I still remember how in my college of priests, Miss Agustina, my 2nd grade EGB teacher, explained to us why the dogs did not want like the people, and it was because they had no spirit, and as although they were also creatures of God, they were inferior beings ... there were studies that proved it.
At that moment I did not know what to answer him. Today I bring you this article as an answer for myself, and of course, I want to share it with you. I leave you with the entry: Who says dogs have no feelings?
It is very difficult (almost impossible) for a dog owner, that his pet has no emotions or feelings. Anyone who has a dog will tell you, that his dog you only need to speak to be a person. However, there is still a part of the international scientific community that insists on the issue. Where these voices come from and what objective they are due to, is the subject that occupies me in today's post.
Let's start engines ...
Emotions and Feelings in our dogs
It is very difficult to assert that dogs have no emotionsHowever, for centuries, the international scientific community has questioned the ability, not only of dogs, but of all animals, to get so excited as to feel and interpret their emotions on a conscious level. It is not from now.
Scientists and researchers of all stripes have long held the theory that dogs had neither emotions nor feelings. Descartes, for example, said of dogs that they were animated machines (Machina Animata who said the), and today there are all kinds of theories about how it is impossible for the dog to feel or get excited.
The Veterinarian and Professor of Animal Sciences Fred Metzger, has his own theory about that:
Dogs they don't feel their emotions like we do. They don't love like we do. What the dog does is investments in human beings, developing all kinds of behaviors that serve to obtain affection or food. In this way, the more tender and emotional the animal is, the more attention it receives. The dog soon relates that the more affection he manages to arouse, the greater his compensation will be, and that is what he does, simulate affection.
I believe that if we leave the dog for a while with some neighbors, and they offer the same rewards, the dog will soon love them as much as their owners.
I personally, before this assertion of a Professor of Animal Sciences, I have to be surprised. However far from getting tangled up now with my personal opinion on Doctor Metzger's theory, I will move on and later, I will try to express my point of view about what he said, and about what he stopped saying.
Now, at this point I do want to ask a couple of uncomfortable questions:
It is clear that today, the general trend is not to investigate why dogs do not have emotions, but rather the opposite. The interactions between dogs and humans and their study are found in the cutting-edge studies of the international scientific community, in which not only ethologists, veterinarians and educators study dogs and their emotional intelligence, but also neurologists, biologists and even sociologists. They all strive to show that dogs are excited and feeling. Together, they look for new ways to make this connection so particular that we have with dogs stronger, richer and more instinctive, that in new ways make us take better advantage of the tremendous properties that this connection brings to humans, and all the possible applications it has. .
Well, if this is so, who does a study to prove the opposite? Who spends money proving that dogs don't have feelings? Who's interested? as the Romans said: Whose Bono?
And this is where the darkness of this issue begins.
Who benefits?
I begin by admitting that I have not wanted to delve much into the subject, since it is painful for me, to see articles and read about animal experimentation, however I made an effort to be as truthful as possible and here I leave you my conclusions. I swear that since I was little I hate everything related to animal testing And as this topic is an exercise in hypocrisy at the social level, however, I will concentrate my efforts on informing you as best as possible. And it is that the subject has crumb.
Well yes, for centuries, humans have experimented with animals. Our medical advances are built on millions of animal carcasses, from rats to horses. And that has always been great business.
Today, there are many companies that sell animals for experimentation scientific. These companies used to be in the US, however in recent decades, different companies have been opened that are dedicated to raising animals for scientific clinical experimentation. This means that, for example, companies such as Noveprim, which is dedicated to the breeding of monkeys for experimentation, and which has its own breed of monkeys for experimentation registered with copyright, has built a breeding center in Camarles, Tarragona, from where will supply companies in Europe. This company has bought half of its shares by another company in the sector, COVANCE, which is dedicated to providing services for scientific and pharmaceutical companies, although its large client is the US Army.
And in Spain?
In Spain, it is also experimented with animals. The Complutense University of Madrid has an average of 50 subjects in experimentation, all of the Beagle breed, which is the breed that is usually used for this. These dogs are sold by international companies that are dedicated to scientific research services, such as Harlan Iberica, Charles River or B&K Universal. These companies market with the life of living beings, and earn a lot of money with it. The price of a Beagle to experiment with is around 1000 euros. The price of a Beagle, for any individual, with a pedigree, would not exceed 500 eu. As you can see, it is quite a difference.
Although many times we are not aware of it, in reality, many products of which we consume daily, are tested on animals. Cosmetics, drugs, foods, new materials, and a long etc, are tested before with our canine friends (and many other animals, here the official numbers of the animals used in Spain), and their use extends to other sectors, from Universities, where they are used for testing by students in branches such as Medicine or Veterinary Medicine, or for military purposes, which is that I prefer not to comment on my own emotional health.
These types of companies, focused their advertising campaign, focused the way they wanted us to see their companies, decades ago, in demonstrating through scientific studies of doubtful result, that the animals did not feelThey didn't even have emotions. This made it easier for them to be accepted by public opinion, which made it easier for them to develop as a company. It is not easy to get investors if they think of your work that you are an animal killer. That is easy to understand.
For this reason, this type of company has always dedicated a large part of its advertising budget to try to have a better acceptance among the public opinion, and for this reason, one of his first attempts was to try to show that animals did not have emotions or feelings like those of humans. Although the so-called Emotional Intelligence, was not studied as it is today, the first attempt by the industrial machinery of these companies was to cut the ties that humans have, emotionally with animals, and especially with dogs. . His way of trying to cut that tie was through studies that, through theories such as those of Professor Metzger, showed that dogs did not suffer like humans, and that this made them the ideal experimental subjects. As I tell you.
However, that idea did not catch on not at all before animal lovers, and that love we have for our dogs, resulted in countless scientific studies, with proven and reliable results, that tell us otherwise.
What have companies in the sector done to try to mitigate the negative impact What creates your business activity in your corporate image in the eyes of the general public? Well, do what I see as a flight forward. Although of course, given the means available to this sector of the industry, it could well be going well for them. And let me explain.
Where everything comes from
When trying to clarify this issue a bit, and see where the studies that supported the inexistence of emotions in animals came from, I have come across a whole network of associations, companies and advocacy groups for animal experimentation. As you read my friends.
These entities, defend the need to experiment with animals and they introduce words such as Bioethics or Animal Welfare, and they tell us about safe procedures and basic regulations such as the 3R's (Replace the use of animals with cell cultures or computer simulations when possible, Reduce the number of animals to those strictly necessary and Refine the methods used to increase animal welfare), in order to justify their work, and thus enjoy the same opportunities as other companies.
For this they have used that of the union is strength, and the interaction of the companies in the sector, when looking for advertising formulas that nullify their bad image, It is very big and strong, and more than palpable in different associations and societies worldwide such as:
Then there is also continental associationssuch as EARA(European Animal Resarch Association) which is funded by all of the above, which in turn are funded by companies that provide services to research companies. Let's put a button as a sample:
El DRY is Spanish Society for Laboratory Animal Sciences, which is the Spanish version of the groups mentioned above. This Society is financed by companies such as:
These companies and several others finance the Spanish Society for Laboratory Animal Sciences, with succulent donations, and in return, this entity, promotes the benefits to humanity and the need for animal experimentation in the most varied forms and possible ways. For example, giving training in the form of courses, seminars and congresses, where University Professors, Doctors and Directors of Institutes and Scientific Societies participate as speakers, which in turn, are usually the main clients of these companies. And let's not forget that all these companies have state and European subsidies in R&D.
Therefore, the speakers of this type of events, which are organized by SECLA, they have direct deal, through his different professional positions, with the companies that finance him.
Does anyone else smell weird?
Something smells rotten in Denmark
With this quote from Hamlet, I focus on a series of personal opinions, that I want to share with you, and that I hope you will help us understand the scope of this topic.
In other words, the departments of the different universities and scientific institutions of this country, They buy animals for experimentation from various companies in the sector, mostly multinationals, which then finance Scientific Societies and Associations such as SECLA, which promotes the need to continue experimenting and that talks about concepts such as bioethics and animal welfare in laboratory animals, and that promotes a series of humanitarian norms for animals, and that gives training, through courses, lectures, meetings and congresses, in which the main speakers are the directors, professors, doctors and scientists of the departments of the aforementioned entities.
If not suspicious, at least it is curious. Especially when those Universities and Institutes, They buy Beagle dogs at an average of 1000 euros for each animal. I know that someone will try to explain to me that these dogs are genetically balanced, and that they are of a special breed free from diseases and consanguinity defects, however, I repeat ... 1000 euros for a Beagle ...
In a good hatchery, one like decasla, which is not cheap since it meets all possible regulations, and has 20 years of experience, a Beagle dog with Pedigree, has a price of 400 euros. I think it is toooooooda a difference.
And this is how it works in Spain. In the US, companies directly finance University departments give scholarships and research funding to scientists and directors of scientific institutions and organizations.
This means that there are Veterinarians and Professors in Animal Science, they develop all kinds of theories and studies that help the industries of the companies that will end up financing them. And I don't want to point out where Fred is, why is it ugly to point out Fred, otherwise ...
Dismantling Fred's theory
Focusing directly on Fred Metzger's theory of good old man, researcher, professor and veterinarian at the University of Pennsylvania, which is in my opinion, a string of nonsense said by someone who is supposed to know what he is talking about, there is a part, the part of the statement of his theory, in which he puts a practical example to add credibility, which is particularly incredible that a professional says it with his resume.
Really, I have freaked out a lot. I say it that clearly and I explain myself. Good old Doctor Metzger tells us:
"I think that if we leave the dog for a while with some neighbors, and they offer the same rewards, the dog will soon love them as much as their owners"
Dogs are social animals. They create emotional bonds with the individuals with whom they live with those who have a good relationship (and with those who do not), since within the herd, it is necessary to have relationships, and these are usually based on common motivations and objectives. Following the example of good old Fred, if we leave our dog to the neighbor for a while, and he gives him prizes and rewards, he will develop an emotional bond with that neighbor, however he will not do so by replacing the relationship he had with us with a new one. you will simply have a new relationship with someone, which does not have to resemble the one you have with us.
Dogs are animals with emotions and feelings, not machines that reproduce a series of behaviors when faced with stimuli. It is very normal for the same dog to develop different behaviors when faced with the same stimulus, which comes from different individuals. This is due to the dog adapts to situations and changes in the same way as humans, through emotions and feelings. And I put a simple example.
If the same dog is taken out to the street by several individuals, the dog will have different behavior with each individual, depending on his personality and the relationship he has with the dog. It doesn't matter if they give it the same reward, the dog will adapt to the situation, and will behave differently with each of the members of the group to which it belongs. And maybe even if they all give you the same prizes and rewards, your relationship with them will be different with each of them, which as I have said before, it depends on the personality of each one and the emotional bond they have with the dog.
Ultimately, the example that Fred gives us has the flaw that totally ignores the psychology of the animal, and focuses directly on a single aspect of the human-dog interaction, giving a distorted version of the situation, from which he draws some hasty conclusions that are nowhere to be sustained. I really don't know how someone with his academic record he can say such savageryunless you have any interest in saying it.
To finish
It is incredible how, sometimes, we read certain types of articles, explaining all kinds of theories and studies, that it is easy to wonder, after reading them, what is the scientific rigor and what purpose do they serve, and many times we just have to apply the Cui Bonus, to know where they arise and who is interested. You just have to read Dr. Metzger's article to understand it. Here I leave it ...Probing Question: Does my dog really love me?
Without further ado, I leave you until a next article. Be happy and take care of your dogs.
