Cancer has long been cured in mice but not in people. Why? Successful laboratory treatments and cures for one species don't necessarily result in cures for humans. But, because practice has become economically entrenched within medical industry, animal experimentation -against all medical evidence- continues.The human benefits of animal experimentation- a bedrock of the scientific age- is a myth perpetuated by an amorphous but insidious network of multibillion-dollar special interests: research facilities, drug companies, universities, scientisits, and even cage manufacturers.C.Ray Greek, MD, and veterniary dermatologist, Jean Swingle Gree, DMV, show how the public has been deliberately misled and blow the lid off the vested-interest groups whose hidden agendas put human health at risk.

Cancer has long been cured in mice but not in people. Why? Successful laboratory treatments and cures for one species don't necessarily result in cures for humans. But, because practice has become economically entrenched within medical industry, animal experimentation -against all medical evidence- continues.The human benefits of animal experimentation- a bedrock of the scientific age- is a myth perpetuated by an amorphous but insidious network of multibillion-dollar special interests: research facilities, drug companies, universities, scientisits, and even cage manufacturers.C.Ray Greek, MD, and veterniary dermatologist, Jean Swingle Gree, DMV, show how the public has been deliberately misled and blow the lid off the vested-interest groups whose hidden agendas put human health at risk.

Donna Yarri presents an overview of the current discussion on the ethics of animal experimentation from a Christian standpoint.

Suggest to the average leftist that animals should be part of broader liberation struggles and—once they stop laughing—you'll find yourself casually dismissed. With a focus on labor, property, and the life of commodities, Making a Killing contains key insights into the broad nature of domination, power, and hierarchy. It explores the intersections between human and animal oppressions in relation to the exploitative dynamics of capitalism. Combining nuts-and-bolts Marxist political economy, a pluralistic anarchist critique, as well as a searing assessment of the animal rights movement, Bob Torres challenges conventional anti-capitalist thinking and convincingly advocates for the abolition of animals in industry—and on the dinner plate. Making A Killing is sure to spark wide debate in the animal rights and anarchist movements for years to come. Table Of Contents: I Taking Equality Seriously II Chained Commodities III Property, Violence, and the Roots of Oppression IV Animal Rights and Wrongs V You Cannot Buy the Revolution Advance praise for Making A Killing "Bob Torres' Making a Killing draws a very straight line between capitalism and the oppressive system of animal agribusiness. Drawing from social anarchist theory, Torres provides a convincing argument that in order to fight animal exploitation, we must also fight capitalism and, in doing so, animal rights activists will need to reconsider their methods and redirect their focus. While his critiques of the animal rights movements' large organizations may not earn him friends in high places, such considerations are crucial to keeping the movement on track and for preventing stagnation. Making a Killing is an important work from a new voice in animal advocacy that will surely spark heated discussions amongst activists from all corners of the movement."—Ryan MacMichael, vegblog.org "In Making A Killing: The Political Economy of Animal Rights, Bob Torres takes an important and timely look at the animal rights movement, calling for a synthetic approach to all oppression, human and animal. His analytical framework draws together Marxism, social anarchist theory, and an abolitionist approach to animal rights to provide a timely social analysis that will no doubt have profound effects on the animal rights movement literature."—Gary L. Francione Distinguished Professor of Law, Rutgers University "Bob Torres's socioeconomic analysis of nonhuman animal use is a welcome and important addition to the understanding of human-nonhuman relations at the beginning of the 21st century. In particular, Making a Killing, makes vital a contribution to understanding the role of the property status of animals and the continuing strength of various welfarist positions on the ethics—and indeed the economics—of the human utilisation of other animals. Making a Killing will become required reading for social scientists and others interested in modern social movements and the socioeconomic forces that shape their activities and their claims-making."—Dr. Roger Yates, Lecturer in sociology at University College, Dublin, Republic of Ireland "This is the book I've been waiting for. Making A Killing is a rare and powerful example of first-rate scholarship, a searing critique, and lively declaration of the rights of animals and humans. You will walk away from this book with a clear understanding as to why social justice movements for people must take animal rights seriously, and vice versa. Bob Torres has forever deepened my thinking about these relationships."—David Naguib Pellow, vegetarian, animal rights and anti-racist activist, and Professor of Ethnic Studies, University of California, San Diego; and author of Garbage Wars: The Struggle for Environmental Justice in Chicago and Resisting Global Toxics: Transnational Movements for Environmental Justice Bob Torres is assistant professor of sociology at St. Lawrence University, received his PhD from Cornell, and is co-author of Vegan Freak: Being Vegan in a Non-Vegan World. His writings have appeared in Critical Sociology, The Journal of Latinos and Education, International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, and Satya magazine.

This book brings together a collection of social justice scholars and activists who take Foucault’s concept of discipline and punishment to explain how prisons are constructed in society from nursing homes to zoos. This book expands the concept of prison to include any institution that dominates, oppresses, and controls. Criminologists and others, who have been concerned with reforming or dismantling the criminal justice system, have mostly avoided to look at larger carceral structures in society. In this book, for example, scholars and activists question the way patriarchy has incapacitated women and imagine the deinstitutionalization of people with disabilities. In a time when popular sentiment critiques the dominant role of the elites (the “one percenters”), the state’s role in policing dissenting voices, school children, LGBTQ persons, people of color, and American Indian Nations, needs to be investigated. A prison, as defined in this book, is an institution or system that oppresses and does not allow freedom for a particular group. Within this definition, we include the imprisonment of nonhuman animals and plants, which are too often overlooked.

Many people think that animal liberation would require a fundamental transformation of basic beliefs. We would have to give up "speciesism" and start viewing animals as our equals, with rights and moral status. And we would have to apply these beliefs in an all-or-nothing way. But in Ethics and the Beast, Tzachi Zamir makes the radical argument that animal liberation doesn't require such radical arguments--and that liberation could be accomplished in a flexible and pragmatic way. By making a case for liberation that is based primarily on common moral intuitions and beliefs, and that therefore could attract wide understanding and support, Zamir attempts to change the terms of the liberation debate. Without defending it, Ethics and the Beast claims that speciesism is fully compatible with liberation. Even if we believe that we should favor humans when there is a pressing human need at stake, Zamir argues, that does not mean that we should allow marginal human interests to trump the life-or-death interests of animals. As minimalist as it sounds, this position generates a robust liberation program, including commitments not to eat animals, subject them to factory farming, or use them in medical research. Zamir also applies his arguments to some questions that tend to be overlooked in the liberation debate, such as whether using animals can be distinguished from exploiting them, whether liberationists should be moral vegetarians or vegans, and whether using animals for therapeutic purposes is morally blameless.