia are able to function well in daily life despite their diagnosis. They may have milder symptoms, or they may have developed good coping mechanisms despite having more severe symptoms. It's important to note that 'high functioning' is a subjective term and not a clinical diagnosis. And the label doesn't necessarily reflect the severity of a person's symptoms. People with high functioning schizophrenia may still experience significant challenges and need continuous treatment and support. A person's level of functioning can be influenced by a range of factors, including: Symptom severity: People with fewer or less severe symptoms may be able to function better in daily life than those with more severe symptoms. Treatment response: Those who get timely, appropriate treatment are more likely to maintain good functioning. Research from 2020 suggests that early intervention may be linked to better long-term outcomes. Personal coping strategies: Some people develop strong coping strategies that allow them to effectively manage their symptoms and prevent those symptoms from having a major effect on their daily life. Strong support network: Those with very supportive family and friends may be able to function better in daily life than those who don't have this support. Lack of other mental or physical health conditions: Many people with schizophrenia have other mental or physical health conditions that make it more difficult to function in daily life. People who don't have another condition may appear higher functioning. Symptoms of high functioning schizophrenia Any person with schizophrenia, whether it's considered 'high' or low' functioning, can experience the same types of symptoms. Schizophrenia symptoms are divided into positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms. Positive symptoms are those that 'add' to your personality (in other words, they weren't there before the condition). These symptoms include those of psychosis, such as: hallucinations delusions disorganized thoughts and speech atypical motor behavior (e.g., catatonia) Negative symptoms 'take away' from your personality and involve five key areas: alogia (reduction in the number of words spoken) anhedonia (reduced experience of pleasure) asociality (reduced social activity) avolition (reduced goal-directed activity, due to decreased motivation) blunted affect (difficulty expressing emotions, such as diminished facial expressions) Cognitive symptoms may include issues with: focus and attention span working memory executive functioning The negative symptoms of schizophrenia are often more challenging to treat than the positive symptoms. For some people with schizophrenia, these negative symptoms persist, even when positive symptoms are well managed. Research from 2020 suggests that negative symptoms are associated with poorer outlook and long-term disability. While many people with high functioning schizophrenia do have negative symptoms, these symptoms may be less severe. Diagnosing high functioning schizophrenia In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. text revision (DSM-5-TR), schizophrenia is now listed as a spectrum disorder. This more accurately represents the condition's wide range of symptoms that can change over time. It's important to note that high functioning schizophrenia is not a clinical diagnosis. So, whether a person exhibits a higher or lower level of functioning, they still have to meet the same diagnostic criteria. A diagnosis of schizophrenia must include at least two of the following symptoms, with one of these symptoms being among the first three: delusions hallucinations disorganized speech severely disorganized or catatonic behavior negative symptoms The symptoms must occur frequently for at least 1 month, with some symptoms lasting for more than 6 months. In addition, you'll need to have experienced reduced functioning in one or more important areas of life, such as personal relationships, work, or self-care. Treating schizophrenia Schizophrenia is typically treated with antipsychotic medication as well as various types of therapies and skills training. Schizophrenia may be treated with the following: Atypical antipsychotics: Atypical, or second-generation, antipsychotics are the first-line treatment for schizophrenia. These medications lower dopamine levels in the brain, which helps target symptoms of psychosis. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT): CBT helps people with schizophrenia identify and fix unhelpful thought processes and behaviors. Social skills training: Social skills interventions help people with schizophrenia learn social and independent living skills. These may include classes covering interpersonal skills and medication management. Cognitive remediation: This intervention focuses on skills such as attention, memory, and flexible thinking. Social cognition training: This intervention targets skills such as social perception (understanding social cues or body language), emotion perception (identifying others' emotions), and theory of mind (identifying and understanding another person's mental state). Some people with high functioning schizophrenia may have achieved symptom remission after responding well to treatment. Symptom remission means that your symptoms are mild enough to not significantly interfere with your life. Research from 2018 suggests that symptom remission is possible in 20% to 60% of people with schizophrenia, but this depends on many complex factors.
Bloomberg
13 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Bloomberg Daybreak: Trump-Musk Feud
On today's podcast: 1) Elon Musk and President Donald Trump engage in a public dispute the traded personal barbs and weighed down Tesla stock and Musk's personal wealth. The dispute began over differences on the GOP tax legislation, with Musk opposing the bill and Trump accusing Musk of being motivated by self-interest. After Tesla shares tanked 14% and Musk's personal wealth dropped by $34 billion, Musk signaled a willingness to cool tensions with Trump, responding to a user's advice to "cool off and take a step back for a couple days" with "Good advice." 2) Tensions appear to be easing between the US and China. President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to further trade talks to resolve disputes over tariffs and rare earth minerals. The two leaders had a 90-minute call, during which Trump acknowledged that the trade relationship with China had gotten "a little off track" but said they are now "in very good shape" with a trade deal. 3) Investors brace for a critical May Jobs Report. Traders are awaiting the key monthly nonfarm payrolls report, which may reinforce expectations that the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates at least twice this year.
Associated Press
16 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order
BOSTON (AP) — Democratic state attorneys general on Friday will seek to block President Donald Trump's proposal for a sweeping overhaul of U.S. elections in a case that tests a constitutional bedrock — the separation of powers. The top law enforcement officials from 19 states filed a federal lawsuit after the Republican president signed the executive order in March, arguing that its provisions would step on states' power to set their own election rules and that the executive branch had no such authority. In a filing supporting that argument, a bipartisan group of former secretaries of state said Trump's directive would upend the system established by the Constitution's Elections Clause, which gives states and Congress control over how elections are run. They said the order seeks to 'unilaterally coronate the President as the country's chief election policymaker and administrator.' If the court does not halt the order, they argued, 'the snowball of executive overreach will grow swiftly and exponentially.' Trump's election directive was part of a flurry of executive orders he has issued in the opening months of his second term, many of which have drawn swift legal challenges. It follows years of him falsely claiming that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election was due to widespread fraud and an election year in which he and other Republicans promoted the notion that large numbers of noncitizens threatened the integrity of U.S. elections. In fact, voting by noncitizens is rare and, when caught, can lead to felony charges and deportation. Trump's executive order would require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, prohibit mail or absentee ballots from being counted if they are received after Election Day, set new rules for voting equipment and prohibit non-U.S. citizens from being able to donate in certain elections. It also would condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the strict ballot deadline. The hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Boston comes in one of three lawsuits filed against the executive order. One is from Oregon and Washington, where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail and ballots received after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by then. The provision that would create a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections already has been halted in a lawsuit filed by voting and civil rights groups and national Democratic organizations. In that case, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, the judge said the president's attempt to use a federal agency to enact a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voting usurped the power of states and Congress, which at the time was considering legislation that would do just that. That bill, called the SAVE Act, passed the U.S. House but faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Trump's executive order said its intent was to ensure 'free, fair and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion.' The Justice Department, in arguing against the motion by the attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, said the president is within his rights to direct agencies to carry out federal voting laws. The order tasks the U.S. Election Assistance Commission with updating the federal voter registration form to require people to submit documentation proving they are U.S. citizens. Similar provisions enacted previously in a handful of states have raised concerns about disenfranchising otherwise eligible voters who can't readily access those documents. That includes married women, who would need both a birth certificate and a marriage license if they had changed their last name. A state proof-of-citizenship law enacted in Kansas more than a decade ago blocked the registrations of 31,000 people later found to be eligible to vote. The two sides will argue over whether the president has the authority to direct the election commission, which was created by Congress as an independent agency after the Florida ballot debacle during the 2000 presidential election. In its filing, the Justice Department said Trump's executive order falls within his authority to direct officials 'to carry out their statutory duties,' adding that 'the only potential voters it disenfranchises are noncitizens who are ineligible to vote anyway.'
