4A - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com E-MAIL ROSE AT ROSEJAFF@UMICH.EDU 74C e WC4,&Dan+aily ROSE JAFFE Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR GARY GRACA EDITOR IN CHIEF Unsigned editorials reflectthe official position oftthe Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Poor procedure 'U' needs to provide a valid reason for dropping practice or years, students in the University Medical School's Advanced Trauma Life Support course operated on live dogs to train for surgery. But after coming under heavy criticism last month, the University of Michigan Health System declared it would end the practice. In the statement announcing its decision, UMHS mentioned that other viable options exist to prepare students for trauma situations. Considering these other options, UMHS's decision to put an end to a controversial and possibly unethical practice may seem warranted. But if it only stopped the practice to quell the public outcry, it wasn't acting for the right reasons. The University needs to provide a sensible rationale for decisions like this one because simply altering its practices without proper explanation isn't sufficient. US ECONOMY I /I 0 0 0 Zac Efron in space The decision to stop using live dogs for surgical training came after the Physician's Committee on Responsible Medicine - a non-profit organization that promotes eth- ical medical research - filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Agriculture criticizing the practice. In the complaint, PCRM suggested that Dr. Richard Bur- ney, the professor who teaches a Advanced Trauma Life Support course, misled the University in order to use the live animals. Citing reccomendations from the Health System's Graduate Medical Education Committee, UMHS announced an end to the practice last Thursday. In place of the dogs, the course will now use advanced technology like the TraumaMan System, an anatomical human mannequin used to simulate real surgery. But the recent decision to turn to tech- nology like TraumaMan may be based more on a desire to avoid a public relations nightmare than a solid opinion about how medical training should be performed. If the University allowed the use of dogs for surgery practice in the first .place, there should have been a compelling reason for why this was the best practice given. Now that the practice is being discontinued, an equally valid reason should be given. Instead, the statement announcing the decision was vague, even elusive, concern- ing the University's reasoning. The state- ment merely said, "The decision comes from a recommendation by the Health System's Graduate Medical Education Committee after a review of simulators that can be used to train medical professionals in trau- ma procedures." UMHS has elected not to explain the logic behind the decision. This statement doesn't shed much light on UMHS's reasoning. What concerned individuals expect from the University is clarity, not just a quick fix. The statement doesn't say that the review showed that the simulators are a better option than operat- ing on live animals. And it doesn't give a reason why live dogs were used in surgical training in the first place. Instead, the state- ment avoids the ethical concerns by danc- ing around the issue and begs the question of whether this practice was eliminated simply because of the negative publicity. The longerthe University avoids explain- ing its reasoning behind first adopting and then banning the practice encourages the perception that the termination of the practice was just a move to put an end to the controversy. That's not a good enough reason to make any decision, let alone one that concerns training the people who may one day save lives. The University should take a firm stance behind its programs, controversial or otherwise. t is a well-known fact that many people, and cats, are unhappy. For instance, there are many pessimistic people who will see a glass that is half full and ' declare, "I hate glasses." And now, as we resume our educa- tion, many people say, "I can't believe - spring break is over, WILL I hate school andG wish I were some- GRUNDLER where else," in a huffy tone, looking very huffy. Imagine my surprise, then, when I pitched to my fellow peers my alien movie idea - a film that is virtually all about the desire to be somewhere else - and they hated it. One unhappy person disliked it so much that he ripped up my drawing of the aliens I had doodled on a nap- kin. Can you imagine if someone had ripped up J.K. Rowling's napkin about Harry Potter? I can't. Well, she would have most likely gotten another one and started over. But what if there weren't any left? Anyway, the point is I forgot how to draw the aliens, and the new ones I drew look stupid. I've decided, then, that it would be best to share my movie with a wider, more diverse audience. With this arti- cle it could, perhaps, reach tens of peo- ple. Therefore, what follows is a letter I sent to Steven Spielberg discussing my idea: Dear Mr. Spielberg, I imagine you receive thousands of boring movie ideas a month, such as documentaries about the Jonas Broth- ers. However, I promise you mine is interesting and, above all, unique. I've always enjoyed your movies because a recurring theme is that of extraordinary things happening to rather ordinary characters - I believe that this is a powerful theme. In your film E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, for example, there's nothing very special about E.T., but then he befriends the little boy who owns a flying bike, and a flying bike is quite extraordinary. But I'm sure you already know this. My idea for a movie came to me last summer when I worked in a grocery store. One night I came home, exhaust- ed, and my cat bit me! For no reason, you understand. It's well known that cats are naturally unhappy. I cursed at her and threw her outside into the night, but then I felt guilty and went out to fetch her. And there, among the brilliant stars and the Milky Way, was a mysterious, flashing object that looked remarkably like an airplanel It turned out it was an airplane. But it sparked my imagination - what if, against all odds, an ordinary per- son, played by Zac Efron, had a close encounter with a UFO? One that left him obsessed with UFOs and a strange geological formation where UFOs landed? So obsessed that he ignored his cat, which bites a lot, and said UFO abducted it (the cat, you understand)? (Thiswouldgroundtheaudience;there is emotional tension that, although the story concerns aliens, adds a distinct sense of humanity to the production, because humanity doesn't especially enjoy cats and would like to see them abducted.) The main plot of the film, then,. is Zac's desire to see the UFO once more and visit the geological forma- tion where it lands (which turns out to be Mt. Rushmore), as well as rescue his cat and repair their relationship. Here's the twist: The aliens turn out to be peaceful. How many aliens por- trayed in films, with the exception of Chewbacca and Keanu Reeves, turn out to be friendly? Here's the second twist: The aliens communicate via musical signals. Not the traditional squeaks or grunts or river dancing, but musical notes. And then, the third and final twist: although Zac is reunited with his cat when he travels to Mt. Rushmore to see the UFO, he chooses to enter the UFO and leave Earth. And then the audience realizes it was what he had wanted the whole movie. He didn't wantto have an ordinary job and be an ordinary person - he wanted to be an alien ambassador, which pays better. He wanted to see the universe. And In theaters near you, if Spielberg gets back to me. his cat is okay with his decision. At the very end, when Zac is holding the cat before he leaves, it understands some- how, and maybe it could lick his nose. That's all I've got so far, but I would appreciate your advice. Regards, Will I have yet to hear back from him, but he is extremely busy. I hope he's not one of those pessimistic people, though, to whom I've tried to tell my idea. They listen for less than thirty seconds before muttering how cold Michigan is, utterly missing myoentire message: if Zac can escape his situa- tion and become an ambassador of the universe, why can't they escape theirs? But instead of transferring to the Uni- versity of Miami, I imagine most of the people I talked to will continue to stay in Michigan. And I will not be dedicating my movie to them. - Will Grundler can be reached at sailgull@umich.eds. 0 0 I I EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca, Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Emmarie Huetteman, Emma Jeszke, Sutha K Kanagasingam, Shannon Kellman, Edward McPhee, Matthew Shutler, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU Society has a responsibility and cultivation of these resources is a moral and necessary goal. to protect the environment Matthew Brunner LSA senior TO THE DAILY: Adam Gaglio's recent condemnation of envi- Environmentalism is based ronmentalism (The perils of environmentalism, 03/03/2009) was, ironically, a waste of paper on humanistic principles and ink. To expand: Gaglio believes that the environmentalism movement is predicated on the notion that nature should remain wholly TO THE DAILY: untouched by mankind and pristine. He frames In Adam Gaglio's recent viewpoint (The per- the issue as a zero-sum game between human ils of environmentalism, 03/03/2009), he stated welfare and environmental health, and seems that the green movement is working towards to think that environmentalism would con- "the destruction of civilization" and "a return to demn any despoiling of the environment to the Stone Age." As a member of the movement, extract natural resources. I can say that neither myself nor any of my col- While there are certainly "live in a tree, leagues are preaching the return to a cave-dwell- poop in a bucket" environmentalists out there, ing, hunting and gathering existence! Of course, the mainstream environmentalist movement Gaglio's point was that of retrogression - that is not about the supremacy of unblemished . environmentalists seek to hinder the advance- nature over human needs. In fact, the major- ment of mankind. In actuality, we are seeking ity of environmental causes are now framed just the opposite. in terms of increasing human welfare, in two What many individuals are asking for is distinct ways. sustainable energy sources, increased energy First, environmental regulations help ensure efficiency, new green job opportunities and inno- that primary goods are not squandered through vative technologies for a competitive market. Is inefficient machinery, that clean air and water this not human advancement at its best? Why are preserved, and that environmental toxins must we envision progress as "drilling for oil in do not rise to levels which could damage the Alaska" or "mining tar sands in Canada"? Why ecosystem (upon which we depend). Thus, must we develop toward a future of externalities there is an immediate benefit to humanity from where we pollute unconcernedly, waste uninhib- environmental policy. itedly and destroy irresponsibly? We must move The second consideration, which Gaglio forward, but not along that path. mocks in his opening paragraph, is the pres- At the very core of his argument, Gaglio made ervation of resources for future generations. a fundamental error. Environmentalism is not Overzealous consumption of natural resources "anti-mankind." Rather, it seeks to preserve and the generation of pollution by our genera- mankind by providing a means to sustain our tion will negatively affect the welfare of subse- existence on this planet. How can this be inter- quent generations. Although the moral primacy preted as a disregard for human life? It's because of human needs is the central thesis of Gaglio's of environmentalism's intrinsic compulsion to argument, his concern for human well-being is improve human condition that politicians such focused wholly on the current generation. Such as former Vice President Al Gore and President logic is contradictory, as it states that future Obama embrace itso dearly. humans have no claim to resources, which is a It's not a surprise to me to see viewpoints such decidedly anti-human sentiment. as Gaglio's. The term "environmentalism" is mis- Environmentalism, in its current manifes- leading and unfortunately seems to turn away tation, is about using resources efficiently and those who don't share a passion for the outdoors. cleanly. The world is not, as Gaglio portrays it, In reality, this movement is composed of individ- a bipolar conflict between humans and nature uals who desire the sustainability of health, equi- and environmentalism is not a concerted effort ty, and a peaceful coexistence onthis Earth. It is a to "return to the Stone Age." Rather, environ- concern for the long-term and is motivated by the mentalism recognizes that humans are directly mostbasic instinct of humankind: survival. dependent on the biodiversity, natural resourc- es and cleanliness of our surroundings for our Margo Ludmer continued survival, and that the preservation LSA junior As the Michigan Student Assembly examines its future on campus, the Daily would like students to voice their opinions on what should be a part of its agenda. E-MAIL YOUR IDEAS TO ROBERT SOAVE AT RSOAVE@UMICH.EDU. KATE BARUT, JASON BATES AND KEN SRDJAK VIEWPOINT Defending workers ights Before spring break, the University's President's Advi- sory Committee on Labor Standards and Human Rights recommended to President Mary Sue Coleman that we end our licensing contract with apparel-maker Russell Corpo- ration. The recommendation came after workers' rights abuses surfaced at Russell's plant in Honduras called Jer- zees de Honduras - particularly in response to the glar- ing "cut-and-run" tactic used at this factory, where over 1800 workers had been amidst collective bargaining nego- tiations. During negotiations with the union on its first contract, Russell closed the factory, leaving the workers, mostly women, without a means to support their families - a blatant violation of our University Code of Conduct for Licensees. In light of this, we appreciate the committee's decision to respect the Code of Conduct and recommend endingthe contract, but we also wish to emphasize thatthe context of this decision is indicative of a vastly insufficient process for ensuring widespread global protection of work- ers' rights. Even an obvious case of malfeasance like this took half a year before action was taken, given that the committee meets only once a month. Further, while other universities cut contracts in response to Russell's anti-union activity last year in another Honduran plant, Jerzees de Choloma, the University of Michigan did not. Nor did we act when the New Era Cap Company sent top executives (includ- ing a "fair" labor association board member) to Alabama to intimidate and illegally fire activists struggling for a living wage and equal opportunity, in what the NAACP ultimately called "a disgraceful and discriminatory situa- tion." Nor did we take action two years ago in a situation of striking resemblance to the current Russell case when con- tractors for licensees like Nike were pressured to "cut-and- run" when workers demanded a livable wage and dignity through union contract negotiation at the BJ&B factory in the Dominican Republic. These are the cases that have come to light thanks to the efforts of the Workers' Rights Consortium. But they also call attention to the need for oversight for the overwhelm- ing 4,782 factory job-sites currently sourced by University of Michigan logo licensees. Reassuringly, the most recent meeting of the commit- tee produced a discussion of several stipulations that Rus- sell must meet if it ever wants a contract with us again. These include additional recommendations that can create momentum toward a just solution for the Honduran work- ers who are still unemployed and likely blacklisted despite this historic string of university business decisions. These indicators are still being drafted, but they will likely include that Russell must step up protections regarding freedom of association, respect collective bargaining agreements, strengthen language in company policies protecting worli- ers and not open new factories without a tangibly positive collective bargaining atmosphere. These are laudable goals, but the facts maintain that the status quo global system lacks the means of full compliance with these dreams. The only way to ensure that our code of conduct is followed is to institute a program in which we ally with other universities to get our apparel made'in a more focused number of factories that require more su- tainable contractrelationships. This way, our marketpower can be concentrated to effect real change. This program exists in the living document of the Desig- nated Suppliers Program, a program tobe undertakenby the WRC that would require university apparel be made only in factories paying a living wage and have worker represen- tation and other vital protections. The Designated Suppli- ers Program cannot be launched until enough universities have signed on to support a working group set up to fashion university market power and introduce this revolutionary program in the global apparel industry. To silence critics of this ambitious and innovative pro- gram, the WRC is working with clothing manufacturer and University licensee Knights Apparel to enactthe provisions of the DSP on a single company scale. The pilot program will show the industry and universities that the principles of the DSP can fulfill our moral imperative while remain- ing economically viable. Thankfully, the committee has appeared supportive of including provisions to encourage independent university bookstores and shops to replace outgoing Russell stock with Knights Apparel, who would source new orders in deference to workers' rights atthe for- merly forsaken BJ&B factory in the Dominican Republic. We encourage supporters of the DSP to tell shop manag- ers and owners carrying University logo apparel that they would like to see Knights Apparel products on the shelves because it is currently the only major brand that has been produced in a system designed for human dignity over exploitation. Kate Barut, Jason Bates and Ken Srdjak are members of Students Organizing for Labor and Economic Equaliy.