Bugs

The Conservation Imperative

86 posts in this topic

Good news Ted Reilly - another legendary conservationist, has agreed to take up patronage of the Conservation Imperative alongside the late Dr Ian Player. To have another person of his wisdom on board is invaluable.

 

http://theconservationimperative.com/?p=83

 

Ted Reilly, doyen of wildlife conservation and Head of the Kingdom of Swaziland’s Big 5 Game Parks has formally accepted our invitation to become a patron of The Conservation Imperative alongside the late Dr. Ian Player.

His contribution to rhino conservation especially ranks among the most significant and accordingly he takes up a deserved place alongside the late Dr. Ian Player as our second patron

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bugs:

 

There would seem to be major differences among correspondents here as what illegal rhino horn is used for.

 

It would seem that Smart Trade proponents are planning under the belief that most horn ends in China (Vietnam merely being a convenient point of entry to China) and that it is almost entirely used in TCM. They go so far as suggesting that the CSO might sell directly and exclusively to Colleges of TCM. To the extent that one's ultimate aim (for wild rhino conservation) should be demand reduction, it hardly seems sensible to endorse the pharmaceutical efficacy of the product by selling by this route.

 

Others are saying that Vietnam is now the main final market and that principal use is by those wishing to gain face with ostentatious displays of wealth.

 

It might be helpful if the pro-trade side gave fuller consideration to this issue.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Lixin Huang, president of the American College of Traditional Chinese Medicine, said the overwhelming demand derived from claims it could act as a cure for cancer.
This was despite the studies that showed no link between taking rhino horn and curing cancer. “Rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the Traditional Chinese Medicine profession and there is no traditional use, nor any evidence for the effectiveness of, rhino horn as a cure for cancer,” she said.
There is no evidence that rhino horn is an effective cure for cancer and this is not documented in TCM nor is it approved by the clinical research in traditional Chinese medicine.”

 

 

Even some members of TCM do not recognise rhino horn as effective in their medicine...

 

Apparently the president of the American College of TCM says that rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the TCM profession and there is no traditional use, nor evidence for its effectiveness as a cure of cancer.

 

I wonder what the view is of the Chinese TCM organisation(s)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Apparently the president of the American College of TCM says that rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the TCM profession and there is no traditional use, nor evidence for its effectiveness as a cure of cancer.

 

I wonder what the view is of the Chinese TCM organisation(s)?

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure has not been verified. It seems that one was started by someone else. Perhaps by the syndicates - or they were just grateful that someone made it up for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bugs:

 

There would seem to be major differences among correspondents here as what illegal rhino horn is used for.

 

 

The reality is that it doesn't really matter what it is used for. Whether it is some snake oil or luxury display of wealth, whether the market is China or Vietnam; the same theory applies. People are willing to pay ridiculous prices for the horn, and willing to kill the rhino for it, willing to risk their lives for it, willing to enter into a life of crime for it, willing to die for it and willing to murder for it. At the same time all the people who are protecting the rhino get no incentives to continue, and people who kill the rhino get all the money.

 

And from the other end (anti-trade), - if Vietnam were the main user country, or the main purpose was trinkets - then the "Demand reduction campaigners" have set their sights on the wrong target and they are targeting the wrong reasons. And all alternatives to stop the poaching aside from a legal trade remain unchanged. - The fate of the rhino remains certain and fatal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bugs:

 

You dismiss most of my comments as being irrelevant. You signally fail to address the point I made (and others before me) that selling direct to TCM organisations would either send a wrong signal (endorsing a product of unlikely pharmaceutical benefit and thus inconsistent with demand reduction) or to the wrong target market (if the product is now little used by TCM practitioners).

 

I think you risk being a poor ambassador for your cause because of your implacability. Is it too much to ask that you listen to and address points made by your opponents instead of dismissing them out of hand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bugs:

 

You dismiss most of my comments as being irrelevant. You signally fail to address the point I made (and others before me) that selling direct to TCM organisations would either send a wrong signal (endorsing a product of unlikely pharmaceutical benefit and thus inconsistent with demand reduction) or to the wrong target market (if the product is now little used by TCM practitioners).

 

I think you risk being a poor ambassador for your cause because of your implacability. Is it too much to ask that you listen to and address points made by your opponents instead of dismissing them out of hand?

 

I am sorry if I did so, and I didn't intend to sound dismissive. I am in fact genuinely trying to help. I have nothing personal to gain from what I am doing, its all done off my own steam and time. Its always far easier to talk face to face that to try and put your point across in writing. I can assure you that I meant no disrespect, I can see that you have a genuine interest and open mind.

 

By selling horn to whoever the buyer is - is by no means endorsing the use as medicine. In fact, I would recommend that it is sold with a health warning, as in the case of cigarettes. If they are using illegal horn for medicine, then there is little we can do about that. We are just saying - if you have to have this horn - please let us give you horn without having to kill our rhino.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bugs:

 

Thank you for your conciliatory reply. I agree that demand reduction is unlikely to happen overnight and, in principle, I am sympathetic to the concept of legalisation until such time as there is minimal demand for horn (legal or otherwise). However, though I may have been shooting the messenger, I believe you published a document prepared, I think, by Dr Eustace, which suggested that an ideal trading partner for the CSO could be an official TCM body. I really do think that this would be inappropriate and send out the wrong signal. Attempting to sell directly to official TCM organisations with a health warning would seem absurd and insulting. Selling to wholesalers with no overt links to recognised TCM bodies would make more sense - whether or not some product subsequently goes to TCM practitioners. Possibly of greater importance is the fact that the Chinese Government has signed up to Cites and has banned the import of horn. I can't see how this stance is compatible with the CSO supplying an official Chinese institution even if Cites changes the rules to allow legalisation. Rightly or wrongly, I wouldn't expect the Chinese to lift the import ban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Apparently the president of the American College of TCM says that rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the TCM profession and there is no traditional use, nor evidence for its effectiveness as a cure of cancer.

 

I wonder what the view is of the Chinese TCM organisation(s)?

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure has not been verified. It seems that one was started by someone else. Perhaps by the syndicates - or they were just grateful that someone made it up for them.

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure stemmed from a high Vietnamese official as far as I understand, that's why the huge increase in horns going to Vietnam. So another reason why Vietnam should be included in the equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Apparently the president of the American College of TCM says that rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the TCM profession and there is no traditional use, nor evidence for its effectiveness as a cure of cancer.

 

I wonder what the view is of the Chinese TCM organisation(s)?

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure has not been verified. It seems that one was started by someone else. Perhaps by the syndicates - or they were just grateful that someone made it up for them.

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure stemmed from a high Vietnamese official as far as I understand, that's why the huge increase in horns going to Vietnam. So another reason why Vietnam should be included in the equation.

 

As I said there is no verification of this story. I have asked about it and was told by someone who did extensive research on it that he was unable to verify that story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Apparently the president of the American College of TCM says that rhino horn is no longer approved for use by the TCM profession and there is no traditional use, nor evidence for its effectiveness as a cure of cancer.

 

I wonder what the view is of the Chinese TCM organisation(s)?

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure has not been verified. It seems that one was started by someone else. Perhaps by the syndicates - or they were just grateful that someone made it up for them.

 

 

The myth about the cancer cure stemmed from a high Vietnamese official as far as I understand, that's why the huge increase in horns going to Vietnam. So another reason why Vietnam should be included in the equation.

 

As I said there is no verification of this story. I have asked about it and was told by someone who did extensive research on it that he was unable to verify that story.

 

 

Didn't Julian Rademeyer research this story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


© 2006 - 2017 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.