Digest Number 107

[Guest guest]

To Toni Hallivaux:

 

I too have thought about this issue. I think there are two different sets of

circumstances. We have to survive - and sometimes that does mean an us-or-them

situation. Personally, if I have a realistic choice about it, I'll choose not to

do harm, but I recognise I might have to where options are limited.

 

I don't need to eat animals to survive, so I don't. I don't hate head lice for

doing head-lice things, but if they infest me or my children I'm going to want

rid of them. I'd use tea tree oil and comb them out. Yes, that would harm and

probably kill at least some of them, and washing down the drain might be an

unpleasant experience, but they can't stay in my hair. I wouldn't use a chemical

for many reasons (not good for us, causes superbugs, isn't very effective in my

direct experience, and seems a more violent reaction to them) and an electronic

comb is deliberately trying to kill them. I just want to remove them from me and

my kids. Another way of dealing with it is doing as much as you can to avoid

getting them (short hair, avoid contact, oils that deter them from moving in)

and then you don't have to harm them.

 

It's a bit like the humane mousetrap idea - you don't wish them harm but can't

allow them to live in your space. I feel the same about insects and other pests.

Try to encourage them to leave you alone, remove offenders as gently as you can,

and only do harm you can't avoid.

 

Medicines: I'd rather not use animal products as a medicine, but then again if

it's a matter of survival I think it's OK. There's room for trying alternatives

where they exist, as long as there's time to research and try them out. But if

your time is limited, like in an emergency, you have to go for the sure options.

You may have to decide whether to try something vegan but unsure and maybe risk

your condition becoming harder to treat if the vegan method fails. Nobody but

you can really make that choice, and I don't think anyone should condemn a

person for not taking the risk.

 

I take anti-depressants at the moment which contain lactose, and probably

gelatine (not even getting into animal testing). I only took this step after

realising my efforts to deal with it on my own weren't working. I've not tried

every avenue, but it got to the point where I needed something effective NOW or

my survival was in doubt. There may be room in the future for me to change to

something less harmful to animals - I just need to make sure that changing

doesn't harm me.

 

Magda

[Guest guest]

> kmagda354[sMTP:kmagda354]

>

> I take anti-depressants at the moment which contain lactose, and probably

> gelatine (not even getting into animal testing).

>

My take on this is that we need to try to change society's way of thinking

away from automatically including animal products in EVERYTHING. Unless the

lactose is an active anti-depressant then it doesn't need to be there.

Manufacturers really should wake up to the fact that they automatically

limit their marketplace by including substances that an increasingly large

section of society will not consume. Maybe worth a letter to the drug

company? Unless we point these things out nothing will ever change! Hope

they work well for you, by the way.

Cheers

Cathy

[Guest guest]

Please me.

 

 

aapn [aapn ]

Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:10 AM

aapn

Digest Number 107