To the editor: I read your article on “closed colonies” of cats and dogs used as full-time blood donors with great interest and greater horror. I was struck by both the lack of empathy for the animals in captivity and the tragic consequences that a lack of available blood during surgery has on a pet (they would surely die).
What makes the lives of dogs or cats “lucky” enough to be pets more valuable than the lives of dogs and cats who are caged and drained of some of their blood every three weeks? We seem to forget that those dogs and cats could also be pets were they not born into the misery of a blood bank facility.
I hope God turns out to be a dog.
Pia Alexander, Long Beach
..
To the editor: About 40 years ago, I went to a veterinarian in West L.A. who I considered kind. One day, I walked through a back room to get my cat, and I saw a black cat on top of a box in a bare room.
My “kind” vet said he was there to give blood — permanently there, a prisoner. He was not going home that night and lived his empty life alone like that.
Humans take advantage of all other species; it’s just never-ending. These blood-donor animals are in prison for life with no home or family, and it could all be different. There could easily be a system for members of the public to donate their pets’ blood on a schedule.
There is no such thing as a necessary evil. It’s simply taking advantage of other creatures.
Patricia Mace, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Let’s stop with the euphemisms. The animals are not blood donors. They are dogs from whom blood is taken
Joan Maggs, Granada Hills
