A lawsuit from PETA recently revealed the cruel and abusive experiments conducted on cats at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The experiments included restraining a cat named Double Trouble and subjecting it to toxic substances and electrical implants, leading to its death.
An investigation by the USDA and NIH revealed the inhumane practices and ordered a halt to the experiments, resulting in a victory for cats and a reminder that animal cruelty should never be tolerated.
Cruelty and Abuse in Sound Localization Experiments
At the University of Wisconsin–Madison, cruel and abusive sound localization experiments were conducted on cats. These experiments resulted in the imprisonment, cutting, and eventual death of the cats. PETA’s lawsuit exposed the true nature of these experiments. One cat, Double Trouble, had a stainless steel post screwed to their head and was subjected to a toxic substance to deafen them. Additionally, Double Trouble was restrained in a nylon bag and forced to listen to sounds while being deprived of food. As a result, Double Trouble suffered from twitching, partial paralysis, an unhealed head wound, and an untreated bacterial infection.
Despite receiving over $3 million in funding, these experiments were considered a failure. No peer-reviewed papers were published as a result of these experiments. The USDA confirmed the pattern of recurring infections and cited the University of Wisconsin for violations. After PETA’s complaint, the NIH found the university’s justification for cat use inadequate and ordered a halt to the experiments.
Experimental Procedures and Conditions
Experimenters at the University of Wisconsin subjected Double Trouble, a cat, to a series of cruel and unethical procedures. They first screwed a stainless steel post into the cat’s skull. Then, they applied a toxic substance to deafen Double Trouble and implanted electrical devices in its ears. To force cooperation, the experimenters restrained the cat in a nylon bag while exposing it to various sounds. Unsurprisingly, the cat’s health quickly deteriorated under these harsh conditions. It exhibited neurological signs such as twitching, suffered from partial paralysis, and had an unhealed head wound. In addition, Double Trouble developed an antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection from the wound and showed signs of depression.
Despite the immense suffering inflicted on Double Trouble, the experimenters went on to kill and decapitate the cat. Shockingly, this project received over $3 million in tax money. However, it is worth noting that no peer-reviewed papers were published as a result of this cruel experimentation.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) conducted an investigation and found a pattern of recurring infections in the experiments. As a result, they cited the University of Wisconsin for violations. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) filed a complaint, which led to a major reform in the university’s practices. Additionally, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reviewed the justification for using cats in these experiments and deemed it inadequate. As a result, they ordered a halt to the experiments.
Deterioration of Double Trouble’s Health
Double Trouble’s health deteriorated drastically due to the cruel conditions. This was evidenced by twitching as a neurological sign, partial paralysis, an unhealed head wound, and an antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection.
Double Trouble was described as depressed, and the experimenters eventually killed and decapitated the poor cat. The USDA confirmed a pattern of recurring infections and cited the University of Wisconsin-Madison for violations. The project had received over $3 million in tax money, yet the experimenter admitted their goal was not clinical treatment or cure.
Modern methods using human volunteers were used by other institutions. Thanks to a PETA complaint, the USDA investigated and major reforms were made. The NIH found UW’s justification for cat use inadequate and ordered a halt to experiments.
Lack of Scientific Justification and Failures
The lack of scientific justification and failure of the experiment was evident. No peer-reviewed papers were published, and correspondence acknowledged problems with the procedure.
The project had received over $3 million in tax money. However, the experimenter admitted that the goal was not clinical treatment or cure.
Alternatives, such as modern methods with human volunteers, were used by researchers at other institutions.
PETA’s complaint led to a USDA investigation and major reforms. The NIH found UW’s justification for cat use inadequate and ordered a halt to the experiments.
Ultimately, the cruel sound localization experiment caused Double Trouble’s death. However, it resulted in a victory for cats everywhere.
Funding and Alternatives
Funding for the cruel sound localization experiment at the University of Wisconsin totaled over $3 million in tax money, despite the experimenter admitting the goal was not clinical treatment or cure.
The PETA complaint against the university ultimately led to a USDA investigation and major reforms, and the NIH found UW’s justification for cat use inadequate, ordering a halt to the experiments.
As a result, modern methods with human volunteers have been adopted by researchers at other institutions. This victory for cats ended the project’s costly and inhumane practices, and put an end to the suffering of Double Trouble and other test animals.
Victory for Cats
PETA’s complaint resulted in a USDA investigation and major reforms, ultimately bringing an end to the cruel sound localization experiment at the University of Wisconsin and protecting cats from further suffering. The NIH found the University’s justification for cat use to be inadequate and ordered experiments to be halted.
The experiment had received over $3 million in tax money and caused Double Trouble, the cat used in the experiment, extreme suffering. Double Trouble had been subjected to stainless steel posts screwed to his skull, electric devices implanted in his ears, and forced to listen to sounds while deprived of food. His health had been deteriorating, with twitching, partial paralysis, and unhealed wounds.
The project had been a failure, with no peer-reviewed papers published as a result of Double Trouble’s suffering. Correspondence had also acknowledged problems with the surgery. Alternatives had been available using modern methods with human volunteers, but the experimenters had continued in order to maintain constant funding.
The victory for cats marks a major step forward in animal rights, and PETA’s lawsuit set a precedent for protecting animals from further cruelty and abuse.
