AngryToxicologist is a scientist in the public health sector, knows plenty about toxicology, and is occasionally angry about it all. Drop me a line at After the dust up last week about violent anti-animal testing groups (coast down through the comments on the linked Denialism post to get the short version of my take), two things stuck in my head. One, the Dalai Lama says my karma's okay as long as I'm following what looks like a version of the Society of Toxicology's Principles of Animal Use. Two, what would be of practical use to researchers who deal with this problem? Here's my advice:
1) Have compassion for animals in research.
2) Strive to make your research a benefit for humanity.
3) Get this free karmic pass and put it on your lab door. Download pdf poster here.
4) Smile and feel at peace (really).
Many thanks to my good friend P for putting this together for me!
Politics
Life Science
Comments
I should note that this isn't meant to poke fun at his Holiness; in fact, I respect him. It's a way of showing how absolutely outside of any accepted moral realm these violent extremist are. If done right, Bhuddists are with us! Who's with the extremists? Nobody. Well, at least no one in their right (or left, or any) mind.
Posted by: Angrytoxicologist | November 5, 2007 10:01 AM
As someone who was in the room for that talk, I'd say that the Dali Lama's threshold for acceptible animal research is probably stricter than what is currently being done in science labs. He clearly would prefer a system that focus on research with extremely clear and direct benefits to life (i.e. not necessarily basic research that causes animals pain and may or may not result in helping others 20 years in the future). That said, he was clearly in favor of animal research.
Posted by: bsci | November 5, 2007 11:18 AM
My guess is that this poster might bring you more trouble, not less.
I predict that a hard-core anti-animal testing nut would see this and be certain that you're lying about the Dalai Lama's views. He wouldn't know the Dalai Lama's real position, and wouldn't believe you if you told him.
In his mind, you'd be defaming the Dalai Lama on top of your animal testing crimes.
Posted by: qetzal | November 5, 2007 12:01 PM
qetzal, I appreciate the comment but -> so be it. They won't listen to reason or the law so in the vein of Al Franken, we might as well have a little fun. And if it can turn just a few of their heads enough that they look into the subject and find his Holiness's real views and consider them, then I'd be happy (and probably more effective that a logical argument at this point).
Posted by: AngryToxicologist | November 5, 2007 1:08 PM
Sweet! It's gracing the door right now.
Posted by: AJ | November 5, 2007 6:18 PM
Tee.
Posted by: P | November 6, 2007 5:36 PM
hearby -> hereby.
Posted by: Peter Lund | March 18, 2008 2:28 PM
As someone who was in the room for that talk, I'd say that the Dali Lama's threshold for acceptible animal research is probably stricter than what is currently being done in science labs.He clearly would prefer a system that focus on research with extremely clear and direct benefits to life (i.e. not necessarily basic research that causes animals pain and may or may not result in helping others 20 years in the future). That said, he was clearly in favor of animal research.
Posted by: mike | October 28, 2008 2:04 PM
thanx
Posted by: mirc | March 25, 2009 10:32 PM
thanks..
Posted by: muhabbet | March 26, 2009 10:22 AM
They won't listen to reason or the law so in the vein of Al Franken, we might as well have a little fun. And if it can turn just a few of their heads enough that they look into the subject and find his Holiness's real views and consider them, then I'd be happy (and probably more effective that a logical argument at this point).
Posted by: Abercrombie | November 30, 2009 10:16 PM