HOME ] NEWS ] EVENTS ] GENERAL ] HUNTING ] FARMING ] [ VIVISECTION ] LINKS ] CONTACT US ]


Search

The Shoreham Protester is one of the UK's leading publications for comprehensive animal rights news and information.

Free Trial Edition!


National Anti Snaring Campaign

SHAC

SPEAK CAMPAIGN

HUNTWATCH

ARAN

BRIGHTON ANIMAL ACTION

Campaign for the Abolition of Animal Slavery

Anchor: vegetarian
Free vegetarian ebook site with recipes to improve your health

 

 

 

 


"Atrocities are not less atrocities when they occur in laboratories
and are called medical research"
.
George Bernard Shaw

To see the pictures they don't want you to see about vivisection go to: www.animalexperimentspictures.com

 

Wickham LabsLATEST: Cartmell has lost his appeal against refusal of planning permission for new premises at Torbay Farm.  Amongst other things it was considered “out of keeping” with the area.

 

Doctors protest monkey tests

Area doctors have been protesting at McLean Hospital in Belmont concerning a NASA funded experiment on squirrel monkeys they called “absurd.” They accused the hospital of a “flawed” use of $1.75m to test the effects of radiation in space. “That’s a very stressful experience for a sociable little creature,” said Dr. Marge Peppercorn of Sudbury , a member of the nonprofit Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. About 50 doctors protested against the experiment, which involves exposing 30 monkeys to radiation and then probing them at McLean . Dr. John J. Pippin, PCRM’s senior medical and research adviser, said NASA already had invested “4 decades worth” of time for “primate radiation research,” which resulted in “an abject failure.” The hospital, in a statement, said it hasn’t yet received the necessary funding to begin the 4 year experiment. Boston Herald 11 June

 

Scientists find alternative to animal testing

A group of leading international scientists are developing a "test-tube gut and liver" as an easier, more convenient and ethically sound alternative to animal testing. The project, called InLiveTox, will be discussed at a major international nanotoxicology conference at Edinburgh Napier University this week named Nanotoxicology 2010. The 3 year £2m project brings together leaders in nanotoxicology from around the world, including Edinburgh Napier, to develop a way of testing the toxicity of tiny ingested particles that doesn't rely on animals. Instead, the "test-tube gut and liver" will emulate the response of cells and tissues. Dr Gary Hutchison, acting director of Edinburgh Napier's Centre for Nano Safety, said: "Given the widespread use of nanomaterials in a variety of everyday products, it is essential for us to fully understand them and their potential impacts. "We are working with other European specialists on the InLiveTox project to develop a viable, effective alternative to using animals in such testing. A recent change in EU chemical safety legislation means that there is a requirement for information on the toxicity of all materials used in significant quantities by 2018. That means there is pressure to thoroughly investigate how substances affect humans in the long term." The Scotsman 4 June

 

Protest planned at Ilkley business

The National Anti Vivisection Alliance (NAVA) group plan a peaceful and sustained protest at buildings owned by the Ilkley based firm NG Bailey, including the firm’s head office, over the company’s involvement in the building of a £15m laboratory at the University of Leicester, which will be used for carrying out tests on animals. NAVA says it is targeting NG Bailey for protests as the main sub contracting builders for the laboratory. Demonstrations have already taken place at 2 Leeds offices. NAVA spokesman Luke Steele said “We fully oppose the construction of this facility on the grounds of animals being used in experimentation and the delays in scientific progress this will bring about.”  NG Bailey has confirmed that it is working with main contractor Willmott Dixon on a project for the University of Leicester. The project will result a new £15m central research facility to update the university’s existing facilities to carry out life sciences research. Ilkley Gazette 3 June

 

Animal activist in hunger strike protest

A Birmingham animal rights activist, Jonathan White, from Erdington, completed a 3day hunger strike in protest over the construction of a new animal research laboratory at University of Leicester. He chained himself to a bench outside the Coleshill branch of Willmott Dixon 1 of the contractors involved in building the biomedical research centre. Jonathan White is joined by Rebecca House, Dean Bracher and Tracy House in Coleshill protesting against plans to build a new vivisection unit at Leicester Uni. The 20 yr old, who is a member of the Birmingham Animal Rights Centre, survived on water for the duration of the food strike. “I feel passionately about animal rights and hope this hunger strike will have an impact on the managers at Willmott Dixon. We want them to change their minds about being involved in building a vivisection unit. All animal testing is cruel and we will continue to fight on behalf of defenceless animals.” As a full time campaigner, Jonathan said he has dedicated the last 2 years to planning protests and putting pressure on organisations involved in the practice of “the enslavement and exploitation of animals”. Birmingham Mail 9 June

 

More Say “No” To Animal Testing

Recent reports show that the build up to stop the proposed RM500m animal testing facility in Alor Gajah, Malacca has gained momentum, with close to 6,000 people from at least 25 countries having signed an online petition in protest. The petition is sponsored by SPCA Selangor, Friends of the Earth Malaysia, BUAV and the European Coalition to End Animal Experiments. The petition demands that the government “act in all expediency to quash this proposal”. The petition also claims that the half billion ringgit project should be scrapped “for ethical reasons and for the lack of scientific validity in extrapolating data obtained from animal testing to humans”. According to the report, 10,000 signatures have been collected & the petition will be sent to Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Malacca Chief Minister Mohd Ali Rustam. Protests started in late April after it was made known that state owned Melaka Biotech entered a joint venture with Indian biotechnology giant Vivo BioTech Ltd and local company Vanguard Creative Technologies Sdn Bhd to set up primate, small animals and canine testing laboratories in the state. The project will be undertaken by joint-venture company Vivo Biotech Sdn Bhd, formed with all 3 companies as partners after the memorandum of understanding was inked in New Delhi last Jan by Mohd Ali and representatives from Vivo BioTech and Vanguard.  The Malacca government has said it will proceed with the construction of 3 animal-testing laboratories despite growing protests.

 

Science, not animals - The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working with pharmaceutical companies to improve its ToxCast toxicity prediction tool. More than 100 molecules that failed in clinical trials for toxicity reasons, from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis and Merck, will be used to help validate the tool. ToxCast uses a variety of screening assays to help understand how bodily processes are affected by exposure to chemicals, and determine which chemical exposures are most likely to cause adverse health effects. The tool currently includes 500 high throughput assays, and the cost per chemical is about $20,000 (£14,000). The aim is to make chemical testing faster, easier, and less dependent on animal testing. 

 

Primates used in research at the University of Kansas Medical Centre are dying or suffering severe pain because of negligence by researchers or their staff, an animal rights group said in a complaint seeking a federal investigation. Stop Animal Exploitation Now (SAEN) filed an official complaint with the U.S. Dept of Agriculture asking for an investigation of primates’ treatment and “the most serious action allowable” under the federal Animal Welfare Act. In 2009, the USDA cited the medical centre for 160 violations of federal animal protection laws during research projects between Aug 2008 and June 2009. The USDA has the power to impose fines for violations. Citing internal medical centre documents that it obtained using a public records request, the animal rights group’s complaint said 2 primates died of severe dehydration on March 31, 2008, after the facility had problems with water pressure. It alleges that the death of a third primate 2 days earlier was likely also a result of dehydration and inadequate care. The complaint also alleges that other primates being used to research morphine withdrawal were allowed to suffer for days before being euthanised, and that several monkeys died of gastric bloat after receiving inadequate care. The earlier investigation found incidents of monkeys with an infectious disease suffering from extreme weight loss, vomiting, diarrhoea and neurological disorders for at least a day after they should have been euthanised. “The information in the primate records indicate that the university has not done anything to change what they do (since the earlier violations),” Michael Budkie, executive director of SAEN, said. “There are a number of violations clearly still in existence.” Budkie said the medical centre also has not met federal requirements for annual reporting that discloses when research animals do not receive pain relief. The medical centre documents cited by the group discuss animals that are screeching, vomiting, grimacing, not eating or unable to move. SAEN said the medical centre did not report having any animals in experiments involving unrelieved pain in 2006-2008. Budkie said his group would prefer that the money being spent on animal research go instead to clinical research on humans, which he said provides more beneficial medical treatments.

 Sutch and Searle have been found to be importing primates (other animals suspected) through Heathrow for labs in the UK. Fetch Europe in Buckinghamshire are moving them to the laboratory sites. If you would like to politely contact them: Sutch & Searle Highwood Rd, Writtle, Essex, CM1 3PT Tel: 01245 421770 Fax: 01245 422734 enquiries@sutchandsearle.com Sutch & Searle Shipping (Heathrow) Ltd Unit 4, Central Park Estate Staines Rd Hounslow, TW4 5DJ Tel. 0208 538 1600 Fax. 0208 570 5899 sales@sutchandsearle.co.uk Unit3, Stockley Close Emails: peter.scott@sutchandsearle.com, richard.bates@sutchandsearle.co.uk, joanne.bryant@sutchandsearle.co.uk, doug.williams@sutchandsearle.co.uk, dave.hudson@sutchandsearle.co.uk, richard.bates@sutchandsearle.co.uk, joanne.bryant@sutchandsearle.co.uk, sales@sutchandsearle.co.uk, enquiries@sutchandsearle.com   Fetch Europe 3 Woodhurst Drive, Denham, Bucks, UB9 5LL Tel 01895 835 774 Mobile 07764 584 413 Fax: 01895 835-496 Emails: info@fetcheurope.co.uk, srm@fetcheurope.co.uk, ccm@fetcheurope.co.uk

 

Rejecting animal testing

Ito En, Ltd., a major beverage maker based in Tokyo, abolished animal testing at the end of April, while cosmetics giant Shiseido Co. aims to do so within the company by March next year and abolish the practice completely, including through outsourcing, by March 2013. The companies decided to scrap the tests, eyeing European and U.S. markets, where animal rights movements are strong. In Europe, sales of cosmetics developed via animal testing are regulated. Since it is the first time major Japanese companies have decided to abolish animal tests, the move is likely to affect other corporations. According to Ito En, the company decided to abolish animal testing through talks with animal rights organisations in the US, the company's major export market, and also because it learned that 2 major U.S. beverage makers have abolished the practice. "It's an inevitable step as we take our business global," a staff member said. Ito En had experimented with animals, mainly rats, to verify the effectiveness of catechin, which is a substance in green tea. From now on, however, the company will adopt alternative testing methods such as using human cells. Yet animal tests are required to obtain government authorisation of foods for specified health use. The company said it would outsource animal tests in case the data derived from such procedures become necessary in the future. Shiseido has not performed animal testing in its cosmetics research and development since the latter half of the 1980s and has limited such tests to the application of cosmetic materials. This spring, the company decided on a policy to completely abandon the practice, in accordance with EU regulations. The EU has banned animal testing of cosmetics and their materials since March last year. The EU also prohibited sales of cosmetics that used animal experimentation conducted outside the EU, except for 5 kinds of testing, such as repeated dose toxicity studies. The EU is calling for a total ban on animal experiments by March 2013. Shiseido's European business accounts for 11% of the company's total sales. Although Shiseido has not revealed the actual conditions of its experiments, a company official said, "We'd like to deal with the situation positively, as a socially responsible company, and plan to offer opportunities to exchange opinions with experts and animal rights organizations." In Japan, product safety data based on animal testing are required in principle to receive government approval for using new, quasi-drug elements. Concerning the problem, the Shiseido official said, "We'll shift our production policy from developing new materials [that traditionally require animal testing] to utilizing conventional materials." There are many small and medium-size cosmetics companies that do not conduct animal tests. However, animal tests are performed within major companies, including irritability tests on the eyes and skin of rabbits and other creatures. Fusako Nogami, director of the civic association All Life in a Viable Environment (ALIVE), said she hoped corporations would make products without sacrificing animals to the greatest extent possible. "It's a big problem compared with foreign countries, because Japan has no effective law to protect animals from animal experiments and no system to monitor them. Therefore, we can't grasp the actual conditions," she said. Hajime Kojima, chief of the new experiment evaluation office at the National Institute of Health Sciences, said unnecessary animal testing should be avoided. "Although alternative testing methods still have their limits, we've promoted the development of new technologies, including utilising iPS [human stem] cells," he said. "More support from the government is necessary so Japan's chemical industry won't lose the ability to compete in international markets."

 

Cystic Fibrosis has been claimed enthusiastically as an example of effective animal experimentation.  This is not true, and can easily be disproved.   The reality is that: * The genetically altered CF mouse gets no lung infections - unlike human patients who usually die from lung infections. * Mice don't have the glands which cause the lung problems humans have. * Human CF patients also have problems with the pancreas, intestines and with reproduction.  Animal models don't. * Human CF cells can be grown and tested on. * Treatments were discovered in cell culture and through human study.  www.vivisectioninformation.com

 

The Mazor breeding farm currently holds 1,000 long tailed macaque monkeys. Some of these monkeys were wild caught on Mauritius, while others were born in captivity. Mazor is a link in the chain of a cruel trade in which monkeys are forcibly removed from their natural environment then flown thousands of miles in small cages to laboratories or breeding facilities. These animals will have been separated from their family groups, the young brutally separated from their mothers.  Mazor is little more than a monkey breeding factory, whose manager considers the monkeys to be "production units" whose sole purpose is to increase profits, through the sale of the offspring to laboratories. To further increase profitability, the young are separated early from their mothers, allowing these females to mate as soon as possible. Early forced separation is traumatic to both the young and the mothers. These mothers will cry out and cling in desperation to the bars of their cages in a vain attempt to look for their young. The young who have been moved to a separate enclosure, will in turn look for their mothers and display signs of severe distress. Not all will survive this difficult transition. Those who do will have their chests tattooed with a 4 digit serial number and then be sold to laboratories in Europe, the US and Israel. Every year, hundreds of these terrified young monkeys will be forced to travel huge distances in tiny crates to faraway destinations, to a fate worse than death, which awaits them. Each of these "units" will fill the pockets of the breeding farm manager to the tune of $2800. The vast majority of these young monkeys will be sold to laboratories that specialise in toxicology. Among the clients of Mazor are Covance (Germany), the Swedish centre for Biological studies, as well as laboratories in the UK, Belgium, Italy and the US. The monkeys will be housed in miserable conditions and will undergo toxicity tests in which they will be injected or force fed with drugs and other chemicals. Most of the animals will die during these tests, and those who survive will be killed at the end of the experiment. Most of the monkeys sold to laboratories within Israel will undergo invasive brain experiments. These experiments involve water deprivation, immobilization in a primate chair for extended periods of time, surgical removal of the top of the skull, and implantation of equipment in the skull and the brain itself. These types of experiment typically last several years, after which most of the monkeys will be killed. In rare instances, individual monkeys are released and allowed to undergo rehabilitation in sanctuaries. This is a relatively recent phenomenon and is due in large part to public outcry.  Behind Closed Doors, together with other animal rights' groups, called on the Minister of Environmental Protection to withdraw the Mazor trade licence. The Minister is currently studying our written proposal and is expected shortly to announce his decision.  Please write a polite message to the Minister, making clear your views that the Mazor monkey breeding farm must be closed down: Gilad Erdan, Minister of Environmental Protection, sar@sviva.gov.il fax +972-2-6535958 Postal address: Kanfey Nesharim 5, P.O. Box 34033, Jerusalem 95464, Israel.

 

P&G may sponsor London Olympics

Responding to concerns expressed by animal welfare groups to news that the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) are in discussions with the USA based multinational corporation Procter & Gamble as a potential sponsor of the London Olympic Games, London Assembly Member Darren Johnson (Green) has tabled a formal question to the Mayor of London at the next Mayor's Question Time in July 2010: Given Proctor & Gamble's continued use of animal testing for cosmetics and household products in the US, in spite of such practices being banned in the UK and across the EU, can P&G really be considered a suitable sponsor for London 2012 and will you make clear your opposition to any such move?  According to an RSPCA information paper - The testing of cosmetics using animals, 'The use of animals to test cosmetics or their ingredients is now banned in the EU. By 2013, it will also be illegal to sell in the EU any cosmetics tested on animals elsewhere in the world.'  Darren Johnson said: "…..Such unethical practices make it completely inappropriate as a London 2012 sponsor and I am calling on the Mayor to oppose P&G as an Olympic sponsor, unless they agree to end animal testing" Please lobby your MP now to stop Procter & Gamble from becoming a sponsor of the London 2012 Olympics. P&G make animals suffer for brands like Herbal Essences, Fairy, Olay and Pantene. P&G’s unethical practices are in fundamental conflict with the values of the UK and the Olympic movement. By accepting sponsorship from P&G, the London 2012 Olympics would be promoting gratuitous violence towards animals that is strongly opposed by the majority of the public.

 

BUAV uncovers new primate shipments

The BUAV’s long-standing campaign to end the transportation by airlines of non-human primates destined for the research industry has had many successes. The primate research industry is feeling the effects as an increasing number of airlines are helping to put a stop to animal cruelty and suffering by refusing to transport primates destined for the research industry. Every year thousands of primates are transported around the world. Airlines play an important role in this chain of suffering. The individuals are packed into wooden crates, usually too small to allow them even to stand up, and travel as cargo, predominantly on passenger air flights. They often have to endure inadequate ventilation, noise and extreme temperature fluctuations, as well as delays as they are shipped on extremely long journeys to laboratories across the world. A small number of airlines continue to facilitate this cruel trade. Recent information obtained by the BUAV shows that the following airlines transported primates for the research industry during 2009: AIR CHINA - 109 rhesus macaques from China to the USA on 1st Dec; AIR FRANCE - 78 long-tailed macaques from Mauritius to USA on 18th Feb; AMERICAN AIRLINES - 20 night monkeys from Peru to the USA on 23rd June; AMERIJET - 42 African green monkeys from St Kitts to the USA on 26th Oct; CARIBBEAN AIRLINES - 36 African green monkeys from Barbados to the USA on 26th May; CHINA EASTERN AIRLINES - 60 rhesus macaques from China to the USA on 27th May; CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES - 120 long-tailed macaques from Indonesia to the USA on 13th Nov; EL AL AIRLINES – 120 long-tailed macaques from Israel to the USA on 1st Oct; PHILIPPINE AIRLINES - 100 long-tailed macaques from the Philippines to the USA on 1st Nov. Please support the BUAV’s Cargo Cruelty campaign to stop this suffering. Please send letters to these airlines: www.buav.org/campaigns/cargocruelty

 

NASA Engineer Resigns Over Planned Primate Testing

NASA aerospace engineer April Evans has resigned her position as a space architect on the International Space Station (ISS) programme as a result of NASA’s decision to conduct primate irradiation testing after 30 years of non-usage, a decision Evans believes is a major step backward for NASA’s animal testing record. Evans argues that not only do primate irradiation experiments fall out of line with the Obama administration’s long range objective of developing new technologies to shield space radiations, but it also risks current and future international relations and partnerships crucial to NASA’s success.  Evans’ concerns and opposition to NASA primate testing have been met with support by the European Space Agency (ESA) along with Animal Defenders International (ADI), a campaign group whose objective is legislative action in protection of animals. In a letter to ADI, ESA Director General Jean-Jacques Dordain categorically opposed the “necessity of complementary experiments with monkeys in combination with the human research objectives of Mars500,” and further declined “any interest in monkey research and does not consider any need or use for such result.” Evans, a 9-year veteran of the Human Spaceflight Programme, served as the NASA VIPER ISS Visiting Vehicles Integration team lead for the past 3 years at NASA’s Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas, prior to her resignation. She is a recipient of the NASA Space Flight Awareness Honoree award, a designation granted to fewer than 1% of the total NASA government and contractor workforce annually for their excellence. “After much deliberation, I resigned from NASA because I could not support the scientific justification for this monkey radiobiology experiment,” wrote Evans in a letter to Samuel Aronson, director of the Brookhaven National Laboratory, which was contracted by NASA to conduct the tests on squirrel monkeys. Instead, Evans has encouraged NASA to focus on developing space radiation shielding. “Both astronauts and hardware are at risk from the space radiation environment. This is a problem that all space agencies will have to solve for interplanetary space travel. Space vehicle radiation shielding is necessary technology for a sustainable long-term human space exploration programme.“ Evans said to ADI. She believes that scientists and engineers should be given the chance and time to advance shielding technology. NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden defended such experimentation calling it “very strongly peer-reviewed” and “very humane.” However, he did not comment on the growing internal debate and apparent contradiction between the proposed test and the new direction NASA received from the Obama administration. “These tests were proposed to support a schedule for space exploration that no longer exists,“ said Evans. “Experiments on primates only take focus away from the critical need for shielding technology.”  She wrote in her letter to Samuel Aronson that “the planned monkey experiment focuses on predicting how the human brain may function after space radiation exposure. This isn’t solving the problem of space radiation; it’s merely further refining our measurements of the consequences”. ADI has also written to NASA and Brookhaven National Laboratory, urging them to consider their European counterpart’s decision to not conduct these tests. “These tests are not only inhumane, they are also not a wise choice of the times. They are costly and scientifically unsupported. We urge NASA to stop ignoring the overwhelming opposition to these tests coming from the international space community, as well as from its own rank” said Jan Creamer, President of ADI. “We also would like to urge other NASA employees who object to these experiments to voice their opposition.” In the face of a nationwide budgetary crisis, the costs associated with the planned experiments have also raised concern. Reports indicate that these controversial radiation tests will cost an estimated $1.75m of taxpayer money. Just 2 weeks ago, however, NASA announced potential layoffs of up to 5,000 workers, while suspending NASA’s back-to-the-moon Constellation programme due to budgetary shortages. Take Action: Please write a polite letter for the attention of the NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden Jr. Request that he reconsider financing such horrific experiments. Public Communications Office, NASA Headquarters, Suite 5K39, Washington, DC 20546-0001 E-mail: public-inquiries@hq.nasa.gov

 

9 staff at the University of Wisconsin-Madison could go to jail or pay heavy fines for carrying out decompression experiments on sheep for the US navy. Some sheep died in the experiments, which aimed to find new ways to save divers from decompression sickness, otherwise known as "the bends". Antivivisectionists at the Alliance for Animals in Madison and at PETA discovered that Wisconsin has a law banning the killing of animals through decompression. The AFA and PETA filed charges, and on 2 June circuit judge Amy Smith backed the animal-rights groups' claim. She concluded that the researchers "intentionally or negligently violated Wisconsin law", and so should face criminal charges. Smith dismissed the university's defence that the research project was exempt from the law. The case is the first in which animal researchers have faced criminal charges in the US since 1981. "If animal rights groups continue to pursue the use of laws in ways they were not originally intended, I'm concerned that universities may be forced to expend additional resources to counteract these unwarranted legal attacks," says Frankie Trull, president of the Foundation for Biomedical Research in Washington DC, which defends animal experiments.  "I recommend institutions doing biomedical research educate their in-house counsels about these animal rights strategies and be prepared."  New Scientist 14th June   The law was in place, the vivisectors ignored it yet they call it an “unwarranted attack”.

 

In painful animal experiments, anything goes…

In the world of animal experimentation, nothing is what it seems. It would be a reasonable assumption that incidents for which Yale animal laboratories were cited recently by federal inspectors would be among the worst practices that have occurred at the laboratories since they warranted citations. Far worse occurs to the animals confined in Yale University labs. In experiments at Yale, animals have had their feet shocked, had holes cut into their skulls, had toxins injected in their brains to cripple them, been addicted to nicotine, cocaine and methamphetamines and killed. These incidents are not deemed abuses by federal inspectors because these practices are perfectly legal. There is no experiment regardless of how painful or how trivial that is simply prohibited. If the requisite paperwork is completed, anything can be done to an animal in a laboratory, and with funding from an unwitting public. New Haven Register 16 June

 

Kuala Lumpur Govt probes British funded lab

The KL government is considering shutting down a controversial British funded animal testing lab if there is evidence of cruelty there, according to the government's top veterinary official. The Progenix Research lab, which uses monkeys, dogs, rodents and rabbits for toxicology testing, is accused of poisoning the animals to death. Veterinary Services director Abdul Aziz Jamaludin said the company will be ordered to shut down if his department finds animals were subject to abuse. "If animal testing cannot be conducted in the US or Europe, I see no reason why they should be allowed here. Animal welfare laws in Malaysia which is bidding to become a major biotech hub in S.E. Asia, are not as stringent as those in developed nations, although there are laws to prosecute those who treat animals badly, adding that research companies should use tissue culture rather than animals to conduct tests for drugs and cosmetics. I have got a report on the lab and I will act on it “ he told AFP from Beijing. The BUAV condemned the facility, which is based in Penang and run by the Britain based Alpha Biologics. "We are extremely concerned that a UK company has an animal laboratory in Malaysia," said Sarah Kite, its director of special projects. These animals are being cruelly used for toxicity testing in a country where there is no legislation governing their welfare, animals are quite literally poisoned to death." Last month a local Malaysian leader drew criticism from campaigners for saying that God had created animals to be used by man, amid controversy over an Indian drug company's plans to build an animal testing facility in the country. FreeMalaysia13 June

 

Last Chance To Save EU Animal Experiments Agreement

Greens in the European Parliament are leading a challenge to the proposed new EU law on animal experiments (an update of EU Directive 86/609) because of controversial amendments.  Their challenge is the last chance in the lengthy negotiations to prevent amendments that would weaken the legal requirement to use available non-animal alternative methods (in force in the EU since 1986) and restrict the ability of national governments to introduce higher animal welfare standards than those required under the EU law. The Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research has supported the challenge, saying the amendments are “to the detriment of medical progress as well as animal welfare.”  Since the EU Commission’s original proposal in Nov 2008 to revise the 20-year old animal experiments directive, negotiations between the EU Parliament and Council have been ongoing throughout 2009. Many of the most progressive animal welfare measures have been stripped out in the face of intense lobbying by the animal research industry, most notably restrictions on the use of non-human primates and protection of some sentient invertebrate species. However the most recent compromise text finalised after the last ‘trialogue’ meeting on 7th Dec, goes even further by removing the legal requirement to use available non-animal alternative research methods instead of animal experiments.  The EU’s Swedish Presidency has been keen to negotiate early agreement of the proposed new directive and MEPs were asked this week to give their verdict, with each political group in the Parliament having either to endorse or reject the text. Many MEPs are dissatisfied with the compromise, but only the Greens/European Free Alliance group has publicly rejected the deal on offer and stated they are prepared, if there are no further opportunities to reach agreement through the trialogue process, to bring forward amendments at a plenary vote. The Greens/EFA group has highlighted 4 requirements for agreement: – removal of the restriction on EU member states’ ability to continually improve animal welfare standards; preservation of the requirement to use available alternative methods; an end to primates being used for trivial experiments, and introduction of a requirement to develop strategies to replace the use of primates in experiments. Dr Caroline Lucas said: “It is absolutely unacceptable that this compromise text fails to require the use of available alternative methods in all cases, something that for decades has been fundamental in giving legal impetus to humane research. The loss of this provision and removal of member states’ freedom to introduce stronger laboratory animal welfare measures nationally in the future is simply a compromise too far, and I am delighted that Green MEPs have been able to take a stand. "The EU has an opportunity to lead the world in progressive animal research legislation, and yet the proposal doesn’t even protect highly sentient primates from trivial experiments and contains no strategy for phasing out their use altogether. This is not legislation fit for the 21st century, and I hope other Parliamentary groups will join the Greens in standing up for humane science when this comes to a Plenary vote." Government Ministers from Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands publicly raised their concerns at a meeting of the EU’s Agriculture Council on Dec 15. The UK’s position on the compromise is not known, and remains subject to parliamentary scrutiny. The House of Lords EU Committee produced a report in Nov supporting far reaching animal welfare and humane science measures, but the 2 most controversial issues – the ability of Member States to introduce stricter measures and the weakening of the requirement to use available alternative methods – were not at the time under discussion so have not been considered by those tasked with providing UK parliament scrutiny.

Monkey starved to death in US lab
Staff at the University of Washington's National Primate Research Centre allowed a monkey to starve to death last year. A U.S. Dept of Agriculture inspection report says the male pigtailed macaque had lost a quarter of his body weight, and had not been weighed regularly as required by the university's own protocols. 3 workers and one supervisor were ‘disciplined’ in relation to his death. The death is the latest blow for animal research programmes at the UW, which is one of the nation's top institutions in terms of biomedical funding from the National Institutes of Health. In 1995, 5 baboons died of exposure or thirst at a UW primate breeding centre near Spokane. The centre was later closed. Inspectors from the Association for Assessment & Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care found "serious deficiencies" in the university's animal care facilities in 2006 and placed the university on probation. In 2008, UW was ordered to reimburse the federal government more than $20,000 for unauthorized surgeries performed on primates being used to study the relationship between the brain and eye movement. Stop Animal Exploitation Now, which monitors all U.S. research centres, has targeted the UW for special scrutiny,  Executive Director Michael Budkie comments "If they can't even keep the primates fed, you have to wonder what else is happening,"  The USDA report said the macaque hadn't been weighed for more than 2 months before his death. The problem was traced to a change in staffing and confusion over responsibilities. The same USDA inspection noted a problem with 2 adult male baboons, being used for neurological studies. Cages were designed so that when the animals were on the perches where they usually sleep, they were unable to "sit upright in a normal manner" because of 2 inch tall implants in their heads.  The UW primate centre's Web site says it is the largest of 8 federal centres across the country. Facilities in Seattle house about 700 animals, mostly macaques and baboons. The university also operates primate breeding colonies in Louisiana and Texas, with about 3,000 animals. Seattle Times 8 Jan

Australia to lift ban on animal transplants
Australia has lifted a 5 year ban on animal to human transplant trials from the end of 2009. Australia joins 14 other countries including Japan, New Zealand and the US in allowing xenotransplantation.

2009 – a year of progress against vivisection

Despite a rise of 14% in animal use admitted by the UK Home Office….

Chimp research into HIV was finally understood to be useless.  It was expertly examined and dismissed by a team of scientists who published in a medical journal at the end of 2008.

A review on animal GM models for heart disease showed it was ineffective and misleading. Immunologists explained that "mice are lousy models for clinical studies" and suggested we study humans instead.

A published study stated "Despite claims by the research industry, chimpanzees have proven to be a poor model for human cancer research."

Technology incl virtual humans, artificial skin grown from human skin cells & 3D models of brain blood flow have been revealed & approved.

UK researchers investigating what went wrong in the drug trial with TGN1412 in 2006, developed a test that uses a mixed culture of white blood cells and endothelial cells, which prove what drugs like this really do.

Computer modelling lead to the Times headline “Animal experiments could end in a generation”, as computer modelling is proving more accurate.  “These models have the ability to be far more accurate. I sometimes think it is just tradition - that feeling that if it’s safe in an animal it’s safe in a human - which means so many animal tests are still carried out.”

‘Toxichip’ was revealed - which can monitor how cells behave and interact with drugs, chemical pollutants in the environment and toxic substances in food and beverages.

Scientists have for the first time been able to record spontaneous epileptic activity in brain tissue "Until now we’ve only been able to mimic epilepsy using animal models but this can never give you a true picture of what is actually going on inside the human brain in epilepsy".
A Swiss animal experimenter was sued for his experiments on monkeys which opponents believed could not be justified legally.  He lost the landmark case, thus threatening the future of his work and opening opportunities for many such future cases.

MEPs were overwhelmed by the massive support from the public for meaningful changes in the legislation affecting vivisection in Europe.

MPs in the UK in their masses supported EDM569, which called for an independent inquiry into animal testing. This EDM finished joint 10th out of over 2400 Early Day Motions, ranking inside the top 0.5%.  This showed beyond doubt the political support for historic action in this area.

Even more MPs supported EDM545, which expressed outrage at the unacceptable increase in animal use & demanded action to reverse this trend.

Record number of humane research applications
The Dr Hadwen Trust has received a record number of applications from scientists for grants to develop non-animal techniques to replace animal experiments in medical research. This is an 84% increase in applications from the previous year and the highest overall intake in their 40-year history. An increasing interest from scientists in developing new technology, which will advance medical research and replace animal experiments in the laboratory, is a positive and significant step forward. The successful grant recipients and projects will be announced in the summer.

San Francisco, Bay Area researchers are working with a technique that could soon revolutionise the way new medicines are developed. By using stem cells, they are conducting what amounts to human drug trials, in a dish. The cells match those of a patient suffering from a rare and deadly heart condition. "We can actually make heart cells right in a dish that's genetically identical to a person, then we can give drugs to those cells and have the heart speed up or slow down and so we're doing clinical trials in a dish right now," Dr. Bruce Conklin said. "To be able to work directly on human tissue, directly on human heart tissue, directly on human neuronal tissue is a fantastic leap forward."     That is because for decades researchers have relied on lab animals to conduct the early phases of drug testing; but that has led to many false starts because their physiology is significantly different from humans. But now, S. San Francisco-based Ipierian believes it is on the verge of developing new treatments for neuro-degenerative diseases using drugs tested first on human nerve cells created in their lab. "We have started with skin cells from patients that already have the disease, turned those skin cells into stem cells and then turn those stem cells into neurons that also have the disease," Ipierian senior scientist John Dimos said. Using the diseased neurons, researchers can test dozens of samples at a time to see which drugs are working, with potentially far more accurate results than in animal models.

Charles River Labs fined for killing primate

Charles River Laboratories has been fined $4,500 for killing a macaque last April at its Longley Lane facility. This is almost half of the $10,000 it paid the USDA after a May 28, 2008, incident in which severe heat led to the deaths of 32 primates in their lab on Dunn Circle in Sparks. USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service spokesman Dave Sacks said no information was available on how the USDA reached the $4,500 figure. The incident was documented in a June inspection of the facility by the USDA and brought to light by the animal advocacy group Stop Animal Exploitation Now! Cage washers “sterilize the enclosures, meaning that this primate was literally boiled alive.” Cianciaruso acknowledged the macaque died as a result of being put through the cage washer, but the specific cause of death was not determined, stating, “This unfortunate incident was the result of human error. We have enhanced our quality control processes at the Reno facility and have implemented these best practices at all of our sites globally. We expect these actions will preclude the recurrence of a similar event.” The USDA report said Charles River workers twice signed off that there were no animals in the cage. They were supposed to check before a pre cleaning and before putting the cage into the washer, the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service report said. “Since an animal died, the training was not of sufficient frequency to remind the people to thoroughly look for animals before having the cages washed,” the report said. “This is important for the health and safety of all the animals.” The company said several human errors led to the animal’s death. As a result of the laboratory’s  investigation, 5 additional preventive measures were added to the standard operating procedures to enhance communication among workers during the cage changeover. Cameras in the dirty cage staging area were added and practices have been updated at all Charles River sites. RGI  6th Jan

Antidote pesticide study

Antidote is currently funding a unique UK study on the effects of pesticides and pesticide mixtures on human health. The aim is to promote good science and get rid of animal tests. The regulatory authorities require pesticide chemicals to be tested on a rodent and a non-rodent species (Biocides directive 98/8/EC), which invariably means rats and dogs. Not only are these tests extremely cruel, but the results they yield are meaningless for human health. Another major issue ignored until very recently by the regulatory authorities is the effect of mixtures of pesticides on human health. Animal toxicity experiments are designed to test one chemical at a time. Animal studies would not be able to cope with chemical mixtures. According to toxicopathologist Dr Vyvyan Howard, in order to test the 1,000 most common chemicals in unique combinations of 3,  we would need to conduct 166m animal experiments. That simply isn't feasible, and even if it was, the results would not be relevant to humans, hence the rationale for applying toxicogenomics (the study of how genes respond to a toxic agent) and human cell lines. Using human cells means the study is relevant to humans, and using toxicogenomics yields results in 24-48 hours. Animal toxicity tests typically last 90 days. Toxicogenomics is also ideally suited to chemical mixtures because hundreds of tests can be carried out simultaneously on minituarised DNA slides. We expect the study to be completed within about 6 months', after which it will be submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal for publication. Once that is achieved, results will be released to the media and the EU regulatory authorities will also be informed.

Antidote Europe, the French-based NGO, was awarded the Professor Pietro Croce Prize for its achievements in the fields of scientific progress and public health. The award ceremony took place at the Palazzo dei Conservatori under the auspices of the Mayor of Rome, a Ministry of Health representative and several distinguished academics. This annual award is sponsored by the Italian groups Equivita and the National Ecological Movement (UNA). The French NGO has worked tirelessly to promote modern toxicology and helped to include the concept of "toxicogenomics" in the EU's chemical testing programme, REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of Chemicals). The application of toxicogenomics was the subject of a special session held in Brussels by an EU risk assessment committee. Currently, Antidote Europe is waging a public awareness campaign on the public health dangers of the synthetic chemical bisphenol A, found in baby bottles and other plastic products. Previous studies using toxicogenomics and human cells have demonstrated the hormone-mimicking effects of bisphenol A.  This chemical is now a prime suspect for the significant increase over the past few decades of hormone-sensitive cancers, such as breast and prostate cancer. In addition, Antidote Europe has commissioned a laboratory study on the effects of single pesticides and pesticide mixtures on human cells. Very few scientific studies exist on the effects of pesticide mixtures on human health. The late Professor Pietro Croce, a member of the American College of Pathologists, was one of Italy's most outspoken critics of animal research. A prolific writer and public speaker, he subsequently spearheaded an international movement away from animal experiments in favour of modern methods of scientific research.

Cosmetic testing in Japan

Shiseido Co. told a group of anti-animal testing activists that the top Japanese cosmetics maker has boosted efforts to suspend the controversial practice in the near future, if not immediately. During the first meeting of its kind at an office of Shiseido, company officials explained ongoing measures it has taken to develop viable alternatives to ensure the safety of its products without using animals for testing. Members of the Japan Anti-Vivisection Association handed to the officials the signatures of some 45,000 people calling on the company for an immediate halt to animal testing. The 2 sides met at a time when major cosmetics companies in Japan are faced with the need to develop ways to produce makeup without animal testing as the EU is set to introduce in 2013 a full ban on the sale of all cosmetics products made through animal testing, including those produced outside its economies.

Toxichip could bring about the end of animal testing. Toxichip, which was developed at the Tyndall National Institute in Cork, is capable of monitoring how cells behave and interact with drugs, chemical pollutants in the environment and toxic substances in food and beverages. Cell-based biosensors, developed and made at Tyndall, integrated in the Toxichip platform also have the potential to replace animal testing currently used in toxicity screening. Already 2 companies, one in Ireland and another in France, are seeking to invest in and apply this new technology.

Wickham labs has lodged an appeal against the 2 planning applications which were heard by Winchester City Council in Sept '09 for which the planning committee refused planning permission, namely the 'building of a new laboratory' at Torbay Farm, Lower Upham, and the 'erection of a security fence'.  Letters of objections are to reach The Planning Inspectorate by 14 Jan. The address is :  The Planning Inspectorate, Room 3/19 Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay,. Bristol, BS1 6PN.  The reference numbers to the planning application are :  APP/L1765/A/09/2117832 and APP/L1765/A/09/2117S826. We continue to demonstrate outside the labs every week and will now plan to have a demonstration outside Torbay Farm, Lower Upham, for information purposes only. SWAT

A mock funeral was held on Thurs 10th Dec in Wickham Sq to commemorate all the animals killed in Wickham labs. A small coffin, pallbearers and grave stones with pictures of the various animals used and RIP on them were carried round the square.  Police had refused to close the road for a short march despite being informed of the protest beforehand – they said it would be ‘inconvenient’. After the ceremony we went around the corner to the labs and as the workers came out we could voice our feeling to them.  Some scurried on whilst others were arrogant and provocative. The Home Office is currently investigating claims of animal cruelty after a BUAV undercover investigator worked at the labs for 8 months. Wickham Lab technician director Chris Bishop said they were working with the Home Office.  Await another whitewash

Animal testing labs need policing.
The Home Office has been urged to stop issuing blanket licences to animal testing labs where rabbits are being “needlessly” shackled in medieval” stocks for up to 8 hours per experiment. Campaigners say a hands-off attitude in Whitehall means the Government is failing to properly police animal tests and so prevent suffering to thousands of rabbits a year. They say a policy of issuing high-level licences to animal labs rather than authorising individual experiments means tests are being carried out when not actually required by regulations. That “makes a mockery” of the Government’s pledge to reduce the number of tests on animals, the campaigners said last night. Home Office minister Meg Hillier admitted the high-level policy after a series of questions in Parliament by Lib Dem MPs last month. The row centres on pyrogenicity tests - experiments designed to see if products likely come into contact with the human bloodstream cause fevers - at 4 British laboratories. One of those is Wickham Laboratories in Hampshire, which is currently being investigated by the Government after allegations of malpractice during a range of procedures.  The claims were made by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, which handed a dossier of evidence to the Government last month following an undercover investigation. Film footage shows lines of young rabbits shackled by their necks awaiting tests for medical and veterinary drugs for large pharmaceutical companies. Rabbits are deliberately chosen, BUAV say, because they are large docile creatures and relatively easy to handle. The campaigners claim animals are starved for up to 30 hours before testing and restrained, without water, for up to 8 hours during the experiments themselves. Not only can the rabbits sustain injuries to backs and necks as they struggle in the “mediaeval stocks”, they are also distressed from botched injections to their ear veins and from probes inserted into their rectums for the duration of the test, according to BUAV.
A diary kept by its investigator describes seeing “petrified” rabbits “frantically biting at the bars of their small cages”, and a lab technician cursing at one animal struggling before an injection. So long as rabbits do not show “significant adverse effects” first time round, Government guidelines allow the animals to go through the ordeal repeatedly.  Yet many of the tests are not even required by European and American regulations and in some cases non-animal methods are readily available. Sarah Kite, BUAV’s special projects director, said because the Home Office simply hands out “blanket” licences to labs such as Wickham, officials were allowing needless tests to slip through the net. That means the Government is failing its legal duty to comply with the principles of the “3 Rs”, to reduce, refine and replace animal experiments. Ms Kite described that as “outrageous” and added: “It makes a mockery of claims that the UK has the toughest legislation on animal testing. How can it comply with the 3 Rs when it is not scrutinising individual substances to see if there is a legal requirement for animal testing to take place before handing over licences? This appalling loophole has to be closed." However, Wickham Laboratories’ technical director Chris Bishop said the animal welfare was “paramount”, that rabbits were usually deprived of food for 18 hours prior to tests, not 30, and that non-animal methods were used “wherever possible”. He said that rabbits were chosen to comply with regulations and added: “The suggestion they are used only because they are docile & easy to handle is a complete irrelevance.” A Home Office statement said: "We authorise animal research only when it can be justified. We expect & require the highest standards, and will thoroughly examine any evidence that suggests these standards are not being met.”
Sunday Express. 6 Dec

Monkey to be sent to Mars

A monkey may be sent to Mars, under plans unveiled by Russian scientists.  Although the ape will be looked after by a robot on the mission, the decision is expected to spark controversy with animal rights groups.  The Russians first succeeded in putting monkeys into orbit in 1983. "We have plans to return to space,” said Zurab Mikvabia, director of the Institute of Experimental Pathology & Therapy in Georgia which supplied apes for the programme in the 1980s. The Institute is in preliminary talks with Russia's Cosmonautics Academy about preparing monkeys for a simulated Mars mission that could lay the groundwork for sending an ape to the Red Planet, he said. Such an initiative would build on Mars-500, a joint Russian-European project that saw 6 human volunteers confined in a capsule in Moscow for 120 days earlier this year to simulate a Mars mission. Mr Mikvabia said: "Earlier this programme was aimed at sending cosmonauts, people (to Mars). But given the length of the flight to Mars, and given the cosmic rays for which we don't have adequate protection over such a long trip, discussions have focused recently on sending an ape instead." Estimates for the length of the journey to Mars vary depending on the type of mission envisioned, but the European Space Agency says its proposal for a round-trip mission would take 520 days. If Russia pursues the idea of sending monkeys to Mars, Mikvabia's institute could become the site of an enclosed "biosphere" where apes would be kept for long periods to simulate space flights.  The Institute said a robot would accompany the first primate to Mars to feed and look after the ape.  Mr Mikvabia said: "The robot will feed the monkey, will clean up after it. Our task will be to teach the monkey to co-operate with the robot."

Harvard to radiate squirrel monkeys

NASA plans to zap more than 2 dozen squirrel monkeys with radiation and then test the toxic simians at Belmont’s McLean Hospital as part of a Harvard Medical School project. These monkeys will be forced to spend the rest of their lives doing a host of behavioural tasks to assess how the radiation damages their brains and their bodies over time. The $1.75m project calls for National Aeronautics & Space Administration researchers to blast 28 monkeys with gamma rays equivalent to 3 years of space travel in an attempt to gauge the effects of a mission to Mars on a human. After the animals are radiated in a Long Island, N.Y., facility, plans call for them to be shipped to Belmont, where they would be monitored for the rest of their lives in McLean as part of a Harvard Medical School project. Harvard Medical School’s Dr. Jack Bergman is in charge of the McLean project. NASA officials vigorously have defended the programme, which will mark the agency’s first monkey testing in years. “The overall objective of the planned studies with the nonhuman primates is to help NASA predict neurobehavioural effects of space radiation, which are among the most poorly understood health risks for astronauts,” said a NASA spokesman. “Studies in nonhuman primates are essential to be able to best predict neurobehavioral effects of radiation on humans.” NASA officials also have insisted the monkeys won’t be killed. PETA representatives point out that previous NASA experiments on primates have left animals with fatal cancer and brain tumours. The project still is awaiting final government approval, but PETA officials are hoping protests will block the monkey testing. “It’s easy to establish how space travel affects humans Just study humans who’ve travelled to space,” Byrne said. “It speaks volumes about humans’ callous attitudes toward animals on our planet.” Boston Herald 28 Nov

Mazor Farm - Call for Action

The Mazor breeding farm in Israel currently holds 1,000 long tailed macaque monkeys. Some of these monkeys were wild caught on Mauritius, while others were born in captivity. Mazor is a link in the chain of cruel trade in which monkeys are forcibly removed from their natural environment then flown thousands of miles in small cages to laboratories or breeding facilities. These animals will have been separated from their family groups, the young brutally separated from their mothers.  Mazor is little more than a monkey breeding factory, whose manager considers the monkeys to be "production units" whose sole purpose is to increase profits, through the sale of the offspring to laboratories. To further increase profitability, the young are separated early from their mothers, allowing these females to mate as soon as possible. Early forced separation is traumatic to both the young and the mothers. These mothers will cry out and cling in desperation to the bars of their cages in a vain attempt to look for their young. The young who have been moved to a separate enclosure, will in turn look for their mothers and display signs of severe distress. Not all of these animals will survive this difficult transition and some will die. Those who survive will have their chests tattooed with a 4 digit serial number and then be sold to laboratories in Europe, the US and Israel. Every year, hundreds of these terrified young monkeys will be forced to travel huge distances in tiny crates to faraway destinations, to a fate worse than death. Each of these "units" will fill the pockets of the breeding farm manager to the tune of $2,800. The vast majority of these young monkeys will be sold to laboratories that specialise in toxicology (poisoning tests). Among the clients of Mazor are  Covance (Germany), the Swedish centre for Biological studies, as well as laboratories in the UK, Belgium, Italy and the US. The monkeys will be injected or force fed with drugs and other chemicals. Most of the animals will die during these tests, and those who survive will be killed at the end of the experiment. Most of the monkeys sold to laboratories within Israel will undergo invasive brain experiments.. These experiments involve water deprivation, immobilization in a primate chair for extended periods of time, surgical removal of the top of the skull, and implantation of equipment in the skull and the brain itself. These types of experiment typically last several years, after which most of the monkeys will be killed. In rare instances, individual monkeys are released and allowed to undergo rehabilitation in sanctuaries. This is a relatively recent phenomenon and is due in large part to public outcry. Last July, Behind Closed Doors together with other animal rights' groups, called on the Minister of Environmental Protection to withdraw the Mazor trade licence (import and export). The Minister is currently studying our written proposal and is expected shortly to announce his decision. We would like to ask you to please write a polite message to the Minister, making clear your views that the Mazor monkey breeding farm must be closed down: Gilad Ardan, Minister of Environmental Protection sar@sviva.gov.il  fax +972-2-6535958 Postal address: Kanfey Nesharim 5, P.O. Box 34033, Jerusalem 95464, Israel.

Lab monkeys saved
3 laboratory monkeys, due to die before the New Year, have been saved by Animal Defenders International (ADI) and are now starting a new life at a sanctuary in the UK. The 3 macaques, who had been used in neurology experiments at a major European animal research laboratory, were no longer required and were scheduled to die by the end of the year. The laboratory responded positively when ADI offered to home the animals and a race against the clock began to find a new home.

Puerto Rico monkey breeding facility halted
A judge has barred construction of a monkey breeding facility in Puerto Rico that has pitted people seeking an economic lifeline for their poor mountain town against other residents and animal activists. The decision came in a lawsuit filed by local residents and PETA. Bioculture Ltd., the company planning the facility, deny that they failed to hold public hearings or submit a full environmental impact statement. PETA spokesman Justin Goodman said, "If Bioculture attempts to pursue this project any further, we are poised for action." Bioculture are to appeal the ruling. Miami Herald 30 Dec

Uni Cancels Anthrax Project
Commotion has erupted over a cancelled anthrax project at Oklahoma State University. The National Institutes of Health had agreed to fund the study, which involved creating an animal model of anthrax infection in baboons, and the university's animal use and care committee had given it the green light. But OSU President Burns Hargis decided that the project would not be allowed on campus, for reasons that weren't immediately clear. Hargis claims he made the decision based on several factors, OSU's vice president for research and technology transfer, Stephen McKeever, commented "The issue he was mostly concerned about was that he really did not want to attract controversy from the violent elements of various animal rights groups. He did not want to put OSU in that spotlight and so unnecessarily distract from or interfere with current research." Although McKeever says no specific attacks or threats against OSU factored in the decision, attacks by animal rights extremists have been on the rise in the US in recent years. Researchers at OSU and elsewhere had been quick to speculate that Hargis's decision had been influenced by Madeline Pickens, a wealthy donor and animal rights activist. Her husband, T. Boone Pickens, has donated $458m to the university in recent years. Last week Madeleine Pickens's Web site posted an article from DVM Newsmagazine about the anthrax decision, appending the original headline with the exclamation "Kudos for a Great Decision!" and highlighting comments from a professor in OSU's Centre for Veterinary Health Sciences suggesting that Pickens had played a role in the decision. McKeever flatly denies that the Pickenses had a role in the decision to block the anthrax project. Science Insider 7 Dec

SPEAK demo - Police pay out over monkey photo
A group of animal rights campaigners are to receive substantial payouts after taking legal action against Lancashire Police. The action, brought by 5 protesters, followed arrests made during demonstrations outside Vodafone shops in Preston & Blackpool in 2006. The protesters, Dr Keith Richardson, Dr Joanne Moodie, Dr Elisa Aaltola, Dean Cain & Krystyna Warzecha were arrested for alleged public order offences because images on their placards of monkeys being experimented on were considered offensive. The protests were intended to highlight financial ties between the phone giant and the biomedical research laboratory at Oxford University. The campaigners brought a civil action against Lancashire Constabulary for false imprisonment and under the Human Rights Act 1998, claiming their rights to freedom of expression and the right to public assembly had been breached. Lancashire Police has now accepted that the protests were legitimate. The group will receive an undisclosed sum in an out of court settlement. They were arrested under Sec 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 because of graphic images of animal experiments. Police said at the time the pictures were "likely to be insulting, threatening and abusive to members of the public". Campaigner Dr Keith Richardson accused police of acting as "censors". He said: "We wanted to show the truth of animal experiments to the public; this kind of research is legal and funded with public money and the public should be informed about it. The reaction of the police to the images was a case of shooting the messenger. On one protest, 5 police vehicles, including a riot van, attended when there were just 3 of us." Clearly Lancashire Police aren’t short of resources! Dr Richardson and Mr. Cain, were prosecuted but found not guilty after a 3 day trial at Blackpool Magistrates' Court in Feb 2007. A statement issued by Lancashire Police said "The Chief Constable, having reviewed matters, agrees that the images shown by the claimants in the course of protests were not themselves insulting, threatening or abusive.” The claimants’ actions in protesting were a legitimate exercise of their rights under articles 10 & 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights." Yet another example of how ‘desperate Oxford University & The Government have become in their efforts to silence those who seek to expose the Oxford primate lab for what it really is and the horrors being visited now and in the past on the animals within it’s walls…  LEP 16 Dec

HLS – the fight goes on

In 2009, there were well over 900 protests in 25 countries on every inhabited continent on the planet. This was over 100 more protests than 2008, with 5 more countries joining the global movement to smash HLS. As well as this HLS was exposed yet again in late 2008 for causing untold suffering to primates. Later in 2009 they had the gall to lobby for the continuation of the use of wild caught primates in European laboratories. As well as the increase in actions, 2009 has been a monumental year for the campaign, as strategic targeting of shareholders forced HLS' share price
into free fall, resulting in a rushed buyout of the company by their own CEO Andrew Baker. This means that HLS are no longer on any stock exchange, and have no shareholders. When you consider how desperate HLS were to get onto the prestigious New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), to have now been forced to become a private company is the last thing they wanted. As can be seen from their own documentation by an independent financial consultancy, it happened because the only other option left to them was bankruptcy. Just when things couldn't seem to get better (or worse if you are HLS!), SHAC made another huge breakthrough. In 2006 HLS was saved from imminent closure by a massive loan after Stevens Inc pulled out. HLS (and the new lender) were so keen to keep this a secret that a company in Luxembourg was employed to create an entirely fictitious company named Anchor Sub Funding. The lender set up a second front company called Progress to try and further muddy the waters. After 3 years of diligent research, SHAC traced both companies back to the Fortress Investment Group, based in New York. It is interesting to note that the Chairman of Fortress is Andrew Baker's next door neighbour! In early 2009, HLS defaulted on a loan payment to Fortress and were once again teetering on bankruptcy. Unfortunately, Fortress let them off and has even extended the loan to HLS. If they were to call this loan back in, HLS would have very limited options left and hopefully be finished. On top of this, HLS' only other revenue, from operating profit from customers has continued to drop during 2009. So as we enter 2010, we once again find ourselves armed with the knowledge we need to deliver a finishing blow to HLS, as all that stands between the animals and freedom are Fortress and HLS' top customers (AstraZeneca, Bayer and Novartis). On behalf of the animals and our fellow activists and friends that have been imprisoned we extend our greatest thanks and respect to everyone who has helped over the last year. This campaign has been a long and hard one, but as long as the closure of HLS is a real possibility it will remain as focused and dedicated as the day it was conceived. There can be no quick fix to demolishing a multi-national company that has rather dubious governmental backing, but a brief look over the historic and monumental victories of the SHAC campaign show how much can be achieved with commitment and passion. Every action you take could be the one that drives the final nail. With your help and strong belief for positive change for the animals this will continue in 2010. Lets be the changing force we want to see for the animals...

Activist wins the right to protest
An animal rights activist jailed for his part in a campaign against companies connected to Huntington Life Sciences (HLS) has had his lifetime ban on protesting overturned. The case was described by QC, James Wood, as a matter of the "constitutional" right to "protest and participate in free debate". Gavin Medd-Hall, compiled information on targets whose details were posted on the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) website. They were later targeted and over £12m damage was caused to homes and businesses over 6-years. Medd-Hall was jailed for 8 years at Winchester Crown Court in 20009 for conspiracy to blackmail. He was also handed an indefinite Asbo, as were 3 others, banning them from taking part in any animal rights protest, or contributing to a website dedicated to such a protest for the rest of their lives. All 4 challenged the Asbos before Lord Justice Elias, Mr. Justice Griffith Williams and Judge Elgan Edwards, sitting at London's Criminal Appeal Court, claiming they flew in the face of both their Human Rights and rights of peaceful protest under domestic law. Lord Justice Elias upheld the cases against the other 3 but allowed the appeal of Medd-Hall. Cambridge News 7 Dec

Berkeley activists to sue over federal raid
A federal judge has ruled that activists can sue federal agents for their role in a 2008 raid in which officers seized their computers and records in search of alleged threats by animal rights advocates. The activist group Long Haul Inc. can try to prove that the search of its Berkeley offices exceeded legal boundaries, that agents misled the judge who issued a search warrant and that it was targeted because of its left wing views. An unaffiliated group with offices in the same Berkeley building, East Bay Prisoner Support, also won the right to sue on the same grounds. Both groups have also sued the University of California , whose police were involved in the raid. The university did not join the federal government's attempt to dismiss the suit. A judge approved the search warrant in August 2008 after a UC police detective said threatening messages to animal researchers at UC Berkeley 2 months earlier had been sent from a computer in Long Haul Incs’ premises. UC police, 2 federal agents and other officers entered the building the next day while it was closed. The suit claims they had broken into locked doors and cabinets, seized all 14 computers in the building, combed through library and bookstore records, and taken computer drives and other items from both Long Haul and East Bay Prisoner Support, which was not named in the warrant. The suit said officers had no evidence that either group was involved in illegal acts and had failed to tell the judge that both groups publish newspapers, a status that requires special justification for law enforcement searches. In seeking dismissal, the federal government said its officers had believed that tracing the threats and seizing the records was necessary to prevent serious harm. However the judge said that argument depends on disputed facts he can't resolve at this stage, and that the 2 month interval between the messages and the raid weakens the government's claim of an emergency. The judge, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, said the 2 groups could also sue the government for allegedly violating their right of free speech, but must present evidence that officers had been motivated by the groups' political views.

Judge orders release of US animal rights activist
A federal judge has ordered the immediate release of a Minnesota man charged with conspiracy for his alleged involvement in the 2005 animal rights vandalism act at a University of Iowa laboratory. Scott Demote was being held at the Muscatine County Jail on the federal charge. He was already in jail for contempt of court for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury convened in Davenport earlier this month.  The prosecution claim the ALF raided the Spence Laboratories and Seashore Hall in Nov 2005. DeMuth is accused of being involved with the group. The conditions of DeMuth’s release include wearing a GPS unit at all times, be under home detention but allowed to continue studies at the University of Minnesota, permission to travel between Davenport and Minneapolis for court proceedings, surrender his passport and firearm licenses and may not possess any controlled substances or alcohol except with a doctor’s order. ..The FBI was called in to investigate the vandalism and break in. The ALF claimed responsibility for the damage to lab equipment and the release of 88 mice and 313 rats used in psychology department experiments. The break in was designated as ‘domestic terrorism’.

Replace animal tests in EU
The South East’s Green MEP launched a new campaign in the European Parliament on 7 Oct, to urge EU lawmakers to replace the use of animals in testing and research with non-animal alternatives. Caroline Lucas MEP, who was recently named the new President of the European Parliament’s influential cross-party Animal Welfare Intergroup, has joined with fellow MEPs to sign a Written Declaration calling for increased funding for the development of alternative methods to animal testing – and a 1% ‘research levy’ on products that contain ingredients tested on animals. The Written Declaration, like an Early Day Motion in the House of Commons, will become the official position of the European Parliament if it can attract the support of at least half of all MEPs. Dr Lucas MEP said: “Since 2007, I have been working with MEP colleagues and animal protection groups across Europe on a campaign urging the EU to replace cruel, unnecessary and misleading animal experiments. The existing law on the use of animals in experiments is over 20 years old, so action on this is long overdue. “The EC has already stated that one of its ultimate aims is ‘to replace animal experiments with methods not entailing the use of an animal’. It must now increase funding for the development and validation of alternative research methods – and make the administrative processes more efficient. “We propose that the Commission now assesses options for increasing the funds available, including the introduction of a ‘research levy’ of 1% of the selling price of products that contain ingredients tested on animals.” She continued: "More than 12m animals are used in EU labs each year, yet experiments on animals can be unreliable as a guide to human biology and the range of viable alternatives, such as epidemiology, the use of cell cultures, human tissue and computer simulation, is increasing all the time. "The Commission should increase funding, introduce quantitative targets for reducing the number of animals used in experiments, and bring in compulsory inspections of testing facilities in order to dramatically improve standards of animal protection.”

British civil servants have been shocked by the degree of suffering permitted by proposed EU rules on animal experiments. The draft EU directive “on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes” would allow monkeys, dogs, cats and foals to be used for experiments leading to severe and lasting pain. Animals’ bones could be broken, they could undergo paralysing electric shocks, they could suffer trauma leading to multiple organ failure, they could be confined to restrict movement and they could be kept in isolation for prolonged periods. The standards would also allow organs to be transplanted between species even if this led to “severe distress”. The rules make clear that experiments would not be confined to small breeds such as beagles but include large dogs such as St Bernards. Horses and ponies bred in family stables could be used by laboratories in Europe. The directive would permit practices banned in Britain, which can continue to impose its own rules. The Home Office said it did not want to see British standards weakened. BUAV, which campaigns against animal testing, accused the EU of ignoring public concerns. A positive measure introduced by the Parliament is ‘biannual thematic reviews’ of primate and other research. These will be systematic assessments of the value of various kinds of animal experiments, with a view to outlawing those judged to be useless. The biannual thematic reviews must be supported. Please write to: Meg Hillier Animal Scientific Procedures Division Home Office 4th Floor Seacole 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Email Meg Hillier at hillierm@parliament.uk Elisabeth Jeggle Parlement européen Bât. Altiero Spinelli 10E209 60, rue Wiertz / Wiertzstraat 60 B-1047 Bruxelles/Brussel Email Elisabeth Jeggle at elisabeth.jeggle@europarl.europa.eu

Nicotine addiction study
Dr. London is a professor and researcher at UCLA in the Depts of Psychiatry & Bio-behavioural Sciences & Molecular & Medical Pharmacology. She is currently the lead researcher in a nicotine addiction study funded by Philip Morris, to the tune of $6m. According to the LA Times, vervet monkeys are forced to ingest liquid nicotine, and some are then killed for brain study. Dr. London said, “We are doing this because we really want to save lives. I am really proud of what we are doing. We have a track record for contributing to science, and we would like to bring that to bear on the problem of nicotine addiction.” (LA Times, 2/8/08). Philip Morris, funding 23 projects at 7 different California campuses, has indicated that their purpose is to reduce adolescent smoking. How twisted and sordid is this business relationship? Philip Morris, arguably a mass murderer, is paying the nation’s best and brightest to torture and kill primates ostensibly to protect young smokers from becoming addicted. Never mind that addiction to their product is precisely how Philip Morris makes their money. Let’s review what was established as scientific fact years ago: nicotine is addictive, and smoking will probably kill you. A Harvard School of Public Health study found that nicotine content actually increased annually from 1997-2005 among all major brands. Imagine that. Philip Morris is putting more nicotine in their cigarettes and we’re supposed to believe that they care about teenage smoking. How morally corrupt are these people? Edythe London pitifully rationalises torturing animals using blood money with references to her being a child of holocaust survivors committed to reducing human suffering, and the fact that her father died “of complications of nicotine dependence” (i.e. he smoked himself to death). In response to the morality of taking Philip Morris money she wrote, “It would, therefore, be immoral to decline an opportunity to increase our knowledge about addiction and develop new treatments for quitting smoking.” And so, when her research was made public, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), acted. Her home was vandalised twice (Oct ‘07, Feb ‘08), and she received a card with blood and rat poison (attributed to a group called Justice Department) in Jan ‘09.

A recent study documents the severe emotional trauma chimpanzees suffer as a result of laboratory use and confinement. Developmental Context Effects on Bicultural Post-Trauma Self Repair in Chimpanzees was published in the Sept issue, Vol. 45 (5), of the American Psychological Association journal Developmental Psychology. Says Dr. Capaldo, president of the New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS): "A federal bill to end the use of chimpanzees in research (the Great Ape Protection Act, H.R. 1326) has been introduced. Studies like ours expose the reality of what it is like for approximately 1000 chimpanzees languishing in U.S. labs. Chimpanzee research must stop if we are to end the suffering caused by decisions - both scientifically flawed and ethically unjustifiable - to use them as living test tubes." Billy Jo lived like a human child from infancy to his teenage years when he was sent to a lab. He spent his next 14 years alone in a 5'x5'x7' cage, enduring hundreds of procedures. He was rescued into sanctuary at age 29 and died only 8 years later. Tom's family was killed in Africa in order to capture him. He spent decades in 3 different labs undergoing multiple procedures including 369 "knockdowns" - anaesthesia by dart gun. Every morning, Tom gags uncontrollably - the result of repeated intubations. Regis, born in a lab, was only 2 years old when he was treated for his first stress-related injury - he had chewed his finger nail completely off. Regis, fearful if left alone, suffers severe anxiety attacks in which he nearly stops breathing. The chimpanzees' symptoms are consistent with traumatic stress, depression, and other psychological conditions.

Glaxo, a multi-billion pound company, is closing in Crawley and there’ll be cut backs in jobs at their Worthing facility. This company has been forced in the USA to reveal e-mails between itself and researchers about birth defect risks after a family sued it for the death of their 1 year old son.  They also use dogs in tests for yet another blood pressure pill when there are loads on the market.  The list could go on and on but……….  They don’t care about any life, just their huge profits. Good riddance to them and the sooner they go the better.

About 200 people turned out in Wickham for the protest again the laboratory.  For the first time the police had closed the roads (as they always do for other events) , so a loud and lively march left the car park for the village square, just round the corner from the lab.  There were 3 speeches – from Sue (editor of this paper), André Menache and John Curtin, who reminded us how Cartmell, the lab owner, had stolen dogs at the lab in the past – and then we walked to the lab to lay a wreath and hold a 2 min silence for the animals. Wickham was exposed for using mice in Botox tests when a non-animal test exists.

Controversial plans to build a new animal testing laboratory in a rural village have been unanimously rejected. Wickham Labs, currently based in Wickham, failed in its latest bid to win permission for a purpose-built facility at Torbay Farm in Lower Upham. More than 20 animal rights protesters turned up to stage a demonstration outside the civic offices of Winchester City Council, where the planning committee was holding its meeting. After 2½ hours the 10-member committee voted unanimously against the officer's recommendation to accept the proposals on the grounds that the building would be too large and its design unsympathetic for the rural setting. The main proposed building was about 50m by 30m and 9½ metres high. Echoing many of his colleagues, Councillor Ian Tait said: 'In an industrial estate or a business park this building would be fine – but we aren't, we are in Upham.' Cllr Therese Evans, who represents Wickham village, acknowledged that security wasn't their concern, but added that Upham, in the Meon Valley, would not be a suitable place because of the attention the labs would attract. She added: 'There was a demonstration a couple of weeks ago where all the roads were closed and there were 130 police.' Afterwards, veteran animal rights campaigner Helen Nelson said: 'We are absolutely delighted. We have been working so hard towards getting this result, it's such a relief. I'm sure they will try again – they're not going to give up. They think they can trample over everyone and get their own way, but this proves they can't.' Moving the operation to Torbay Farm has been a longheld ambition for owner William Cartmell. Ray Botterell, representing the labs at the meeting, refused to comment afterwards.

A 6-month dispute between a biotech company and a university primate facility it contracted for a study on spinal cord injury has prompted a lawsuit. Cambridge-based biotech InVivo Therapeutics filed suit against Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) with the US District Courts in Boston on Sept. 1st, claiming the school's primate centre improperly cared for monkeys during the study, resulting in the death of 4 animals and a premature end to the research. InVivo is suing OHSU for not giving the monkeys proper post-surgical care, which they say caused the routine bladder problems to become more serious issues. They further charge OHSU with halting the experiment and euthanising the animals against the company's wishes. When OHSU requested that InVivo pay the second instalment of an agreed-upon fee, the company refused, citing "OHSU's incompetence" and claiming it "had ruined the study, cost InVivo hundreds of thousands of dollars, and jeopardized the future of the company," according to the lawsuit. OHSU counters that all monkeys received appropriate round-the-clock care after surgery and that it was InVivo who called a halt to the surgeries. The InVivo lawsuit is not the first time the OHSU primate centre has been accused of not providing proper care to their animals. In 2008, PETA complaints about the centre spurred an investigation by the US Dept of Agriculture (USDA), which handles violations of the Animal Welfare Act. In Dec, USDA issued a warning letter for failure to provide proper veterinary care, citing the death of a pregnant monkey after a researcher failed to notice she was having a troubled labour, a sponge being left in a monkey after surgery, and a surgery performed on the wrong monkey.

Sean Kirtley free
After 16 months in prison, Sean Kirtley has been released following a successful appeal. Sean was convicted in June 2008 of conspiracy to 'interfere with the contractual obligations of an animal research organisation', an offence under section 145 of the Serious Organised Crime & Police Act 2005. He was sentenced to 4½ years (out of a max possible 5). That sentence has been quashed, as has a potential 5-year ASBO, which would have totally restricted his ability to exercise his freedom of speech. The charge related to an ongoing campaign against Sequani, a vivisection laboratory based near Ledbury in Herefordshire. His ordeal began with wave of arrests code-named 'Operation Tornado', a NETCU coordinated strike at the animal rights movement. Sean was the only one of 2 people convicted (one other man pleaded guilty at an early stage), and the only one imprisoned. His 6 co-defendants were all acquitted. Evidence relied heavily on phone and e-mail records that the prosecution used to suggest a 'conspiracy'. This charge was useful to the prosecution because the Sequani campaign had been entirely peaceful, and there is not one shred of evidence linking Sean to any violence against people or property. The central plank of the evidence against him was that he updated the campaign website. Despite being almost the definition of a 'prisoner of conscience' it's been nearly impossible for Sean's comrades to get any of the mainstream civil liberties organisations interested in his case. Instead, the fear of being tarred with the animal rights brush has silenced those who would usually be most vocal about such a blatant attempt to stamp on a campaign. Also, funnily enough NETCU - usually lightning fast to gloat on their website when one of their victims gets a prison sentence - haven't got round to press releasing the news of Sean's successful appeal yet.  Schnews 24th Sept

Replica brain
The apparent complexity of the human mind is not a barrier to building a 'replica' brain claims Professor Markram. "The brain is extremely complex because it has trillions of synapses, billions of neurons, millions of proteins, and thousands of genes. But they are still finite in number. Today's technology is already highly sophisticated and it allows us to reverse engineer the brain rapidly." An example of the capability already in place is that today's robots can do screenings and mappings tens of thousands of times faster than human scientists and technicians. Another hurdle on the path to a model human brain is that 100 years of neuroscience discovery has led to millions of fragments of data and knowledge that have never been brought together and exploited fully. "Actually no one even knows what we already understand about the brain," says Prof Markram. "A model would serve to bring this all together and then allow anyone to test whatever theory you want about the brain. The biggest challenge is to understand how electrical-magnetic chemical patterns in the brain convert into our perception of reality. We think we see with our eyes, but in fact most of what we 'see' is generated as a projection by your brain. So what are we actually looking at when we look at something 'outside' of us?" For Professor Markram, the most exciting part of his research is putting together the hundreds of thousands of small pieces of data that his lab has collected over the past 15 years, and seeing what a microcircuit of the brain looks like. "When we first switched it on it already started to display some interesting emergent properties. But this is just the beginning because we know now that it is possible to build it. As we progress we are learning about design secrets of our brains which were unimaginable before. In fact the brain uses some simple rules to solve highly complex problems and extracting each of these rules one by one is very exciting. For example we have been surprised at finding simple design principles that allow billions of neurons to connect to each other. I think we will understand how the brain is designed and works before we have finished building it." The opportunities for this neuroscience research challenge are immense explains Prof Markram: "A brain model will sit on a massive supercomputer and serve as a kind of educational and diagnostic service to society. As the industrial revolution in science progresses we will generate more data than anyone can track or any computer can store, so models that can absorb it are simply unavoidable. It is also essential to build models when it comes to treating brain diseases affecting around 2 billion people. At present, there is no brain disease for which we really understand what has gone wrong in the processing, in the circuits, neurons or synapses. It is also important if we are to replace the millions of animal experiments each year for brain research."

Court orders Felix info to be released
Remember Felix, a golden-haired macaque monkey who was featured in a BBC television documentary? Felix was subjected to a series of distressing and invasive laboratory tests at Oxford University. First he was "conditioned" – likely through deprivation – to perform repetitive movements. Then, surgeons cut through his skull to implant electrodes into his brain. By injecting him with a poison in order to destroy parts of his brain, experimenters deliberately induced the uncontrollable shaking and muscle rigidity that characterises Parkinson's disease. For more than a year, we campaigned to get this intelligent and sensitive monkey released to a sanctuary where he could live his life free from the torments he endured in Oxford University's animal experimentation laboratory. But despite our constant efforts, Felix was killed when those experimenting on him no longer considered him "scientifically useful". He ended his days disabled – and no doubt frightened and confused – before being cut up and discarded like rubbish. Vivisection is a truly abhorrent industry – and, what's more, the pain and suffering inflicted on animals is often demonstrably and totally unnecessary. An astonishing 92% of drugs tested on animals prove unsafe or ineffective when taken by humans! PETA has won an appeal that has forced Oxford University to release to PETA previously hidden information about what really happened to Felix and why. This groundbreaking decision acknowledges the public’s right to know how animals suffer and the justification for that suffering . What’s more, it also means that for the first time ever, we can evaluate the government’s decision to grant a licence to perform such an experiment – and we can strive to hold someone accountable.

Belgian group challenges primate experiments
The Coalition Against Animal Experiments (ADC) staged a peaceful demonstration outside the Catholic University of Louvain to mark the launch of a daring legal challenge against primate researchers at this Belgian university. The group has carefully put together a dossier to expose a series of invasive brain experiments on primates. ADC charges that the suffering caused to the animals as a result of the unnatural laboratory conditions and invasive brain experiments is out of all proportion to the information obtained from the studies. In addition, the group has obtained expert witness testimonies suggesting that the results of these experiments could just as easily have been obtained through observational studies on human volunteers. This legal challenge represents a first in the history of the 23-year legislation relating to the protection of laboratory animals. Article 7.2 of Directive 86/609/EEC states: "An experiment shall not be performed if another satisfactory method of obtaining the result sought, not entailing the use of an animal, is reasonably and practicably available."

After the Animal Liberation Press Office press release this week publicising the ALF action against notorious primate importer Mathew Block and his wife Brooke, the New Times in Broward/Palm Beach wrote an article reminding their readers of Block's previous criminal conviction, 13-month sentence and $30,000 fine for smuggling orangutans from Indonesia. Block, of course, trots out the same tired old excuses, going so far as to claim he doesn't torture and kill the animals himself in a laboratory, and therefore he is not a bad guy. More comments and the original article are available here. http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2009/09/monkey_breeder_targeted_by_ani.php

Eye irritation tests without rabbits
The Organisation for Economic Cooperative Development (OECD) has published final guidance on how to conduct eye irritation tests without using live rabbits. If properly implemented, this move will prevent the untold suffering of rabbits throughout the world, who would otherwise be forcibly restrained while potentially irritating chemicals and cosmetics were dripped into their eyes. The OECD is an economic alliance of 30 of the world's industrialised countries. Based in Paris, the OECD co-ordinates the development of standardised chemical testing guidelines, which are then adopted by the member countries. The BCOP (bovine corneal opacity and permeability) test and the ICE (isolated chicken eye) test are tests that use eyes from animals killed for food via slaughter houses. The BCOP test was developed in the 1940s, pioneered by alternatives experts in the 1970s and finally validated by the European Centre for Alternative Methods in 2007. It is shocking that it has taken this long for international acceptance. The inclusion of the methods in the OECD guidance means that across the world these methods will often be used instead of rabbits to test whether chemicals and cosmetics will be irritating to the eyes. Part of the delay to the acceptance of the alternatives was caused by the fact that scientists could not compare the results of the alternative to the rabbit test because the results from the rabbit tests were so variable. Unfortunately, the tests are not accepted to test mild irritants, however, at the World Congress on Alternatives in Rome last week, experts showed how it was possible to use these methods in combination with in vitro cell tests to show whether chemicals and cosmetics are likely to be mildly irritating to the eyes. Chief Exec of the BUAV, Michelle Thew, said: …… “We welcome the publication of these guidelines but deplore the fact that not only is there an under-investment of non-animal alternatives, but also the lengthy process of getting official international validation of such methods can take decades. Part of the problem is the massive obstacles that are put in the path of non-animal alternatives, obstacles that the equivalent animal tests never had to face.”

Researchers from the University of Leeds have just released details of experiments on mice to test how “Obesity Can Lead to Resistance to Insulin-Like Hormone”. At first this appears valid and scientific, until the following is taken into account. Rodents used were what the industry calls “Lean mice”, in other words they are genetically bred to be overweight and thus related illnesses will no doubt affect them in some form. However, this research conducted is a complete waste of life and funds that could be put into other means of testing, ie developing and using in-vitro (non-animal) methods. It has been known for a number of years that there is a close correlation between diabetes and obesity, even down to what causes the various factors of that relationship and how the disease can be prevented through a controlled and healthy diet, not smoking etc and we do not need more animal research to tell us this. Social studies can easily be conducted whereby information is collected on people with diabetes, or related diseases, and the ‘inputs’ in their lives which are a cause of the disease can be analysed, thus developing a positive correlation between lifestyle and diabetes. No doubt this animal research would have been funded using public money. We need only look back over the past few years and we find details of the University of Leeds testing salt on beagle dogs to see the effects it has on their health. Low, medium and high salt diets were fed to the dogs over a period of time; the end result being that a high salt diet is bad for your health! Again, this research was funded by public donations via the British Heart Foundation. In their Animal Research Policy, Leeds University claim the following: * The University will use alternatives to animals wherever possible, such as computer modelling, tissue culture, cell and molecular biology, and research with human subjects… * Research using animals is driving fundamental advances in understanding, treating and curing a range of health problems including cancer, heart disease, diabetes and mental illness, and continues to enable fundamental advances in our understanding of diseases. If this is really the case, then why did the Ethics Committee of the university approve the above 2 experiments to be conducted? They could have been done using alternative means, ie looking at previous research and using sociological studies, and are giving information already known via countless others sources about diseases, not helping to cure them!

2 biology classes at UC Irvine will cease the use of lab rats, according to the OC Register. The university reasons that it can meet the “educational objectives” without having to use rats as tools of demonstration for labs. Despite the fact that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) claims that they were a driving force in the university’s decision for change, UCI Spokesman, Tom Vasich, begs to differ.  In an email, Vasich stated that “PETA had no involvement with UCI’s decision to evaluate the lab course … but the information on alternatives provided by PETA was used during the evaluation process.” Kathy Guillermo, Vice President of Laboratory Investigations for PETA, said that at least 200 rats every year will now not have to face the “fear and pain that resulted from these experiments.” She also mentioned that students will be able to ascertain scientific information using modern methods of experimentation that are being implemented as awareness is broadened concerning the use of animals for testing.

Charles River Laboratories fatten up and then sell obese monkeys for medical research. Charles River Labs said that, with the nation crippled by an obesity epidemic, its monkey business is increasingly necessary. In 30 out of 50 states, at least 25% of the population is obese, health experts say. As obesity and its associated complications - such as heart disease and type 2 diabetes - wreak havoc on the nation’s health, researchers are scrambling to create new ways to treat obesity-related medical conditions. And because primates are such close relatives to humans, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires that all new drugs be tested on primates before they are marketed to the public. Charles River Labs plans to sell its fattened-up monkeys to pharmaceutical companies, academic research centres and biotechnology firms that will examine “the metabolic changes associated with the onset and development of diabetes” and other obesity-related diseases, the company has said. To prepare the monkeys, Charles River Labs fed them a high-fat diet for 18 months. In that time period, many of the monkeys developed glucose intolerance and a foundation for what scientists say will become type 2, or adult-onset, diabetes.

Is animal experimentation still at the head of scientific development, or is it time to say goodbye to an archaic methodology? Animal experimentation is viewed by most of today's modern scientists as misleading, expensive, and laborious. Large and ever increasing numbers of scientists and doctors claim that animal experimentation is not only ineffective but also counterproductive False findings and toxic medications lead only to more pain and heart ache for the families of the terminally ill individual. For when one assumes that the findings in animals are directly correlated to those of human beings then one need only look to the findings of recent discoveries showing accounts of vast differences between animal and human trials of the same drug. An individual does not need to be an animal activist to reason that animal experimentation has long outgrown its usefulness. The thought that bone marrow from baboons into human beings (in attempts to fight Leukaemia) has failed with costly consequences, furthermore, interspecies organ transplantation has met just as dark fates comparable to artificial organ transplantation and genetic manipulation. These failures are synonymous with the failures and harmful treatments that have been tried on humans due to a positive outcome of an animal test subject. An example of such is how different an animal will react to a chemical than that of a human individual. Genes may be similar amongst varying species, yet guinea pigs reactions to strychnine is much the opposite from humans, The failures and disinformation that can only be seen as a fault to the medical research community is not only a research failure, but an economic failure as well, the costs of funding these projects is staggering and only growing day by day. One would suppose that with the rise in the health care budget we would see a decrease of terminal diseases, but this is just not the case. Since Nixon's launch of the "War on Cancer" 37 years ago, cancer rates have gone up by 18% and cancer deaths have gone up by 7%.  The EU has found a way to limit animal deaths, limit spending, and still found a cure for a common affliction. The Brussels team in May of 2003 found that when inserting a drug that contained fever-causing agents (pyrogens) into human blood cells opposed to rabbits they would still obtain the same affect. Using human blood cells as an alternative to rabbits in finding cures, saves 200,000 rabbits a year and millions of dollars. The Brussels research group claims to have a better understanding of human immunology now than they did 20 years ago, which will hopefully lead to the safer drugs for consumers due to the fact that they are now testing these human cells as biosensors for pyrogens. The validation of the human blood cell experiment is a first proof that testing can be done without the sacrificing of funds and live beings. These experiments are a stepping stone to the reduction if not the remission of animal testing and experimentation. When most animal to human trials only obtain a little over a 50% success rate, one cannot say that animal experimentation is a viable school of research. Sceptics and realists have longed looked at the cost analysis of animal testing, the Machiavellian means meeting the ends argument, and every time animal testing just seems to fall short of any real scientific goal. Edited from Associated Content. 5 October 2009. Inferring Outcomes: Beneath the Fur of Animal Experimentation. www.associatedcontent.com/article/2225931/inferring_outcomes_beneath_the_fur.html

SHAC Campaign
Another Success as Fortress Drop HLS - Following our last email action alert against the Fortress Investment Group, we’re delighted to announce that they are now de-investing in HLS, and have cancelled future financial commitments. Whilst the full ramifications of this have yet to be seen, this is a massive blow for HLS. We are now focusing on the other branch of their 2006 loan. This loan was given by 2 companies - the first loan of $30m was provided through front companies by Fortress. Of course we tracked them down and they have now de-invested. The second loan comes from Progress Funding, part of a New York based realtor company. We are calling on them to cut all ties with Huntingdon Life Sciences and call in the loan with immediate effect. For more info about Huntingdon's financials please visit www.shac.net/action/financial Send polite e-mails to: prince@progressrealty.com, puran@progressrealty.com, shak@progressrealty.com, shaka66@yahoo.com, careers@progressrealty.com  Let them know that HLS has a track record of law breaking and manipulation of data. During just one primate study, HLS broke the law 526 times; and workers have been caught taking drugs and drinking on site. Also that HLS' financials are in a dire state, and there is a high risk that HLS would fail to make its loan repayments. Refer them to the Plymouth Report which HLS recently filed with the SEC to see the financial state HLS is in:  www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1158833/000115883309000045/exhibit99.htmI.

The case has been dropped against a Sheffield IT worker who was raided, arrested and had a computer server confiscated in Jan this year. The server was apparently being used by Indymedia, and the police warrant was to track down the poster of a comment on Manchester Indymedia giving the home address of the judge involved in jailing some SHAC animal rights defendants. Despite being told that Indymedia does not log the IP addresses of any of its contributors, the cops nonetheless targeted this particular, albeit arbitrary, server. The man running it didn't even have the passwords to access the server, yet he was arrested under suspicion of offences including the rather Orwellian 'encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed'. It marked the first recorded use of broad new powers granted by the Serious Crime Act 2007.

Novartis CEO Daniel Vasella has sent 140 animal rights activists letters warning them to back off. The letter says “We strongly condemn the use of violence and terrorist tactics as a substitute for meaningful, productive dialogue. As the author of the e-mail received, you should be aware that willingly or not you are associating yourself with criminal activity, such as extortion and blackmail.” But Vasella’s strategy is doomed to failure if he cannot demonstrate what the company has previously claimed: That Novartis has indeed severed its ties with Huntingdon Life Sciences, the contract company that does often grisly drug tests on animals. This is the key to the entire conflict. Even though Novartis has previously said it no longer deals with HLS, the activists do not believe the company. And those activists are far more numerous, and far more determined, than Vasella is. As long as they believe Novartis tests at HLS, Vasella will be a target no matter how angry he becomes. But being able to demonstrate that the activists are wrong on the facts could be a game-changer. Even extremists need a sympathetic political environment. The fact is that testing at HLS is … unpleasant. Edited from Bnet.UK 5 Oct

Court orders USDA to disclose animal testing records
The Department of Agriculture must disclose 1,017 pages of animal testing records to an animal protection organisation, a D.C. federal judge ordered. The nonprofit animal rights group In Defence of Animals filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain documents relating to the USDA’s investigation of Huntingdon Life Sciences, Inc., a contract research organization with a facility in New Jersey. The USDA initially released only 31 pages to IDA, arguing that the remaining records were fully or partially protected from release under FOIA’s exemption 4, which protects trade secrets and confidential commercial information. Specifically at issue in this case was whether the data collected during the animal studies is confidential commercial information that, if released, would cause substantial harm to HLS’s competitive position in the contract research industry. Despite lengthy testimony from 2 defence experts, the defendants only showed a generalised potential for competitive harm and could not demonstrate that all reasonably segregable, non-exempt material was disclosed. Defence experts’ admissions that they had not personally examined every withheld record to determine an individual risk for competitive injury proved particularly damaging to the defence. The withheld records, 503 pages in full and 514 pages in part, include a proprietary design for animal cages, detailed physical observations of animals on active tests, postmortem examination reports, records of toxic effects, and other records that demonstrate the effect of a particular drug.

Highate Farm demo - Police officers from 5 different forces were involved in the policing of around 300 activists demonstrating outside Highgate Farm near Normanby by Spital on Sat 26th Oct, as part of the Global Week of Action against laboratory animal breeders. Highgate Farm is a supplier of animals to the vivisection industry, including Huntingdon Life Sciences. It also supplies rabbits to the meat trade. In Jan 2008, protesters broke into the farm and liberated around 130 rabbits. SHAC has hailed the event a 'success', and said it brought the attention of local people to the farm's 'immoral practices' and the 'start of an ongoing and growing campaign to close them down for good'. Protesters were kept about 300 metres from the farm entrance as police placed a perimeter of officers protecting the private business. As demonstrators arrived police used a banner to announce the implementation of the legislation. The road down to the farm was also closed and campaigners used a shuttle minibus to get their supporters near to the farm entrance. An ‘eye in the sky’ radio controlled device was used by the police for film protesters as well as the FIT team on the ground.  What a pity they don’t use it to film illegal hunts!  Heard that police had approached local people saying that if they’d been inconvenienced by the protest they could report it and the police could get an injunction.  They weren’t interested. Villagers in Lincolnshire say they can’t get the police out when they need them – but then they aren’t working for the vivisection industry!

SPEAK Campaign

Police efforts to silence dissent outside the Oxford animal testing lab have seen a freelance journo and NUJ member, David Palmer, arrested at the regular demo outside the lab, with all of his recording and camera equipment seized. Despite the fact that the campaign to prevent the building of the lab on South Parks Rd, Oxford was unsuccessful and the Thames Valley Police's promise to 'wage a dirty war' against protesters was exposed - an injunction drafted by Timothy Lawson Cruttenden controlling the protests is still in force.  David inadvertently wandered into an area prohibited under the terms of the injunction. He was warned to leave by university staff and did so immediately. But this wasn't enough for the cops however, who jumped on him mob-handed and arrested him for harassment. 'I spent around 6 hours in a cell at Oxford police station before being interviewed. During the course of the interview, I was informed that my video camera and mobile phone were going to be retained and that I'd be questioned about material found on them at a later date. I pointed out to the interviewing officer (on tape) that such treatment of a journalist was completely illegal; at this point the police tried to say my press cards were fraudulent! I insisted the police ring the 24hr NUJ verification number on the back of my press card, but they refused to do so and said they'd ring the number the following morning and that I'd hear from them after that.' David was not released from custody until shortly after midnight, 9 hours after his arrest.

15 animal rights protesters are suing police for up to £250,000 after claiming they were treated illegally during a demonstration outside Oxford University’s honorary degree ceremony. The claimants, supporters of the Speak campaign group, have filed papers at the High Court claiming “false imprisonment, breach of human rights, malicious prosecution, assault and battery” over the protest in 2006. On June 21, demonstrators gathered outside Oxford University’s Encaenia Day Ceremony to oppose the building of the animal testing laboratory in South Parks Rd. 14 protesters were arrested and charged, but a trial at Bicester Magistrates’ Court in May 2007 cleared them of offences under Section 14 of the Public Order Act. Charges against 2 others were dropped earlier.  Protester Pauline Broughton was found guilty of obstructing a police officer, while Fran Cornwell was found guilty of assaulting an officer. Both were given absolute discharges by District Judge Deborah Wright. During the trial, a tape recording of unguarded comments made by police officers was played to the court in which they used a swear word about the campaigners and said they would “prosecute the s*** out of them”.  In summing up, Ms Wright said: “I find the (Section 14) conditions were imposed unlawfully.  “Whoever was responsible for making the decision that this prosecution should proceed in light of the tape may well have made a serious error of judgement.” She added: “Although the (taped) conversations were made away from the public, all the officers were on duty.” Among the claimants in the High Court case are Brett Gordon and Ruth Undy, both of Woodman Court, East Oxford.  The legal papers state Mr Gordon “asked a police officer if he could leave (the demonstration) and meet his wife who had been taken ill earlier in the protest but was told in no uncertain terms that if he did so then he would be arrested. “He was at the back of the march and was being pushed about aggressively by 2 police officers and threatened with arrest.”  The writ comes just days after Thames Valley Police was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £25,000 costs after call centre worker Keith Tilbury was shot in the torso by PC Dave Micklethwaite in Kidlington in May 2007. Thames Valley Deputy Chief Constable Francis Habgood said the force was aware of the writ, but that it was inappropriate to comment with legal proceedings active. However, at the time of the collapse of the trial, his predecessor Alex Marshall said: “There are comments on the tape that I find very regrettable and I find some of the comments unprofessional. I will take careful note of what the judge has said and see if there are any matters which arise from it.”  I’ve heard that the officer who made the comments has been promoted

Neurosurgeon refutes monkey model

Marius Maxwell is an American Board of Neurological Surgery-certified neurosurgeon who was educated at Cambridge, Oxford, and Harvard universities. He has written an article about deep brain stimulation and Parkinsons disease, refuting the argument that experiments with monkeys has brought about this ‘wonder’ technique. You can read the full article at: www.vero.org.uk/mariusmaxwell.pdf as it’s too long to reproduce here.  Some important extracts: This claim (using primates) is a clear misrepresentation of the historical record which actually shows that neurosurgical experimentation with … human patients, performed decades before the very first description of the MPTP-primate model, has alone led to the present treatment of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease.   …… one can only conclude that primate vivisection has amounted to an expensive, savagely cruel, and scientifically invalid sideshow. The "official" and highly selective primate vivisection-based narrative of deep brain stimulation misleadingly begins with the serendipitous discovery of symptoms in young drug addicts exposed to the narcotic contaminant MPTP. This gave researchers the idea of seeing whether monkeys would also display Parkinsonian symptoms in response to this toxin and indeed, in 1983 monkeys poisoned with MPTP were found to exhibit similar, albeit temporary, symptoms and the non-human primate model of parkinsonism was born (Burns et al. 1983).   ……the discovery that the implantation of stimulating electrodes in the subthalamic nucleus of humans with Parkinson's reversed many of the disease's most crippling symptoms (Benabid 1987; Limousin 1995). In this way, we are repeatedly told, deep brain stimulation was created by the endeavours of monkey researchers. The general public is served a compelling tale of successful medical research borne on the back of primate misery….. But what will they say when they find out that the importance of the subthalamic nucleus to the treatment of Parkinson's disease had in fact been known more than 30 years before by neurosurgeons who employed this knowledge to successfully treat hundreds of human patients? How will they react when they discover that deep brain stimulation has been used since the 1940s, and that early implanted stimulators were used in human patients with Parkinson's and other movement disorders years before the first ever description of the MPTP-primate model? Hundreds of monkeys have been experimented on, countless "peer-reviewed" articles have been written, and a vast archive of monkey "data" has been accumulated….. but deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease developed without this. Benabid, knowing of the importance of the subthalamic nucleus to Parkinson's disease from the surgical studies of 1963 and subsequently, together with the more recent data of deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders, took the logical ….  next step by reporting the benefit of stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in 1995 in a series of patients (Limousin et al.1995). The oft-parroted claim that "the MPTP monkey model demonstrated the pivotal role of the subthalamic nucleus in the mechanisms central to Parkinson's disease" is therefore clearly false. Furthermore, it does a grave disservice to the memory of the many real pioneers of neurosurgery by co-opting their repeated demonstration of the very same, decades before. It is as if they have been quietly airbrushed from the pages of history. Most importantly, the rapid and reversible MPTP-induced parkinsonian state in monkeys bears little relation to the slowly progressive and irreversible Parkinson's disease, which is unique to humans. None other than the late Nobel Laureate Francis Crick was also a harsh critic of the experimental use of primates in the neurosciences. Crick argued for the development of new and forward-looking techniques to study the human brain. Persistent support for the non-human primate MPTP model of Parkinson's can only serve further to neglect and impoverish the demonstrably scientific and productive avenues of the clinical neurosciences…….. The predictable consequences of maintaining the status quo will be further obfuscation and delay in the discovery of a definitive treatment for Parkinson's disease.

Tests flawed and duplicated - At this year's British Association Festival of Science a report from the Camarades Collaboration that reviewed 288 animal studies of prospective treatments for stroke concluded that many animal experiments are flawed. The report found that animal studies frequently do not use experimental techniques that are the "gold standard" for clinical trials. For example, only 1/3 of the studies randomised which animals went into the treatment and control groups. And in only 1/3 of cases were the experimenters who assessed the experimental outcome blinded to whether each animal had been given the treatment or not - a well known source of unconscious bias. Another problem highlighted by the EU's Science and Research Commissioner Janez Potocnik today is that too often the same tests are duplicated - particularly by companies not willing to share data.

Cancer research wasted – together with animal lives
Millions of pounds of charity donations and taxpayers' money have been wasted on worthless cancer studies, the BBC has learned. File On 4 has discovered thousands of studies have been invalidated. It found some scientists have failed to carry out simple and inexpensive checks to ensure they are working with the right forms of human tumour cells. Cancer Research UK said it used robust procedures to check the cell-lines used in research. One of the latest examples of scientific research to be affected by this problem is a study of oesophageal cancer. Researcher Dr Chris Tselepis worked with an international team which has found that TE7, an experimental culture of cancer cells used in labs for the past 20 years, was the wrong cancer. Few scientists publicly admit such problems but Prof Geoff Pilkington, of the University of Portsmouth, told the BBC that he had to discard research into brain tumours after it emerged his team were studying human cells contaminated by the cells of rats and mice. "Whole programmes of research had to be redone using verified human brain tumour cells," he said. "It's hugely expensive and it's incredibly frustrating," Prof Pilkington added. The problem is compounded by the fact that studies based on erroneous research data will be printed in reputable scientific journals and become part of the accepted literature, thus misleading future researchers. Earlier this year 19 eminent cancer specialists from the UK and USA wrote to the US health secretary urging tough action to end this waste of time, effort and money. The US authorities replied that there appeared to be "abundant evidence" that many studies and publications had been compromised. But the letter's originator, Prof Roland Nardone of the Catholic University of America, told the BBC that some scientists seemed unwilling to act. He said the best way to get scientists to comply would be to withhold research grants and publication in scientific journals unless their research used authenticated cell-lines. This verification can be achieved using a technique of DNA profiling which compares the cell-line with a list of known contaminants and can cost as little as £180 per sample. But the Medical Research Council, the major source of public funds for such research in the UK which provides £70m of grants annually for cancer studies, is reluctant to enforce authentication. Dr Rob Buckle of the MRC told the BBC: "As soon as you start talking about regulation we have to ensure that it is proportionate and does not inhibit research." Dr Buckle said the MRC was not aware of any particular study in the UK which had been compromised by problems with cell samples. However, one of the UK's leading cancer medicine experts has said it is time for the scientific community to put its house in order. Cancer Research UK, which spends £315m a year on research, would not be interviewed for the programme. Instead it issued a statement from Dr Lilian Clark, its executive director of Science Operations & Funding, which said: "It is of paramount importance for us to ensure that all our researchers deliver world class science - they have the latest systems and robust procedures in place to guarantee this." Blah, blah, blah!!!

Animal experiments holding back psychiatric medicine
Dangle a mouse by its tail, and it will wriggle and strain to escape before eventually recognising the hopelessness of its situation. Measure the time it takes to abandon thoughts of helping itself, and you have one of the classic animal tests for depression. Except it's not, says Laurence Tecott, a research psychiatrist at the University of California, San Francisco. “We can't say that that mouse is depressed, and we can't say you would be if you were strung up by your tail,” he says. The reason we have not seen a genuinely new class of drug in psychiatry for 50 years, he asserts, is largely because animal models are woefully inadequate representations of human-specific disorders.

 

 


 



HOME ] NEWS ] EVENTS ] GENERAL ] HUNTING ] FARMING ] [ VIVISECTION ] LINKS ] CONTACT US ]

The Shoreham Protester, 7 Stoneham Road, Hove, BN3 5HJ, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 (0)1273 885750. Email: shoreham.protester@ntlworld.com

Last Updated 13 December 2008