Shades of Gray

The world, it is full of shades of gray. There is nothing that is "always" or "never". Every person, every animal, has their own view based on what they have experienced in life. It is a rather useless mindset to make an opinion to be "NEVER, NO HOW, NO WAY, NEVER". I see this all of the time, however. I have even been guilty of it myself. I do try, especially the older I get, to see both sides, to see why something may or may not be valid in a given situation.

I saw a post today about a study that found some dogs who have "aggression" issues, those dogs that snap/snarl/bite, suffer from low serotonin levels. The idea is that these animals could be helped with an antidepressant medication. Response to these posts were varied but many were "don't drug the dogs, that's wrong, never, never, never". This knee jerk response is useless. Out of the millions of dogs on this planet, I imagine there are some who have medically low serotonin levels and that makes them feel rather surly. (Serotonin is like nature's feel good drug) Does that mean that all surly dogs should be on medication? Of course not. The causes for low serotonin are varied, just as they are in humans, and may be a symptom rather than a cause. Multimodal treatments are often needed in these instances. However, some of these posters went on to say how people take too many antidepressants, children take too much ritalin, etc. In some ways, they are correct, but that is then to the opposite extreme of drug help. Drugs don't solve underlying issues so those issues need to be addressed BUT they can make a person, or dog, functional until those issues are addressed. Moderation is key, moderation in all things.
My high school honors english teacher always taught us that moderation in everything is the way to go. I am coming more and more to agree with her.

In other examples, I know many rescue people who are completely against breeding. That is not reasonable either since that would eventually eradicate all pet animals. Now, being against irresponsible breeding, that is a stance I can get behind. I prefer to allow the professionals, who actually try to prevent genetic abnormalities from continuing, to breed and not allow the backyard breeders to continue. But, most importantly, the ones who need to be required to spay/neuter are those that never intend to breed and end up with "oopsies". Those are the mixed breed dogs dying in shelters every day. Yes, there are plenty of purebred dogs in shelters but many of them make it out through rescue or adoption because they are purebred. The mixed breeds don't have a chance and those animals come from irresponsible people too lazy, stupid, uncaring, or just plain ignorant to spay/neuter. That is where our stance should lie, in the middle ground. Rescuers and responsible breeders (hell, even backyard breeders) should be able to unite on this.

Another example, all scientists are not crazy Einstein people who torture animals for kicks. If we do animal research, it's because we must, not because we want to cause them pain. The extreme animal welfare people are always screaming about what we do to animals in research but none of them are scientists nor do they work in animal research so they don't really have any idea. They assume all scientists who use animals in research are hard-hearted, terrible people but I'm here to tell you, we aren't. Many of us long for the day when animals will only be needed for the rarest of occasion, when we will have reliable means to test drugs without animals. That day has not come nor is it likely to come for many more years since we have such an incomplete understanding of the fundamentals of physiology. We do, however, follow the Reduce mentality in that we try to use as few animals as possible to give the statistical power required. I understand animal welfarists who are concerned about the use, and yes, I agree that we need stringent regulations (and we have them but some are not always enforced as they should be) but I also understand the scientists who have to use animals in order to obtain FDA approval for a clinical trial. There are both sides to this issue and a moderate approach is the only way to have drug development for human health that is efficacious but does not kill more animals than necessary.

Our lives are full of experiences, every day, that shape and mould our thinking. None of us can know the life of another, the mind of another, even the closest of beings will never truly understand one another. We can only try to see both sides, to be moderate in our opinions.