Skip to Main Content

How Ingrid Broke Her Wrist

Written by PETA | October 30, 2007

Ingrid_broken_wrist.JPGAfter I posted a recent interview featuring PETA President Ingrid Newkirk, a lot of people have been asking how she ended up with a cast on her arm. When I asked her how it happened, she told me she’d broken it while disciplining her assistant, Starza, but—difficult as Starza can doubtless be sometimes—I suspect that the truth isn’t quite so dramatic. The closest I could get to full disclosure was an article that came across my desk a few days later that’s slated for the next issue of PETA’s quarterly magazine Animal Times. It’s a great little piece, so here it is for anyone who’s curious about how Ingrid ended up with that cast. Warning: this is a classic bait and switch—she’s going to turn the tables on you and make you think about, like, animal suffering—but as I say, it’s a great little piece.

“Just as I was setting out to launch my new book, Let’s Have a Dog Party!, I met a wet floor and went splat, neatly snapping the bones in my wrist. Ooh, the pain! Thank goodness for IV drips. Lying on the emergency room gurney, I thought of a seagull I had seen with a broken wing who was being tormented by boys, of the fox in our fur-farming video with a broken leg, and of the monkey who caught his arm in a laboratory cage and broke it. How had they coped without pain relief of any kind? And not just with the screaming pain of their injury, but with the simultaneous fear of attack by the humans who were clearly out to harm and even kill them? Even though they may try to hide it, animals feel pain just as much as humans do.

While researching our Animal Liberation Display, we found that during the days of human slavery, whites claimed that blacks did not experience pain as acutely as whites did. Blacks’ stoicism in the face of total domination, like that of animals today, was taken as positive proof that they were almost immune to physical pain. The same mindset allowed families to be torn apart because Africans were also, most conveniently for their owners, thought not to have the same emotional and familial ties. Some mothers walked a dozen miles every night, after a day of hard field work, to glimpse or hold a child sent to another plantation.

Families are still being torn apart. Chimpanzees used in “cute” ads like those for computer supply company CDW, which earned this year’s top Litterbox Award, are just babies, torn away from their mothers and forced to dress up in silly costumes and grimace for the camera (minus their canine teeth, which are always pulled). By the time they are 8 years old, they are too strong to be managed and are “retired” to filthy, depressing roadside zoos or laboratories, never to see their families again.

Times change and victims’ identities shift, but old, worn-out, flawed arguments remain. Please join us in vigorously bursting these balloons that drift everywhere around us. Every word spoken, every myth challenged, and every pamphlet posted and video link shared puts a pin in them. Thank you.”
-Ingrid Newkirk

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • Hyou says:

    lol I broke my arm and thought the same things! I love Ingrid!

  • DamionKutaeff says:

    Hello everybody my name is Damion and I’m glad to join your conmunity and wish to assit as far as possible.

  • John K Clark says:

    Ill just refer you to PETAs Animal Testing page that unambiguously states Send back items that you have from companies that test on animals…

  • James A. says:

    Hope she enjoys that animaltested IV drip. Hypocrite.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Mars You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you say animal testing did the job and then you say it only gives a general idea. Considering the hundreds of thousands of people that die each year from adverse reactions to animal tested and approved drugs a “general idea” falls far short of the mark. If researchers focused on personalized medicine pharmacogenomics in vitro tests epidemiology clinical research microdosing DNA chips computer modeling and abandoned the unreliable and misleading animal model we should be able to vastly reduce and hopefully someday eliminate the amount of human suffering from ADR’s. As you pointed out drug reactions vary from person to person. Trying to factor in a whole different species into the equation is obviously ludicrous. If you research vivisection you’ll find it has all to do with money grants and legal shielding and precious little to do with medical science.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Mars You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you say animal testing did the job and then you say it only gives a general idea. Considering the hundreds of thousands of people that die each year from adverse reactions to animal tested and approved drugs a “general idea” falls far short of the mark. If researchers focused on personalized medicine pharmacogenomics in vitro tests epidemiology clinical research microdosing DNA chips computer modeling and abandoned the unreliable and misleading animal model we should be able to vastly reduce and hopefully someday eliminate the amount of human suffering from ADR’s. As you pointed out drug reactions vary from person to person. Trying to factor in a whole different species into the equation is obviously ludicrous. If you research vivisection you’ll find it has all to do with money grants and legal shielding and precious little to do with medical science.

  • Julia says:

    To all you morons who think that Ingrid is a hypocrit for accepting pain killers.. Weather or not Ingrid or any of us except the use of painkillers on humans such as ourselves will never change them testing on animals. Now protesting animal testing that the govornment has “mandated” is not a bad idea but if you do so then it should be the harmful drugs that cause painful reactions not the painkillers that make it easier to cope and less painful for anyone injected with them. Knowing that animal testing is still going on in some places dispite all efforts to stop it one who is outraged by this should feel a sense of comfort knowing that the animal will hopefully be lucky enough to receive a pain killer which the majority dont. You who speak with no rationalizations about this obviously do not really care about the welfare of animals in the long run. Obviously you are just out to find anything that one might concider a flaw when it comes to Ingrid. Well just so you know you failed better luck next time jerks.

  • Kenna says:

    Don’t be silly. Milk tastes disgusting.

  • Ariel says:

    Wishing Ingrid all the best for a speedy recovery! Here I go again with another “cut and paste” in order to negate the terribly ERRONEOUS comments by the space cadet MARS. 1. animals and human animals do NOT have the same physiologies as well as each human animal has hisher own unique DNA. Therefore ANY animal testing is automatically inaccurate! Therefore animal testing CANNOT give even so much as a general idea of how it will affect andor effect human animals. 2. pharm. co’s. rely on an outmoded legal clause that allows them to get their drugs on the market faster than their competitors for the sake of the almighty dollar. When they are SUED which is more OFTEN than realized for their latest meds that have caused illnesses or fatalities they have another med waiting in the wings to be marketed to recover their lawsuit losses! 3. NEW and HIGHLY ACCURATE NONANIMAL TESTING methods are being employed more and more slowly but surely in pharm. co’s. especially those who aren’t particularly making “sweetheart” deals with the govt.! 4. Until the NEW and HIGHLY ACCURATE methods are employed by at least MOST pharm. co’s we do NOT have a choice most of the time but to take the meds that have been tested on animals how ever toxic having detrimental sideeffects causing other conditions or fatal that they may be! HOWEVER we don’t have to sit back and allow the innaccurate painful testing on the animals to occur! Testing on animals began in ancient times. This is now the year 2007! with modern technology! The space cadet is way behind the times which typical of a narrowminded uneducated stubborn person with a hunter killer mentality who just wants to be more “right” even though wrong than cares about human beings or any innocent animals’ lives!

  • rojo says:

    Chris the amount of calcium may be more absorbable but the concentration of calcium in vegetables can be lower. ie 64 of the calcium contained in brussel sprouts can be absorbed you just have to eat 400g to absorb the same amount of Ca absorbed from a glass of milk. Or you could eat 3 pounds of spinach instead of having a glass of milkunfair comparison included for dramatic effect.

  • Michele says:

    For those that are new readers of the PETA files you need to be aware that animal testing is actually harmful to humans. Prescription drugs have killed more people in the US than all illegal drugs combined. Humans and nonhumans may have similarities in their physiology and genetics but they are not the same. Scientists who recognize how detrimental animal testing has been have likened such testing to a “crapshoot”. Drugs and other treatments can be tested safely using many nonanimal methods especially with technological advances however historically more advances were made using autopsies clinical observations and in vitro testing. Scientists have used animal tests to “confirm” that a particular treatment is safe however they have to try with numerous species until they find one that actually responds favourably to a treatment. More than 90 of drugs that were “proven” to be safe in animal tests failed in human testing. Animal testing has also delayed the discovery of various treatments as scientists spend billions of dollars and decades on useless animal research. Scientists have spent billions of dollars curing cancer in mice but the treatments that have been effective were NOT proven safe with animal testing. Penicillin may never have been discovered if the current laws about animal testing existed back then because penicillin killed several species it was in vitro testing that showed the effectiveness and the scientists would basically take the drugs themselves to see if it was safe. Look into the history of Thalidomide they continued to prescribe this to pregnant women despite knowing that their children were being born with severe birth defects because the animal tests continued to “prove” that the drug was not teratogenic. Also the asbestos fiasco is another example as is the tobacco industry. A great book that can explain this in far greater detail than anyone can provide on this blog is “Sacred Cows and Golden Geese”. It is not written by animal rights activists and the issue of animal cruelty is not even remotely used in the authors’ arguments.

  • Tricia says:

    To Mars Animal testing is pretty gruesome. But I’m sure that doesn’t matter to someone with a conservativeneocon outlook.

  • James Fontanetta says:

    I myself have experienced broken bones and the severe pain with it. I often marvel at how animals are so brave and noble and endure such horrible pain. It is most heartbreaking to see kittens with broken limbs trying to get food or run away from malicious children. I agree with Ingrid. One day our society will look back on thre treatment of animals on our times as cruel and outdated. There is no need for animal testing. It is archaic and usually in place to save money for big pharma and other industries that are practicing it. It’s time for change. We can no longer accept torturing animals as ok for a great cause. It is not acceptable. James Fontanetta

  • James Fontanetta says:

    I myself have experienced broken bones and the severe pain with it. I often marvel at how animals are so brave and noble and endure such horrible pain. It is most heartbreaking to see kittens with broken limbs trying to get food or run away from malicious children. I agree with Ingrid. One day our society will look back on thre treatment of animals on our times as cruel and outdated. There is no need for animal testing. It is archaic and usually in place to save money for big pharma and other industries that are practicing it. It’s time for change. We can no longer accept torturing animals as ok for a great cause. It is not acceptable.

  • Christopher Cochran MD says:

    Come on Ana aren’t you going to give your new Dutch friend any grief about posting his credentials?

  • BullyDawg says:

    Mars don’t forget…if they had tested chocolate on dogs humans would never be allowed to touch it! Then what would we hand out to trickortreaters tonight? I know there’s other candy besides chocolate but still

  • ANACONDA says:

    mars the wanker king is back on stage but this time without his brains and balls these were already blown away decades ago! farewell you sicko wacko you bored me stiff!!!

  • Ana says:

    Jacob Dijkstra M.D. I really appreciate your compassionate and intelligent comments. Welcome!

  • Mars says:

    Mike Q wrote “These are drugs that have ALL passed animal testing with flying colors. Animal testing doesn’t seem to be doing the job.” It seems animal testing did do the job and continues to do so. Fact is that no amount of testing will result in a safeeffective drug that works exactly the same on every human.You err in thinking that such a test exists. It doesn’t and never will.It is impossible to predict all the variables within the human population but testingincluding animal testing does give a general idea of the effects that CAN occur. Still “ingrid is a hypocrite and even agravates her position since she publicly stated she would oppose medical advances if tested on animals. I guess she meant oppose unless SHE and by the looks of it I use she in assumption because it’s kinda hard to be surebenefits from it.Typical of those with the socialistcommunist mind set.

  • Caboose says:

    True CCMD but milk especially organic tates good.

  • Christopher Cochran MD says:

    I hope her physician checked her for osteoporosis after her fall. As it turns out I don’t advocated getting dietary calcium from dairy. Rather vegetable calcium is much more absorbable and easier on the GI tract. Collards yum.

  • Jacob Dijkstra, M.D. says:

    Greg no last name? the FDA demands that noncosmetic drugs are tested on animals. Until this outdated requirement is finally abolished and researchers become more innovative we the public and medical professionals can protest but have no choice but to abide by this rule. The fact that these medications intended to relieve pain are tested on animals is at least an acknowledgement that animals are capable of feeling pain and we should take this into consideration whenever we interact with them.

  • Mars says:

    I notice she didn’t refuse treatment from the medical treatments that resulted from experiements on animals.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Greg So what’s your answer? Were IV drips tested on animals as you insinuate and if they were did they need to be? The painkillers may have been tested on animals but that is more of a legal requirement than an indication of medical efficacy. Ingrid would have no choice in that matter. “Responding to a public outcry regarding drug safety after the Thalidomide tragedy the U.S. Congress passed the previously unpopular KefauverHarris Act in October of 1962 which among other things mandated that all drugs undergo preclinical testing to demonstrate their safety and effectiveness. The FDA has interpreted these preclinical standards as a call for mandatory animal testing. This interpretation expressed the will of the bill’s sponsor Senator Estes Kefauver but was based on a misunderstanding of the science behind drug testing.” “Although some adverse drug reactions ADR are not very serious others cause the death hospitalization or serious injury of more than 2 million people in the United States each year including more than 100000 fatalities. In fact adverse drug reactions are one of the leading causes of death in the United States.” Lazarou J Pomeranz BH Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients A metaanalysis of prospective studies. Journal of the American Medical Association Apr 15 1998 279 1200 1205.” These are drugs that have ALL passed animal testing with flying colors. Animal testing doesn’t seem to be doing the job.

  • Jacob Dijkstra, M.D. says:

    Ingrid has put into poetic words my own feelings of compassion for animals abused in laboratories or the food industry when I am at the receiving end of potential pain dentist or the cause of potential pain procedures on my patients and how fortunate we are to have anesthetics available and are able to understand why all this is happening to us.

  • Greg says:

    Hmmm … weren’t IV drips and the painkillers delivered thereby tested on animals? Ingrid! I thought more of you…

  • Caboose says:

    Yeah those wet floors are worse than headcrabs! Caution THIS IS SPARTA.

  • claudia marrapodi says:

    all my best wishes to INGRID! she is my hero because no words can describe my thankful feelings for her and her amazing job!

  • liliana says:

    Ingrid your are so nice person you deserve the best you think like me I love the animals and when I see a suffer animal I feel like if it is me. I wish you the best your heart is so beautiful I am proud of you.Thank you Ingrid you are so nice for the animals!

  • Carla says:

    Long Live Ingrid!!

  • Jaclyn says:

    She is so inspiring! Everytime I read something of hers I soak it all in and memorize it!!! I LOVE Ingrid’s passion!

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Ingrid is a very communicative writer and empathetic as always. Hope she has a speedy recovery.

Connect With PETA

Subscribe