|
|
The Shoreham Protester is one of the
UK's leading publications for comprehensive animal rights news and
information. |
|
 |
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
The
failure of animal tests
In a recent essay I asked, "Should animals be used to test party
pills?" I concluded that the answer is "No" and noted there are
many different views on whether or not nonhuman animals should be used to test drugs that
are meant to be used solely or primarily by human animals. And, there's a good
reason for debate and scepticism. It's well known that the vast majority of
drugs that pass tests on animals do not work on humans. To quote from the
report, "The FDA reports that 92% of drugs approved for testing in humans
fail to receive approval for human use. This failure rate has increased from 86%
in 1985, in spite of all the 'advances and refinements' intended to make animal
tests more accurate." If we look at these data in another way, only
about 8% of drugs that pass tests on nonhuman animals also supposedly work on
humans. Hundreds of thousands of people die annually from drugs that work on
animals. Now, a recent essay in New Scientist magazine by research
scientists Kathy Archibald and
Robert Coleman called "How human biology
can prevent drug deaths" presents some updated data that lead the
authors also to conclude that we can do significantly better to protect humans
by not using animals to test drugs. This essay begins, "Adverse drug
reactions are a major cause of death, killing 197,000 people annually in the
European Union and upwards of 100,000 in the US. Little coverage is given to
such grim statistics by governments or pharmaceutical companies, so patients and
their doctors are not primed to be as vigilant as they should be, and
adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain seriously under-recognised and
under-reported." The authors reiterate the 92% failure rate because of
drug toxicity, and also note, "in 2006, 6 people enrolled in a UK trial of
the drug TGN1412 were hospitalised after developing multiple organ failure. Many
clinical trials are now conducted in India, where, according to India's Tribune
newspaper, at least 1725 people died in drug trials between 2007 and 2011.
Clearly, there is an urgent need for better methods to predict the safety of
medicines for patients as well as volunteers in clinical trials."
Furthermore, a recent study showed
that "animal tests missed 81%
of the serious side effects of 43 drugs that went on to harm patients."
Researchers Archibald and Coleman
wonder why governments and drug companies continue to use and to defend their
incredibly poor records using animal tests while there are new technologies
readily available that will result in increased patient safety and decreased use
of animals. Indeed, the organization Safer
Medicines of which Kathy
Archibald is the director has been told by the UK Dept of Health and the
prime minister that "human biology-based tests are not better able to
predict adverse drug reactions in humans than animal tests".
While the US National Research
Council has recognized the need to replace animal tests with "more
efficient in vitro tests and computational techniques" there's clearly a
major problem in the UK where governments and drug companies deny there's a
significant problem with animal testing.
If governments and drug companies paid attention to the data it would be
a win-win situation for all of the animals, human and nonhuman.
The
New Scientist essay
to which I'm referring is a very important one because the conclusion that
animal tests do not work is not merely being put forth by people advocating for
animal protection, but also by respected scientists who want to see drugs do
what they're purported to do for humans who need them and who also care about
the animals who are unnecessarily killed because of the stubborn denial of the
inadequacy of animal tests by those who continue to advocate for them in light
of strongly contradictory data. If governments and drug companies paid
attention to the data it would be a win-win situation for all the animals, human
and nonhuman. Dec 20 Marc
Bekoff, Ph.D. in
Psychology Today
Footnote: The
article mentioned above by Kathy Archibald and Robert Coleman in New Scientist
can be read at: http://tinyurl.com/abj4okr
Unfortunately it doesn’t
allow copy and paste from the page so I can’t reproduce it here without
arduous retyping!!
Air
Canada wins fight
In some excellent news for this festive season, Air Canada have won their
battle with the Canadian vivisection industry to finally dispel a 1998 ruling by
the Canadian Transportation Agency, (CTA), that forced Air Canada to transport
primates for the research industry. The ruling comes just in time for Air
Canada’s Caribbean season, so flights that would have returned from the
Caribbean stocked with animals stolen from the wild will now carry nothing more
sinister than their paying passengers’ luggage.
Mazor
monkey farm to close
Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein decided to back an initiative by
Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan to
ban the import and export of monkeys to Mazor Farm (BFC) and limit its
activities to medical research in Israel only.
Erdan welcomed the decision, saying:
"Banning the trade of monkeys bolsters animal
rights and sends a very
clear message: Trading animals for profit is wrong." Since Israeli
research institutions need only a few dozen monkeys a year, the Mazor farm will
no longer be economically viable. Erdan's initial
move to limit BFC's operations was met with legal hurdles,
as the Environmental Protection Ministry's own legal counsel expressed concern
that the move may infringe on the freedom of occupation rights of businesses
that trade animals. Erdan than asked Weinstein to rule on the matter, focusing
specifically on the export and import of monkeys by BFC. The minister said that
the limitation will have to impact on research facilities in Israel.
"Closing Mazor Farm stems from moral, ethical and educational reasons –
all of which are meant to minimize the harm and suffering of wild animals,"
Erdan said in his brief. "Israel should not be a centre for monkey trade
for other countries," Erdan stressed, "Especially since the local
demand in Israel is so low that it does not morally justify the existence of a
farm whose main business is large-scale exports," he added. Still, while
the AG ruled that the Erdan's ministerial jurisdiction allows him to make
extensive changes to the volume of animals trade for research purposes, there
was no legal justification to bar such action altogether. The ruling states that
the import and export of monkeys for research purposes will be barred, and that
BFC's breeding operations must be limited to medical research in Israel only.
Weinstein ruled that the limitation on the export and import of monkeys will be
applied gradually over the next 2 years. "This 2-year period takes into
consideration the needs of research facilities in Israel, as well as those of
Mazor Farm, to adjust to these changes," he said. The AG also ruled that
the new regulations must be anchored by the proper legislation; and ordered the
Environmental Protection Ministry to update the relevant international bodies of
the changes, as required by various international research treaties Israel is a
part of. Israel's animal rights group welcomed the decision, saying it was
"Putting an end to one of the cruellest ways in which animals in Israel are
treated. Mazor Farm has been a black stain on Israel's society since the early
1990s. "We will continue to pursue the issue for the 2 years until the ban
takes effect, to stop the farm's cruel and corrupt trade in monkeys." The decision, the statement added,
"Sends a clear message to anyone who abuses animals for a living – the
Israeli public will no longer tolerate cruel practices, only because a handful
of people make their living off them, even if it's out of the public eye. This
is a happy day for anyone who has morals and scruples." Anabel Zamir, a
leader of the animal rights campaign against the Mazor Farm, welcomed the
ruling, but noted that "The attorney general is still allowing animal trade
for profit, under the state's sponsorship, for the next 2 years, without
mandating proof that any such trade will be done for life-saving purposes.
That's very disturbing." BFC was unavailable for comment. www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4328868,00.html
Hunger
strike for monkeys
Anabel Zamir, an activist,
from the Struggle for monkeys in Israel campaign, recently went on hunger
strike demanding the closure of the Mazor Farm, a breeding centre for primates
used in vivisection. For 21 years
the Mazor Farm, a private company in Israel, has imported macaque monkeys
captured from the wild in Mauritius. The
monkeys are flown to Israel in very poor conditions.
On arrival at the Mazor Farm they are branded with an ID number and then
bred to produce monkeys to be exported to laboratories throughout the world.
Infants are separated from their mothers and sold for a profit of about
$3,000 each. Israel does not have
the ability to monitor this trade nor to know where or for what purposes the
monkeys are used. Struggle for
monkeys in Israel is an independent campaign set up in Feb 2012 in order to
close the Mazor Farm. It is not
affiliated to any animal-rights organization and its sole purpose is to stop the
greed-driven monkey trade in Israel. The
hunger strike took place in front of the house of Gilad Erdan, the Israeli
Minister of the Environment, who at the beginning of 2012 was given
responsibility for examining the possibility of stricter wildlife trade policies
in Israel, including further examination of the Mazor Farm's activities.
The protesters demanded the finalization of legal proceedings on the
future of Mazor Farm, since if a decision is not made before the elections on 22
January it could be delayed indefinitely. On
17 December protesters received an official reply from the Minister promising to
speed up the decision process and to make sure it gets legal standing before any
change of government. As these were
Anabel's demands, the hunger strike was called off after 7 days.
Medical
research without animals
Barrett’s Oesophagus is a pre-malignant condition which is a
complication of chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. In the UK alone,
approximately 8,000 new cases and 300,000 worldwide of oesophageal cancer are
diagnosed each year. It is amongst the 10 most frequent cancers in the world and
the prognosis for the disease is poor, with a mortality rate of 80%. Only 10% of
sufferers survive for 5 years or more. Current
research uses a large number of animals including mice, rats, rabbits, guinea
pigs, cats, ferrets, baboons and dogs. The number of animals used ranges from 3
to 200 per experiment, and these experiments cause severe pain, the results from
animals have a low translation value with respect to humans. In other words,
what "works" in animal experiments rarely works in humans. The Dr
Hadwen Trust (DHT) has recently awarded funding to research into the development
of a model which will allow the study in an environment that more closely
resembles the human condition. The
research is being carried out at Dundee University using 3D cell monolayers
which will be exposed to oesophageal bacteria and acid/bile reflux.
This will allow the study of cellular processes in an environment more
closely resembling the situation in humans and thus evaluate the effectiveness
of preventative therapeutic strategies. To
see more of the research work being carried out around the country using DHT
funding go to the website: www.drhadwentrust.org
You can
make a donation by texting HADW01£ and either 5 or 10 to 70070 on your mobile
phone. Or telephone 01462 436819.
Spotlight
on ethical issues of laboratory animals
We’re always hearing how research will move abroad if we deter animal
experiments here. Well… seems
they’re worried in India too!
Bio-medical scientists from all over India who gathered
recently to discuss the efficacy of using animals for research laid emphasis on
ethical and welfare issues relating to laboratory animals and called for
evolving a balance between experimental animal studies and alternative methods
such as models and computer simulation. Scientists,
researchers, policy-makers, animal breeders, veterinarians, activists and
representatives of pharmaceutical units taking part in the national conference
felt that the guidelines and regulations in the field issued amid a raging
debate on the use of animals and alternatives were often contradictory and
affecting higher education and drug development. The 3-day conference on “Use
of animals and alternatives in bio-medical research with emphasis on drug
development” was organised by the Centre for Advanced Studies (CAS) in
Rajasthan University’s Zoology Dept. CAS emeritus medical scientist N. K.
Lohiya told The Hindu that the demand being raised by certain
activist groups for developing alternative approaches might lead to elimination
or a drastic reduction in the use of animals in the laboratories. “The
principal concern in the scientific community is about its impact on the quality
of research and development of medicines.” Prof. Lohiya, who is also president
of the Indian Society for the Study of Reproduction & Fertility, said the
participants also expressed concern over the proposed amendments to the existing
legislation governing the use of animals for teaching and research and
regulating the functioning of animal houses in various institutions. Researchers
attending various sessions in the conference pointed out that the animals were
already housed, bred and experimented under standard conditions by strictly
enforcing ethical and regulatory guidelines. The experimentation is covered by
provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and the Breeding
of and Experiments on Animals (Control & Supervision) Rules framed under the
Act. Among others, Indian Council of Medical Research Director-General V. M.
Katoch, Indian National Science Academy president Krishan Lal and Union
Environment & Forest Ministry's Committee for the Purpose of Control &
Supervision of Experiments on Animals (CPCSEA) member-secretary Anjani Kumar
addressed the conference. It was
pointed out that only a fraction of trials on animals for drug development were
taking place in India and the country’s economy would be adversely affected if
they were stopped by banning the use of animals. Non-human primates, rabbits and
mice are mainly bred and used as laboratory animals in the country.
The
Hindu Dec 26th
Animals
and battlefield training
People around the world were shocked recently when news broke that the
Danish Ministry of Defence has medical personnel participate in an archaic
training drill – callously nicknamed ‘Danish Bacon’ by UK military doctors
who also attend the course – in which live pigs are shot with high-velocity
bullets to inflict life-threatening, multi-organ injuries and bone fractures.
The Ministry of Defence is violating the law and perpetuating the myth that
shooting animals helps save human lives on the battlefield. The truth is that
having military personnel try to repair the wounds of pigs who have been
violently injured on a firing range does not help humans. During my 7 years of
active duty as a US navy hospital corpsman – including as a member of the US
Naval Hospital Yokosuka, Japan’s Special Medical Operations Response Team –
I never trained on any live animals. My own comprehensive training in the Navy
included videos, immersive drills with lifelike simulators and moulage scenarios
with human actors. And I have never been unprepared to treat life-threatening
injuries to fellow service-members. This is not just a matter of personal
opinion. Earlier this year, PETA US and current and former US military doctors
published a study in a prestigious military medical journal showing that 22 out
of 28 NATO nations do not use any animals for military training. Germany, whose
armed forces are among the majority that have confirmed that they don’t use
animals, has even repeatedly denied applications by the US army and its
contractors to conduct military training on animals on the grounds that it would
violate German and EU laws requiring the use of alternatives to animals whenever
available. Likewise, the NATO Centre of Excellence for Military Medicine,
designated as the primary source of expertise for the NATO Alliance’s medical
community, has also confirmed that its battlefield medical courses do not use
animals. It wrote to PETA US that it “does not use animals, alive or dead, or
animal models for any training or course or is involved in any partner course
doing so. Where needed for specific training, appropriate human patient
simulators are used.” These laudable decisions to use only modern non-animal
military training methods are supported by scientific research. More than a
decade’s worth of studies by military and civilian trauma experts show that
lifelike simulators – the best of which “breathe”, “bleed”, and are
made of artificial human skin, fat and muscle – better equip trainees to treat
human traumatic injuries, in terms of both skill acquisition and psychological
preparedness. This is because there are vast differences in anatomy and
physiology between humans and pigs that make the former extremely poor models
for human injuries, especially given the superior human-based simulators
available. For example, the pressure required to apply a tourniquet effectively
to the small amputated legs of pigs is enormously different from what is needed
to stop the haemorrhagic bleeding of a human’s arms or legs. Likewise, pigs
have much thicker skin than humans and the anatomy of their internal organs,
blood vessels and airway is unlike humans, so repairing blast or gunshot wounds
that these animals have sustained does not simulate the skill needed for saving
human lives. Indeed, in a 2009 internal email obtained by PETA US, a deputy
surgeon with US Army Europe candidly admitted to colleagues that “there still
is no evidence that trauma training on animals saves lives”. In view of this
mounting evidence, it is perplexing that defence minister Nick Haekkerup would
state, as he recently has to the media, that “if you did not complete the
exercises, it would mean a greater risk that some of our soldiers were either
more maimed or died from gunshot wounds, because they faced less experienced
doctors.” It is feasible for Denmark to train its armed forces without
harming any animals, and there are also legal requirements to do so. Danish
animal protection law states that “animals must not be used for experiments
when the use of cell, tissue or organ cultures or other methods are deemed to be
equally appropriate”. Similarly, EU regulations state that “member states
shall ensure that, whenever possible, a scientifically satisfactory method or
testing strategy, not entailing the use of live animals, shall be used instead
of a procedure.” There is no scientific, ethical or legal justification for
harming and killing animals in military trauma training exercises. The
preference for and widespread use of sophisticated non-animal training methods
by military and civilian facilities around the world is proof that these methods
are viable full replacements for the use of animals. For the sake of
animals, service people and the civilians relying on troops for life-saving
medical treatment, ending the use of animals in military training is a morally
sound policy decision. Matt
Freeman Copenhagen Post Jan 4
Shocking
rise in warfare experiments
The
number of animals being used for military experiments has increased by more than
1,000 in the last 3 years. Almost 10,000 pigs, rabbits, monkeys and rodents were
used in top-secret tests at the Porton Down military research base in Wiltshire
in 2011, it has emerged. The figures were revealed by junior defence minister
Philip Dunne in response to Lib Dem MP Mike Hancock who raised concerns about
the facility in parliament last month.
The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection highlighted
'disturbing and cruel' experiments which include live pigs being blasted with
explosives and forced to inhale mustard gas, monkeys being infected with anthrax
and guinea pigs being killed with nerve agent. And the number of procedures
being carried out is on the up. Mr Dunne listed the number of animal procedures
undertaken at DSTL Porton Down over the last 3 years. The figure has risen from
8,452 in 2009 to 9,582 in 2010 and 9,882 last year. Currently 21 licensed animal
procedures are under way at Porton Down Defence Science and Technology
Laboratory (DSTL).
6 of the projects cover work funded directly by US defence agencies. Mr
Hancock said he was shocked by the statistics which, until now, were never made
generally public.
He said: 'I was shocked to learn that almost 10,000 animal experiments
are taking place at Porton Down every year, including ones inflicting
substantial levels of suffering.
'The details were not included in the annual statistics published by the
Home Office and many people will be totally unaware that this suffering is
occurring.
'It is important that the Ministry of Defence routinely gives more
information on its use of animals so the public can be fully informed.'
Mr Dunne stressed that DSTL operates in 'strict accordance' with the
Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act.
'All the research projects that involve animals are licensed by the Home
Office. As part of the licensing process, the researchers have to convince the
Home Office that the work is required, that the results cannot be obtained
without the use of animals and that every step has been taken to minimise pain
and suffering to the animals involved,' he said. But BUAV chief executive
Michelle Thew said: 'It is alarming that almost 10,000 animal experiments for
military purposes took place in 2011 and that many animals were subjected to the
most extreme suffering categorised by the Government.
'Some of the animal research conducted at Porton Down was even funded by
the US defence agencies.
'The BUAV is calling for an end to the use of animals, including monkeys
and pigs in these gruesome experiments. We need to ensure the safety of soldiers
and civilians but the answer does not lay in blowing up or exposing animals to
lethal chemical warfare and nerve agents.'
All scientific experiments on animals, including those at Porton Down,
have to be licensed by the Home Office under the proviso that suffering is
minimised as much as possible. Procedures are graded according to the severity
of harm or suffering they inflict. Of the 21 'active' projects at Porton Down, 4
are 'unclassified', 3 are 'mild', 6 are 'moderate' and 8 are categorised as
'substantial'. A moderate procedure may cause animals a 'noticeable degree of
pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm', according to the Home Office
definition. Substantial
severity 'may cause a major departure from the animal's usual state of health or
well-being with significant or prolonged animal suffering'.
The
Mail 18th Dec
Ending
military training on animals
President Obama has just signed into law a bill that includes language
requiring the Dept of Defence to create a strategy and timeline by March 1,
2013, for replacing the shooting, stabbing, and dismembering of animals in
military training drills with human simulators and other modern non-animal
methods. This is a milestone moment
in PETA’s ongoing campaign to stop the military from tormenting thousands of
live animals each year in these archaic trauma exercises!
When this lifesaving provision was first inserted into the National
Defence Authorization Act last year, PETA and its supporters sprang into action
with e-mail and call-in campaigns to urge members of Congress to support the
important measure. We now know that they took our concerns seriously and acted
on them! To bolster our efforts to
urge the Dept of Defence and Congress to address this vital issue, PETA released
disturbing, never-before-seen undercover video footage this past year showing
live goats who had their limbs broken and cut off with tree trimmers in a
military training drill. A PETA complaint based on the video led to federal
citations for animal welfare violations and prompted Congress to request an
investigation into the contractor that conducted the cruel training. PETA also
co-authored a study showing that 75% of the U.S.'s NATO allies do not use any
animals in their military medical training programmes, instead employing
superior non-animal methods such as humanlike simulators. Tens of thousands of
PETA members and supporters—including high-profile military veterans Oliver
Stone, Bob Barker, and Gideon Raff—have written to the Dept of Defence asking
the agency to modernize its training programme by replacing its deadly animal
laboratories with more effective, human-relevant simulation tools.
Research
chimps get sanctuary
The world will soon be much brighter for 113 chimpanzees now held in
Lafayette, Louisiana’s New Iberia Research Centre (NIRC) as the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) announced its 2-part plan to retire them all to the
comfort and safety of Chimp Haven, NEAVS’ federal sanctuary. The decision is a
major revision to the NIH’s original plan to send only 10 to Chimp Haven and
retire the rest to another lab. NEAVS/Project R&R has been closely involved
in the fate of the NIRC chimps, advocating for sanctuary for all of them, and is
the first to step up with a matching grant of $100,000 to Chimp Haven to help
cover costs for needed construction to welcome the chimps. NIH’s 2-phase plan
to get them to sanctuary starts in Jan 2013, when half of the chimpanzees will
be moved in small groups to Chimp Haven into available housing and existing
social groups as appropriate. This first phase will take about 6 months. For the
second phase, expected to take 12-15 months to complete, approximately $2.3m in
construction funds is needed. NIH has said it will work with Chimp Haven and
animal protection organizations to secure all funding. Sadly, 4 other
chimpanzees were evaluated by both Chimp Haven and New Iberia veterinarians who
determined they were too sick for transfer. In failing health, they are
permanently protected from use in research. 8 of the chimpanzees are mothers
with young offspring who will remain together during the move.
The soon-to-be new Chimp Haven residents will almost double the
sanctuary’s population – but there are still those waiting. Knowing that 109
of the approximate remaining 488 federally owned chimpanzees currently
held in U.S. biomedical labs can soon rest does not allow us to. It is our duty
and our labour of love to keep working until all chimpanzees live surrounded by
fresh air, sunlight, trees, and all the other comforts an enriched sanctuary
life provides. The NIH’s decision marks the beginning, not the end, of our
goal: to get them all out of labs and safe in sanctuary. NEAVS/Project
R&R will continue to vigilantly and effectively work on behalf of all the
rest who are counting on us. For more information on all our programmes, visit NEAVS.org
and ReleaseChimps.org.
Israel
bans animal tested products
Israel now officially bans the import, marketing and sale of any
cosmetics, toiletries or detergents whose manufacturing process involves animal
testing. The
Knesset originally passed the law in 2010. The new regulations took effect on
Jan 1st. MK Eitan Cabel, who serves as head of the Knesset's Animal
Rights Lobby, promoted the legislation, which states that "Israel will
no longer allow the import and marketing of cosmetics, toiletries or detergents
that were tested on animals. "Animal testing in the Cosmetics Industry
inflicts horrific suffering on these animals. Each product requires between
2,000-3,000 tests, and animals die in agony."
The
law makes certain exceptions for items produced for medicinal products, which
are not categorized as drugs; and follows the guidelines set by the EU, which
enacted a similar ban in 2004. MK
Cabel said that the law represents "A true revolution in animal welfare in
Israel. We've come a long way in the last Knesset term and this law in the
pinnacle of our efforts. "I hope we'll create a change in perception that
will end animal testing altogether." The
new law was enacted as an addition to a law enacted in 2007, which banned animal
testing in the Israeli Cosmetics Industry altogether.
India
to ban cosmetic testing
India, in a landmark move, is planning to impose a blanket ban on testing
cosmetics on animals. The Bureau of Indian Standards (BSI) is revising the
standard IS 4011 — the method of safety testing for cosmetics. Drug Controller
General of India (DCGI) Dr G N Singh told TOI that the Central Drugs Standard
Control Organization (CDSCO) is examining the feasibility of banning animal
testing of `cosmetics.
Bears were used to test
ejector seats
When the U.S. Air Force was designing its first supersonic jet bomber in
the 1950s, it turns out bears were an essential part of the process, helping to test the plane’s new
ejection seats during the Cold War, according to i09.com.
The website has put together a summary of the role bears played in
testing the supersonic Convair B-58 Hustler. Apparently, because Himalayan and American
black bears are reasonably close in
size to humans, they were deemed acceptable substitutes, after a team of humans
died in an early ejection test. So,
while Chief Warrant Officer E.J. Murray became the first human to successfully
eject from a B-58 at nonsupersonic speeds on Feb. 28, 1962, it was a 2-year-old,
female black bear that made it into the history books for the first successful
supersonic ejection from the aircraft. That occurred about a month later, on
March 21. The bear was ejected from
the plane at 35,000 feet above Edwards Air Force Base at a speed of Mach 1.3. It
took nearly 8 minutes for the capsule containing the bear to reach the ground
safely. Io9 describes the ejection system: “In the new system, a pre-ejection
handle yanked the pilot's legs in close and closed a scalloped shell that
enclosed him while still allowing rudimentary control of the plane. The actual
ejection handle sent the capsule up with a rocket burst, automatically deploying
a parachute. The capsule was designed to float, and contained food and survival
supplies.” Statistically, the bears actually fared
better than their human counterparts: While a team of humans died in an early
ejection test of the B-58, no bears died during the later test runs. However, in
an extremely unsettling twist, the bears were euthanized so their bodies could
be examined after the ejection tests.
The
number of animals used by Irish universities in live scientific
experiments is to drop following changes to the law. From January 1, an EU
Directive will mean alternative testing methods should be used if they can
produce equally valid results. Health Minister Dr James Reilly has introduced
the changes to encourage institutions to explore alternative experimentation. The
Independent.ie. 22 Dec
The
new EU Directive governing animal experiments across the Union has
passed its final hurdle en route to becoming UK law. Committee stage debates
this month in both the Houses of Lords and Commons left several key questions
unanswered, but the legislation will nonetheless be formally signed off today
(Dec 18) by Home Office Minister Lord Taylor. The mechanism used to
‘transpose’ EU Directive 2010/63 has been to introduce changes to the
existing 26-year-old national statute. The new domestic law will, therefore, be
called the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations 2012.
It will essentially mean business as usual for animal experimenters in the UK.
Animals in laboratories will not benefit from stricter controls on their use and
abuse, but nor will existing restrictions on what can be done to animals be
relaxed in any major way. However, a significant number of EU member states have
historically exercised very few controls in this area, and standards and
safeguards for tens of thousands of animals in such countries will be
substantially better. Although the amended Act comes into force at the beginning
of 2013, there are still a number of battles to be fought. These relate to the
contents of the guidelines that govern day-to-day activities in animal labs, as
well as to questions of public accountability. Animal Aid, alongside other
animal protection groups, will be pressing the Home Office on both these fronts.
Important guideline-related objectives include ensuring that the requirement to
stick to the severity limits (the degree of pain and anguish that can be
inflicted on animals) is set out in plain terms in the licence granted to
experimenters. A key accountability matter is membership of the so-called Animal
Welfare and Ethical Review Bodies (AWERBs). The equivalent bodies currently in
action are supposed to preview, at a local level, proposals for new vivisection
programmes, prior to those plans going for ultimate approval to the Home Office.
Animal Aid is pressing for the guidelines to insist that all AWERBs have a
genuinely independent element in what is at present a cosy tick-box system.
The future of ‘thematic reviews’, as allowed for by the new
legislation, is also a matter of vital concern. Such reviews offer the potential
to formally assess and eliminate whole categories of experiments where they can
be demonstrated to be of no value. This coincides neatly with the Coalition
Government’s pledge to work to reduce the number of animal experiments. We
must ensure that the Home Office works speedily to meet this obligation and that
it recognises the potential that thematic reviews offer for doing so.
We are also determined to ensure that the millions of genetically
modified mouse victims of laboratory breeding and experimental programmes
receive, at the minimum, official recognition. At present, an enormous amount of
suffering and death does not even reach the official statistics. Our research
shows that GM mice are suffering unimaginably brutal treatment in laboratories
across the UK, during breeding programmes and actual experiments.
So far, those responsible and their government facilitators have
succeeded in painting a benign picture of fruitful research on animal
‘models’ who merit little public concern (‘they’re only mice’). Animal
Aid will be publishing a major new report in the New Year revealing the truth
about this cruel and scientifically bogus enterprise. The task before all of us,
thereafter, must be to serve as unapologetic and bold advocates for a massive
and growing group of animals who have been callously sidelined for far too long.
Animal
Aid
Shocking
report on university experiments
A rhesus monkey, named Petra, kept in a botched brain study with screws and a
piece of acrylic waste buried in her head. Mice having their toes cut off
without a drop of anaesthesia. Others dying of thirst. Birds cut open without
anaesthesia. All of this, and much more, at the University of California at San
Francisco (UCSF), which experimented its way through 800,000 animals last year.
This “chilling, even gruesome” story is told by the San Francisco Chronicle after
studying inspection reports by the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, which monitors all
the vivisection labs in the country. (Inspectors are required to conduct just
one unannounced inspection each year.) UCSF
is one of the biggest labs in the country. The vast majority of the animals in
their experiments are mice and rats. But the Animal Welfare Act doesn’t apply
to them since rodents are among the animals not considered to be
"animals". Even so, UCSF
paid out $92,500 in fines 7 years ago after various incidents of abuse and
neglect were uncovered. The SF Chronicle quotes a scientist at UC San Diego:
"You would think that UC would clean up its act and not have these
deficiencies anymore. But $92,000 is chump change for them because these
research grants bring in millions - it's the cost of doing business," said
Lawrence Hansen, a neuropathologist at UC San Diego who sued UC in 2007, saying
state money was being used to support animal cruelty. A Superior Court judge
called it a federal issue and dismissed the case.
"I don't disapprove of the use of all animals in research, as long
as the animals don't suffer," said Hansen. "What they're doing to
these monkeys is so inherently cruel and painful that it's impossible to do it
without causing a great deal of pain and suffering."
The newspaper focuses on the rhesus monkey in the botched brain study:
The female monkey that UCSF researchers named Petra arrived at the lab in
March 2008. In December, researchers studying Parkinson's disease implanted a
device in the monkey's skull so that gene therapy could be delivered directly to
her brain. The device remained in place for 7 months and was removed in July
2009. As is common practice, said UCSF, the veterinarian left screws in the
monkey's skull. Soon the monkey became lethargic and picked continually at the
spot on her head. The veterinary staff treated her with antibiotics and
painkillers. That didn't work, so a month later veterinarians tried to repair
the wound surgically. That didn't work either, and in Sept they removed the
screws. It still didn't help. Her wound still unhealed, the monkey remained in
the study. A year later, in Oct 2010, the veterinarians and principal researcher
tried again to figure out the cause of the monkey's persistent wound. This time
they found a piece of acrylic that had been left in her head from the 2008
implant. A federal inspector arrived unannounced days later and snapped a photo
of a miserable-looking monkey, a wide, red wound at the top of her head.
Researchers euthanized Petra 3 weeks later, on Nov. 16, 2010. The study in which
Petra was involved received a $2.1m grant from the National Institutes of
Health. UCSF refused to be interviewed for the SF Chronicle’s report. Instead,
spokeswoman Barbara French sent a “statement” saying: "The university
takes very seriously the care and use of the animals it studies, beginning with
ensuring that as few animals as possible are used in research." We would
tend to call that more or a mis-statement than a “statement.” Then again, as
George Bernard Shaw once wrote, "Anyone who doesn't hesitate to vivisect
wouldn't hesitate to lie about it." Earth
in Transition. 27 Nov
Brown
Dog campaign Lots of
information for actions against vivisection http://www.brown-dog.info/
REACH
exposed
The EU chemicals testing programme REACH (registration,
evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals) is a well-intentioned
but scientifically flawed attempt to protect human health and the environment
from the effects of toxic chemicals. This is the conclusion reached in a report
published in the peer-reviewed journal Medicolegal and Bioethics.
The report suggests that: • EU health authorities are out of step with
modern toxicology; • That current animal test requirements are invalid for
predicting human response; • That REACH will result in a pointless animal
massacre; and • That public health and the environment will continue to be at
risk from the effects of toxic chemicals. Principal
author of the report Andre Menaché states: “Although REACH does put the
burden of proof on manufacturers to demonstrate the safety of their products, it
then “scores an own goal” by obliging manufacturers to conform to invalid
test methods to predict human health outcomes.” He adds: “The fact that EU
citizens have not been given the opportunity to grant or deny their consent
before being exposed to the toxic burden that now contaminates us all has legal
as well as public health implications. The presence of nearly 300 industrial
chemicals in umbilical cord blood of newborn babies is testimony to a failed
strategy of pollution control, when EU health authorities should be focusing
their efforts on pollution prevention.” The
report calls for the following measures to be implemented without delay:
• Significantly increase the biomonitoring of EU citizens and make the
results publicly available; • Toxic risk assessment of chemicals based on
modern toxicology, not animal tests; and to be conducted in an independent and
transparent manner; • Prioritisation for a ban and avoidance of harmful
chemicals found in adult and umbilical cord blood and urine samples
• Public policy based on pollution prevention, rather than pollution
control. Link to the article: http://www.dovepress.com/articles.php?article_id=10625
REACH
– alternatives ignored
In April 2012, as a result of your continued support, Humane
Society International (HSI) submitted technical proposals to cut the number of
animal tests required by Europe's notorious 'REACH' chemicals regulation.
REACH’s adoption in 2007 signalled the start of an animal-testing nightmare
for millions of animals. Lawmakers promised that animal testing would be carried
out only as a last resort and that test requirements would be updated regularly
to reflect technical progress. But the sad reality is that we - and the
animals - are still waiting. Internationally accepted alternative methods
that could spare millions of animals are being ignored. Please sign our petition
to be delivered to the European Commissioners responsible for REACH asking them
to implement HSI's proposals to make full use of animal-testing alternatives.
We're calling for alternatives to cruel lethal-poisoning tests, in which
animals are forced to breathe chemical fumes or have them applied to their skin
at doses high enough to kill, and to reproductive toxicity tests, which use
2,600 mother rats and their babies to test just one chemical for its effects on
mating and fertility. Our proposed alternative testing strategies have already
been accepted by EU authorities in the biocide and pesticide sectors because
they achieve the same level of protection for human health and the environment
whilst reducing animal use. Now we need chemical regulators to follow
suit. Every day the Commission delays taking action, more animals suffer and die
needlessly. Please take action today! http://tiny.cc/rd8cnw
Gateway
to Hell
Please check out the campaign website and spread the news
that G2H is back: www.gatewaytohell.net
For those of you who aren't familiar with the Gateway to Hell campaign, it is a
militant anti-vivisection campaign focused on the disruption of the supply of
animals to laboratories, with the emphasis being placed firmly on those who
transport and supply the animals with the objective to prevent their
transportation and subsequent abuse in experiments. With laboratory animal
shipments becoming increasingly difficult, the prices of lab animals is on the
rise and the vivisection industry descending into a state of hysteria and panic,
there's never been a better time to formally re-launch the campaign to squeeze
the last collaborators out of this evil business. Some of the highlights from
the campaign launch are: 1. A new cyber-action to confront Air India over their
duplicitous betrayal of the animals by revoking their policy on the
transportation of lab animals: www.gatewaytohell.net/air-india-resumes-shipping-laboratory-animals/
2. A global week of action focusing on Air France-KLM, which will run
from the 1st - 8th Dec: www.gatewaytohell.net/air-france-klm-week-of-action/
3. A call for action against United Airlines, another company that
revoked a policy not to carry lab animals, and also Vietnam Airlines who are
responsible for shipping thousands of primates from S.E. Asia to Europe and the
USA are also in the spotlight: www.gatewaytohell.net/top-targets/
4. A collection of increasingly hysterical missives from the vivisection
industry, discussing the dire state of lab animal transports and suggesting
laughable efforts to improve the public image of animal experimentation: www.gatewaytohell.net/our-network/in-the-news/
More news will follow, but for now please check out the site, spread the
word, start preparing actions and let's ensure that 2013 is the year where the
shipment of lab animals becomes almost impossible!
Jet
Airways has
assured People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India in writing that
it does not and will not transport animals destined for laboratory
experiments. In a reply to PETA’s letter inquiring about Jet Airways’ policy
regarding shipments of animals to laboratories, Mohammad Ali El Ariss, Jet
Airways’ vice president of cargo, stated: “We refuse to carry live animals
for experiments.”
Lab animals drown
After superstorm Sandy flooded New York University's medical
research laboratories, first accounts were of Herculean rescue efforts. But
critics are asking whether the laboratories did everything they could - and
whether they followed government guidelines - to protect the research animals.
Thousands of animals, mostly mice housed in the basement of one NYU Langone
Medical Centre building on the East River in Manhattan, died during the storm.
All told, said NYU spokeswoman Jessica Guenzel, the biomedical facility
lost 7,660 cages of mice and 22 cages of rats. Each cage houses between 1 and 7
animals, she said. "This happens again and again and research labs never
learn," said Fran Sharples, director of the Board on Life Sciences at the
congressionally chartered National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
"Anybody with half a brain knows you do a site-specific
analysis" to understand the risk of disasters, she said, "and it's
really stupid to put your animals in the basement if you're in a flood
zone." It's not as if
scientists didn't have recent lessons in the risk of natural disasters to
biomedical research, she said. In 2001, tens of thousands of mice and scores of
monkeys and dogs were lost when Hurricane Allison struck Houston; and in 2005,
some 10,000 lab animals drowned when hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans.
Scientists contacted by Reuters say there was a double whammy. Flooding that
overwhelmed the basements drowned some animals, while toxic fumes from breaches
in the diesel fuel tank and lines that supplied back-up generators killed
others.
Taking
one giant leap backwards, NASA has
called on researchers to submit funding applications for projects which may
involve the use of primates, dogs, cats and other animals, provoking
condemnation from NAVS and ADI. The purpose of the research is to study how the
environment in space affects biological processes, enabling NASA to develop “a
safe, productive human presence in space for extended periods”.
Animal
rights activists want to take the University of Minnesota
to court over its alleged secrecy in animal testing. The
Animal Legal Defence Fund and Minneapolis resident Isaac Peter filed a lawsuit
against the University of Minnesota, accusing its Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committee of violating the state’s open records and open meetings laws.
GM
rat experiments slammed by scientist
Jean-Francois Narbonne has issued a statement clarifying the
position of the Pro Anima Scientific Committee: "The project involving rats
fed OGM is utterly scandalous. It is vital that Gilles-Eric Seralini be
discouraged from mounting any new project involving the study over a period
of 2 years of rats fed OGMs". He stipulates: " I myself was involved,
along with other researchers, in the development of several experiments on OGMs
in 1995, which we ultimately rejected as being completely ill-adapted to the
goal of understanding the effects of OGMs. We subsequently recommended
alternative fields of analysis, for example molecular microbiology."
Narbonne goes on to denounce what he regards as an obvious and totally
outrageous manipulation by the various media, adding that he had asked Seralini,
as far back as 2005, to abandon his method as being patently ineffective. To no
avail, "as it turns out there were as many tumours on the controls as there
were on the subjects. "This
result was already known ahead of time. Seralini used groups of 10 rats.
Completing a live study over a period of 2 years would have necessitated using
groups of 50, for a total of 1000 rats! More significantly, there exist
techniques that specifically do not require the use of live animals, such as:
genomic, proteomic, metabolomic." Most significantly, these latter methods
have been proven to be more effective than any 2-year study involving live
animals in detecting the differences between OGM and non-OGM plants. Employing
an alternative method, would have spared the rats from suffering and at the same
time would have guaranteed far better-targeted results. Narbonne adds that
"at a time when we have already clearly succeeded in developing the means
to replace so-called 'classic' methods within the framework of REACH, it seems
totally incongruous that a researcher sing the praises of a method using
thousands of live animals in long-term experiments that today are considered to
be obsolete. If, indeed, toxic substances are existent in OGMs, the use of
techniques involving 'omics' as well as biological trials are far more
effective. Using these methods, it is currently possible to detect mutations,
cancer-inducing cells, or endocrine
anomalies in far smaller quantities than those affecting live subjects. For
example, the threshold of detection of an strogennomimetic (as found in BPA's or
phtalates) is in the order of extremely few pg/kg. The Seralini project clearly
demonstrates the underlying inefficacy of long-term live experiments in the
study of OGMs. We at Pro Anima are
intent in expressing our fear that this type of 2-year study could continue to
be utilised on the grounds that the majority of the researchers who are opposed
to this approach are necessarily "in Monsanto's pocket".
Medicines
Agency fails to grasp modern science
The UK medicines regulator, the MHRA (Medicines and
Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) appears to be out of step with global
scientific opinion that better methods are needed to improve the safety of new
medicines. Although current methods include computer models and in vitro tests, they rely mainly on tests in animals. The
MHRA’s mission is “to enhance and safeguard the health of the public
by ensuring that medicines and medical devices work, and are acceptably safe.”
In order to fulfil their statutory duty, the onus is on them to be alert to the
most predictive technologies available and – where there are clear advantages
over current methods – to mandate their use. There are many exciting new
technologies on offer, which promise to predict various aspects of drug safety
more reliably than animal tests and some of the older in vitro tests
– but unless they are included as requirements in safety testing, they will
continue to be overlooked, and their enormous potential to save lives will be
wasted. In the US, several government initiatives are underway to tackle this
important issue. The Predictive Safety
Testing Consortium was established to address the problem that: “The
tests that are used to determine drug safety today have not changed in
decades.” They openly admit that “Companies have developed newer safety
testing methods, but these are not generally accepted by the FDA [Food and Drug
Administration, the US medicines regulator] or EMA [European Medicines Agency,
the European medicines regulator] as proof of safety because the tests have not
been independently validated by a third party.” Yet the MHRA insists that
animal tests are irreplaceable and is extraordinarily dismissive of 2 of the
most exciting breakthrough technologies in drug testing: microdosing and ‘body
on chip’ devices, saying that they are “not superior technologies”. This
contradicts much published scientific opinion, such as a 2010 review of microdosing, which concludes: “There are some
scientists who look at new methods such as microdosing with considerable
suspicion, failing to recognise that their current tools are flawed. The biggest
obstacle to building microdose studies routinely into the critical path of drug
development is not scientific but social and economic. It requires scientists to
be thinking outside the box. Once this mental hurdle is overcome, microdosing
will become routine and as a result the efficiency of drug development will
improve.” and a 2012 article,
which explains: “A major problem in the pharmaceutical industry right now is
that the drug development model is actually broken. It just does not work. It
takes many, many years to get a drug to market, it’s incredibly expensive,
innumerable animal lives are lost – and then the results from animals usually
don’t predict what happens in humans. So this is a huge cost to the economy
and to the pharmaceutical industry. Our proposed solution is to do studies with
human cells – but not just cells in a dish—cells that exhibit organ-like
structures and functions." Of
course, neither microdosing nor ‘body on chip’ devices can supply all the
information necessary: each only contributes part of the jigsaw. But a
combination of such powerful techniques with other advances, such as virtual
organs, virtual patients and even virtual clinical trials, promises to provide
more reliable information than currently used methods. Since adverse drug
reactions are one of our leading – and increasing – causes of death and
disability, there is clearly an urgent imperative to improve the current system.
Please write to the MHRA to ask one simple question: When is the MHRA
going to require that pharmaceutical companies use the best methods available to
ensure the safety of medicines, both for patients and for volunteers in clinical
trials – who currently bear the brunt of potentially dangerous medicines that
have not always been tested for safety in humans as far as
technology allows? Please do not mention animal suffering, as this will
allow them to ignore this key question. Letters
should be addressed to: Professor Sir Kent Woods, CEO MHRA, 151 Buckingham
Palace Rd, London SW1W 9SZ or emails addressed to info@mhra.gsi.gov.uk
with “FAO Professor Sir Kent Woods” in the subject line.
Wickham
Labs demo
Animal rights campaigners brought Fareham town centre to a
standstill when they held their annual march against Wickham Labs on 15th
Sept. Campaigners marched carrying banners and chanting Close Down Wickham labs
and No more torture no more pain, Wickham Labs are to blame.
They were corralled along the route by dozens of police officers who
clearly had nothing better to do that afternoon!! Speakers at the rally included
Andrew Knight and André Menaché, both veterinary surgeons. Jeanette McClunan
of Stop Wickham animal Testing said “It did attract a lot of attention and I
always like to think that people go home and reflect and take in what it’s all
about.” The lab moved out of
Wickham and is now based in Barwell Lane, Gosport, but has kept the same trading
name. After the march protesters
went to the labs for a further demonstration.
Apologies for late report on this
demo – my cats knocked the paperwork down the back of the radiator!!!
Update: I have since
heard that William Cartmell, the “vet” who started Wickham labs, has been
struck off of the veterinary register.
‘Over
the top’ policing
Animal rights protesters have criticised the police for being
‘over the top’ during a recent demonstration. Police officers visibly
outnumbered members of Stop Wickham Animal Testing (SWAT) during their annual
march against the controversial Wickham Labs. But police have refused to reveal
how many officers were involved in the operation following a Freedom of
Information request from The News. About 60
protesters took part in the march through Fareham town centre in Sept. Jeanette
McClunan of SWAT said: ‘They definitely outnumbered us. ‘We always have
several meetings with the police in advance, and this time they were concerned
about having it in Fareham. ‘The last thing any of us is going to do is to
step out of line at these demonstrations because if anyone is arrested it gives
us negative publicity. ‘The level of policing was completely over the top.’ The News asked
Hampshire Constabulary how many officers took part, how much it cost the
taxpayer. Rebecca Warhurst of the joint information management unit said in a
statement: ‘Disclosure of officer information is likely to provide a tactical
insight into how events of this nature are policed and the level of resourcing
that is dedicated to this type of protest. ‘Armed with this type of
intelligence information, individuals may be able to determine the likely level
of policing input at future comparable events and use this sensitive operational
information to compromise policing activity and the law enforcement function.’
Blah blah blah
Unwanted
monkeys slaughtered
A BUAV investigation has uncovered the appalling slaughter of
hundreds of monkeys at the Noveprim primate breeding farm in Mauritius. Shocking
images show discarded dead monkeys stacked in piles on the floor or dumped in
bins like garbage. Other images show mutilated bodies in a skip awaiting
incineration. This is taking place on the holiday island of Mauritius where monkeys
are plucked from the wild then exported to UK firms, which pay up to £260 for
each one they buy. The barbaric slaughter is set to continue throughout
October and November, allegedly because overseas laboratories are requesting
primates weighing less than 3.5kg. The majority of monkeys being killed are
adult males weighing over 4kg although the BUAV has learned that Noveprim is
also killing pregnant females and baby monkeys because the farm no longer has a
use for these animals. Noveprim is a major exporter of monkeys to the UK, Spain
and the USA. The company is approved by the UK Home Office to supply monkeys to
UK laboratories. The company is 47% owned by Covance
UK, a research and vivisection organisation based in Harrogate, North Yorks.
Official figures show that in 2011, 518 monkeys were exported to the UK
from Mauritius. In 2010, that increased to 1,059. Only the US bought more. Thousands
of live tests are carried out each year in UK labs. 75% of the monkeys are used
for toxicology tests on new drugs. Despite this slaughter, Noveprim continues to
have traps for wild monkeys. BUAV is calling upon the Prime Minister of
Mauritius to take immediate action to halt these killings and for the monkeys to
be released back into the wild where they belong to live out the rest of their
lives freely. They also demand the UK Government to ban the import of monkeys
from Mauritius. A major investigation carried out by the BUAV in September 2010
obtained shocking evidence of the cruelty and suffering
involved in the trapping and breeding of the wild monkeys on the island.
TAKE ACTION! 1.
Write to the Prime Minister of Mauritius urging him to stop the slaughter:
Dr. The Honourable Navinchandra Ramgoolam. Prime Minister of the
Republic of Mauritius, New Treasury Building, Intendance Street, Port Louis,
Republic of Mauritius Email: primeminister@mail.gov.mu
2. Write to Mauritius High Commission in
the UK calling for the slaughter to stop: His
Excellency Mr Abhimanu Kundasamy, Mauritius High Commission, 32-33 Elvaston
Place, London SW7 5NW. Email: londonmhc@btinternet.com
3. Write to the UK Home
Office calling for a ban on the import of monkeys from Mauritius: Lord Taylor of Holbeach, Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State, Home
Office, Direct Communications Unit, 2 Marsham St, London SW1P 4DF Email: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Also go to: www.thepetitionsite.com/695/795/855/stop-killing-monkeys-for-being-too-large/?z00m=20443480
Opposition
to animal use growing
Public opposition to the use of animals in medical research
is growing and trust in both scientists and the rules governing the
controversial practice is falling, new government-funded research shows.
37% now class themselves as "objectors" to the practice. Their
number has been rising steadily since the 29% recorded in 2006 and 35 % seen in
2010, though is still lower than the 39% found in 2002, according to the latest
research into public attitudes on the issue by Ipsos MORI. Objectors either do
not support the use of animals in experimentation because of concern for animal
welfare (32%) or believe the government should ban experiments on animals for
any form of research (21%), or both. They are more heavily female (41%) than
male (33%) and more likely to be those aged 15 to 24 (55%) and also those in the
lowest socio-economic class ranked as DE (51% compared to 23% of ABs). That
hardening of attitudes is part of what Ipsos MORI called a
"significant" shift away from people endorsing the need for use of
animals in such projects. While 85% of the 1,026 Britons aged 15 and older
questioned "conditionally" support the practice, this is down from the
90% found in 2010, according to the poll, which the Dept for Business,
Innovation and Skills paid for. "In
2012, the public are less trusting of scientists not to cause unnecessary
suffering in the animals involved (47% now, 54% in 2010), but are also less
alert to the possibility of experiments being needlessly duplicated (51% now,
61% in 2010)." While 54% trust the government's inspectorate and 53% think
Britain's rules governing animal experimentation, 43% do not trust the
regulatory system – down from 56% in 2010. But overall 40% said they wanted to
know more about animal experimentation before forming a view. The findings have
prompted scientists, medical research charities, drug firms and universities to
pledge to be more open about the use of animals in experiments in a bid to gain
more widespread public support. Professor
Sir John Tooke, president of the Academy of Medical Sciences, said they were
"concerned" at the poll's results. Stephen Whitehead, chief executive
of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said that, while
two-thirds of people still accepted the use of animals for medical research, the
10% should be "a wake-up call". Britain's life sciences community need
to be "more forthright about the fact that without animal research, the
bio-pharmaceutical sector cannot continue to innovate new treatments", he
added. Sir Mark Walport, head of the Wellcome Trust, Britain's biggest charity,
denied "complacency" among scientists had led to falling public
support. He blamed a continuing "environment of intimidation" which,
at its most extreme, constituted "terrorism", he said. Whitehead said
crashing of websites and other illegal tactics had deterred some people involved
in conducting or helping animal experimentation. The poll also found that 9%
believe it is acceptable for protestors to occupy research facilities or disrupt
firms providing services to such research centres, 8% see roadblocks as
acceptable and 2% and 1% respectively see destroying property and physical
violence in the same light. David Willetts, the science minister, confirmed that
talks are going on with airlines and ferry companies about resuming the import
of some live animals which are specially-bred overseas for use in trials into
conditions such as Alzheimer's disease. "The government is committed to
working to reduce the use of animals in scientific research, but we do recognise
that there remains a strong scientific case for the careful regulated use (!!!)
of animals in scientific research and that this does play a role in ensuring new
medicines are safe and effective", he added.
Responding
to this drop in support for
the use of animals in research in the UK, the country’s leading research
universities, medical charities and drugs companies launched a new transparency
initiative aimed at winning over members of the public to the need for animal
research. A
total of 15 universities, 4 pharmaceutical firms, and groups such as Cancer
Research UK, Parkinson’s UK and the Motor Neurone Disease Association issued a
declaration on openness in the use of animals in medical research. “Where
possible, we use cells grown in a lab, computer models and human volunteers.
When this isn’t possible, research may involve animals,” the declaration
reads. “When we need to use animals, we strive to reduce the number needed,
and seek to develop viable alternatives.” Penny Hawkins, of the Royal Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said: “If the scientific community
really wants to address these concerns, it will have to be more honest about the
harms caused to animals – which can be very severe – and not just talk about
the potential benefits of research.” “Talk is cheap. It’s time to
deliver.”
40
dead animals demo
Today we presented 40 dead animals, taken from rubbish bins
of vivisection labs, in front of the Austrian parliament. see: www.vgt.at/presse/news/2012/news20121018y.php
Yesterday we showed the animals in the main square of the Lower Austrian
capital www.vgt.at/presse/news/2012/news20121017y.php
Tomorrow we are in Graz, Saturday Bregenz, Monday
Linz, Tuesday Klagenfurt. and Wednesday Innsbruck.
Martin Balluch
Students
pose with dead cats
Students at Newport Harbor High School in California openly
posed for photographs with dead cats, posted them on Facebook, and solicited
comments from their friends. The photographs were taken during a science class
dissection that uses cats obtained from biological suppliers. One or more
children reportedly deposited a severed cat’s head in a student’s locker. A
photograph of a cat’s decapitated head was also posted on Facebook. A detailed
online conversation followed in which one student suggested, presumably
jokingly, that she had killed her own cat. Other students joined in with other
inappropriate comments. PCRM wrote to the president of the Newport-Mesa Unified
School District Board of Education and asked that the students involved be
referred for psychological evaluation, that the teacher be reprimanded and
counselled, and that classroom activities involving animals be suspended. PCRM
also wrote to Facebook and requested the company remove any photographs or posts
involving abuse, cruelty, or callousness toward animals in the future, in
accordance with its graphic content policy, which states that “any
inappropriately graphic content will be removed when found on the site. Sadistic
displays of violence against people or animals, or depictions of sexual assault,
are prohibited.” The use of animals for science classroom dissection is not
only cruel and psychologically damaging, it is unnecessary for optimal science
education. In 2008, the National Association of Biology Teachers and the
National Science Teachers Association revised their position statements
regarding the use of animals in the classroom to acknowledge the value and
endorse the use of computer-based dissection programs for all levels of science
education, and to encourage science teachers to be prepared to provide those
programs. Earlier this year, the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society similarly
revised its position statement.
PCRM
The
University of Connecticut
paid $12,429 in fines last month for animal welfare
violations, the U.S. Dept of Agriculture announced. The fines are for 10
violations observed during inspections between 2008 and 2010, mostly involving
the treatment of rabbits at a research facility at the UConn Health Center. 16
Oct
Animal-rights
activists are targeting UC San Francisco
over testing of a lab monkey who was kept in a medical study
for more than 23 months after developing complications due to a surgical
procedure, in violation of the federal Animal Welfare Act. From
2008 to 2010, a female rhesus macaque named Petra was the subject of
neurological studies aimed at learning more about Parkinson’s disease. But
according to a federal inspection report, the primate suffered for months after
hardware removal surgery failed to extract a small piece of drug-injection
apparatus from inside her head. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals now
wants UCSF to return $2.1m in federal grant funding from the National Institutes
of Health, in accordance with the agency’s own policies. “NIH has an
opportunity to make a clear statement that grant recipients cannot engage in
noncompliant activity and expect to keep federal tax dollars,” PETA’s letter
states. The agency has yet to respond to PETA’s request. This is not the first
time UCSF has faced scrutiny over animal issues. In 2007, a committee of
physicians sued the school over about 75 U.S. Dept of Agriculture citations it
received between 2001 and 2003. The school characterized the sanctions as minor,
and ultimately the suit was dismissed by a San Francisco judge who said federal
regulators - not judges - are in charge of monitoring animal experimentation. In
the case of Petra, UCSF documents indicate that the situation required intensive
monitoring as the monkey removed her own fur and continually irritated the
surgical incision by picking at it, at times causing bacterial infections and
leaving dried blood in her cage. After a federal inspector photographed the
monkey during a routine check in Oct 2010, the USDA issued an order to the lab
Jan. 5 telling it to rectify such animal practices within 3 months. But by that
time, Petra already had been euthanized. UCSF
spokeswoman Jennifer O’Brien declined to say whether UCSF would willingly
return the public grant money.
She said the university “takes very
seriously its responsibility for the humane treatment of the
animals it
studies.” She added that
researchers were concerned about the monkey’s problems and kept the condition
“largely under control without ever fully resolving it.”
O’Brien said experiments on the monkey yielded progress in the field by
leading to the development of a human gene therapy clinical trial for
Parkinson’s disease. She said Petra had always been slated for euthanasia
following the tests.
Windows
in mice bellies
Scientists
investigating the spread of cancer cells have are surgically implanting windows
into the bellies of live mice. The glass portholes stitched directly into the
rodents' abdominal walls are intended to help researchers track how cancer cells
spread to form secondary tumours. This process, known as tumour metastasis, is
currently not well understood. This has been done again and again
– and still no cures
Will airlines
be forced to fly lab animals?
Israel's 7 universities have petitioned the courts to order El Al Israel
Airlines Ltd
to fly laboratory animals, including monkeys, for biomedical trials. The
universities are protesting El Al's decision to stop carrying laboratory animals
for trials. The petition states that, over the past year, "El Al has begun
to raise difficulties for institutions of higher education that request monkeys
for research purposes. El Al has on several occasions refused to bring animals
to Israel, and in an extreme case, even refused to carry a shipment of sea
snails from California to Bar Ilan University. "These trials are essential
to save human lives, the development of pharmaceuticals, and finding treatments
for various diseases… They are critical for the development of compounds and
vaccines for curing diseases, correcting flaws, fertility treatments, the
prevention of epidemics, and advancing surgical techniques."
The universities said that the trials were conducted in accordance with
the law and with the full permits and supervision, similar to the prevailing
laws in various countries. They added that they were committed to the animals'
well-being. "The use of test animals in Israel is relatively less than in
the world, and the number of monkeys used in experiments is much less relative
to the world." The universities
contend that El Al does not have the right to put itself above the law.
"The legislature has already regulated the issue of animal experimentation,
allowing research, and did not ban the import of monkeys for research," the
petition states. El Al said in response that it had not yet received the
statement of claim. Globes. 4 Jan
Strange
that they’re not getting their monkeys from Mazor Farm near Tel Aviv
March
to oppose beagle breeder
About
150 people, many wearing dog masks, marched through Hull to draw attention to
the proposed Bantin & Kingman beagle breeding unit in Grimston which has
been turned down by planning but has been sent to government minister Eric
Pickles for a final decision. There were speeches by Luke Steele (NAVA), Deborah
Minns (Local Resident & Activist), Andrew Tyler (Director - Animal Aid), Dr
Victoria Martindale (Anti-Vivisectionist and Doctor).
The application to extend the facility was refused permission by East
Riding Council in June, but, after a successful appeal by the company, the
decision will now fall to Communities Secretary Eric Pickles. He is due to
reveal the outcome on March 8. Deborah Minns, one of the organisers of the local
campaign against the expansion, said: "People don't want this on their
doorstep. "We don't want East Yorkshire to be known for having the biggest
beagle facility in the UK. "It is also about putting ourselves in another
species' shoes. What gives us the right, as humans, to treat them in that
way?" The application was refused by E. Riding Council over concerns about
traffic issues, with councillors saying they could not consider moral issues.
Almost 30,000 people have signed a petition organised by the BUAV calling for
the plan to be refused on moral grounds. Ricky Gervais has also thrown his
support behind the campaign. However, the company has said properly monitored
animal experiments are permitted in the UK because they are vital for medical
research. Well, they would say that,
wouldn’t they.
Stunt demo at
Air France-KLM UK HQ
On Wed 21st Dec London Animal Rights held a surprise protest at Air
France-KLM's UK HQ, near Heathrow, as part of the global week of action against
them. Activists delivered a 'corpse' into the reception to remind them of the
thousands of individuals who die because of their continued support of the
vivisection industry. Dressed in bloody lab coats, 2 of the activists
carried and delivered a "dead body" of one of the animals who had died
in transit during a recent journey. Many of the animals destined to
die in laboratories won't even make it that far. It has to be said that
maybe they are the lucky ones of those bred or caught for vivisection. Workers in
the offices looked on as the corpse, in a body bag, was placed in the
reception area of the building and activists spoke of the horrors that
animals being transported will face and the suffering that they have to
endure during the journey. The stunt lasted for around 15 minutes
before police arrived, the protesters having already decided to leave of their
own accord. The 15 minutes was all that was needed, however, to give the
workers a visual reminder of what their company is responsible for and
to, once again, inform them of the reality of vivisection. If it
wasn't for the part that transportation companies willingly play in
assisting in the torture and murder of millions of animals every year, the
vivisection industry would be having a much harder time. Video of the
action: http://youtu.be/TRN99sUPR_w
Rats used in
alcohol research
A chemical from seeds from the tree Hovenia Dulcis was first used as a hangover
cure in the year 659. Rats who've
consumed the drug can consume vast quantities of alcohol without passing out,
show few signs of a hangover - and don't become alcoholics, even after weeks of
solid drinking, say researchers. Rats respond to alcohol in a very similar way
to humans. The UCLA researchers now aim to find out if the compound will work in
humans. The researchers began their study by looking at herbal compounds that
supposedly had 'anti alcohol' effects. They rapidly homed in on the Asian seed.
They tested one ingredient - called DHM or dihydromyricetin in the rats.
The rats were given the equivalent of 15 to 20 bottled beers in 2 hours. (how
did they administer that?) Most animals passed out, and remained motionless
when flipped over. When given DHM, the rats could 'handle' their drink better.
They took longer to get drunk and seemed to sober up in about 15 minutes. The
compound seemed to help rats dealing with hangover anxiety, too. Rats
recovering from a binge seemed to perk up when given the compound. Perhaps most
importantly for medical professionals, the chemical seems to stop rats wanting
to drink. Although rats on DHM can
drink more, they don't. 'When you
drink alcohol with DHM, you never become addicted,' says the lead researcher,
Jing Liang in research published in Journal of Neuroscience. The
drug appears to work by blocking a brain receptor. Other promising anti-alcohol
drugs have targeted the same receptor - but also caused seizures. So
this is the vital, lifesaving research they always talk about? What about liver
damage?
Empathetic rats
- Researchers at the University of Chicago sought to find out whether a rat
would release a fellow rat from an unpleasantly restrictive cage if it could.
The answer was yes. The free rat, occasionally hearing distress calls from its
compatriot, learned to open the cage and did so with greater efficiency over
time. It would release the other animal even if there wasn’t the payoff of a
reunion with it. Astonishingly, if given access to a small hoard of chocolate
chips, the free rat would usually save at least one treat for the captive. The
researchers came to the unavoidable conclusion that what they were seeing was
empathy - and apparently selfless behaviour driven by that mental state. What
psychologists term “pro-social behaviour” hasn’t been formally shown in
non-primates until now.
And clever
dingoes
have been filmed performing a series of feats described by scientists as
evidence of “unbelievable intelligence”. In experiments performed by
researchers in Melbourne, one dingo was filmed moving a table to use as a
step-ladder to reach food. Another opened a gate latch with his nose to reach a
female partner.
Stena stops
transport of animals to Irish labs
NAVA were recently leaked information showing that laboratory animals were
regularly being exported to Dublin through the Port of Holyhead in N. Wales. The
shipments were conducted on a weekly basis, with unmarked vans loaded with
animals driving through the port and onto Stena Line ferries. We immediately
contacted Stena Line, the operators of Holyhead Port and the owners of the
ferries being used, regarding instigating an embargo on the transportation of
animals for vivisection. Within days of our concerns being voiced, the company
investigated the matter and today we received a statement: “….to
be consistent with our existing livestock policy we will be extending the policy
so that it covers the carriage of all live animals.”
Our gratitude is sent to Stena Lines for
their swift response and for acting for the progression of science without the
use of animals. The majority of animals used in Irish laboratories are bred in
the UK and this decision will certainly put a foot in this archaic trade.
Without animals for vivisection, researchers will be left to move over to other
forms of research that are more accurate to human medicine and curing disease.
Roku and Hex
are the world’s first chimeric monkeys. But their birth has caused an ethical
storm, with critics accusing scientists of disregarding the welfare of the
animals.
Named after
the fire-breathing creature in Greek mythology composed of parts of multiple
animals, chimeras are organisms made up of cells from 2 or more genetically
distinct sources. Twins Roku and Hex, whose respective names come from the
Japanese and Greek for ‘6’, have been created with genetic material from 6
monkeys. Researchers from Oregon Health and Science University in the U.S.
extracted cells from 6 macaque embryos and combined them into a single embryo
in a laboratory before implanting it into a surrogate mother monkey. 3 male
babies were born using this process – Roku and Hex, who are twins, and
Chimero. However, to reach this stage, dozens more embryos were experimented
on, and some surrogate pregnancies were aborted. While most animals only
contain cells in which the genetic material from their 2 parents has mixed
together, the chimeric monkeys’ bodies contain 6 different types of cell –
holding distinct DNA from each biological parent. Although many mice and some
rabbits, rats and farm animals have been born this way, no one has created
chimeric monkeys before. The
researchers say that Roku and Hex are healthy and that their birth opens up
‘enormous’ possibilities for science because of monkeys’ intelligence and
close biological links to humans. They
say the technique could help us learn more about IVF and contraception, and
growing human organs from scratch. But critics of the study, published in the
journal Cell, say that techniques such as these take a high toll on animal
welfare and question what sort of experiments the monkeys will be put through
in future. The BUAV called the research 'deeply disturbing.' Dr Jarrod Bailey,
the organisation’s scientific consultant, said: 'Using such highly sentient
animals in this research raises enormous ethical concerns and imposes a heavy
welfare burden, resulting
in severe suffering to many animals.'
'As
few genetically modified animals show the ‘desired’
characteristics,
many will be killed even before any research can take place, while others will
die of severe and unrelated malformations caused by the genetic modifications.'
'The monkeys who do
exhibit characteristics of ‘interest’ are destined to suffer greatly by
their very nature, and via the experiments to which they will be subjected.'
Daily
Mail 6th Jan
Animals dumped
in lake
An investigation has been launched after the bodies of dozens of dogs, cats and
rabbits were found dumped in an Italian lake. Officials suspect the dogs were
bred for illegal fights, but other animals had single knife wounds which some
suggest may have been inflicted during a bloody mafia initiation ceremony. There
are also fears the dead animals may have been bred for international export to
supply labs conducting experiments - in recent years the mafia is said to have
made millions from the supply of animals for this reason. The latest discovery
was made at Frezza lake in countryside near Naples, an area traditionally a
stronghold of the local mafia known as the Camorra.
Vets are carrying out postmortem examinations on the animals at a
specialist centre in Naples and prosecutors are waiting for a full report on the
macabre discovery. An initial investigation has revealed that none of the dogs
have the compulsory microchip inserted under their skin as Italian law insists
which has further fuelled suspicions the animals were bred illegally. Italian
animal defence group AIDAA said they had no doubt that the Camorra was behind
the grizzly discovery of the corpses and suggested that some had been killed by
'would-be new Camorra members as a sign of their willingness to kill.' AIDAA
President Lorenzo Croce added: 'We know that the Camorra is running dogfights
for illegal gambling and holding dogs in what can only be described as canine
concentration camps until they are ready to fight. 'Other animals are also being
used in international trafficking for vivisection purposes - we believe that
this discovery is just the tip of the iceberg and there are many other dumping
sites around the region.' According to AIDAA, dog rackets provide the Camorra
with annual profits of between 6m -7m euros.
U.S. lab
investigated for horrific abuse of test monkeys
A U.S. laboratory has been accused of severe cruelty to monkeys after a
whistleblower went to PETA with images and accounts of disturbing abuse.
PETA urged the federal Animal Plant and Inspection Service to investigate
the U.S. headquarters of Shin Nippon Biomedical Laboratories in Washington after
an ex-employee came forward. The anonymous whistleblower recounted incidents of
horrific treatment of the animals who suffered from repeated abuse, torment and
torture at the laboratory headquarters in Everett.
When it came to drawing blood from the monkeys, the former employee said
they would 'wince, scream, tremble and shake, and try to defend themselves.
'Eventually, many of the monkeys stop fighting and reacting … it is
like the life is gone from them.' She said they were routinely bruised but not
treated for injuries. PETA launched
an official complaint which charged that Shin Nippon Biomedical Laboratories
violated the Animal Welfare Act for a number of reasons.
PETA Vice President Kathy Guillermo said in a statement: 'With this
video, the public can plainly see what desolate, traumatized lives of
deprivation these monkeys lead. 'We're calling on the USDA to launch an
immediate investigation and hold SNBL accountable if these very serious
allegations of animal abuse are borne out.'
The controversial lab has repeatedly come under fire for alleged
violations, including the 2008 scalding death of a monkey whose cage was run
through a high-temperature washer while the monkey was inside. The company has
not responded to requests for comment.
Mail
6th Dec
Wild
caught primates in US labs
Catching and selling Silver River monkeys is lucrative. For the past 14 years, Scott Cheslak has roamed the forests along the
Ocklawaha River, the Florida Greenway and sometimes Silver River State Park,
quietly plucking rhesus monkeys for sale to research laboratories. On his annual
visits he traps between 20 and 30 monkeys using a dart gun or cages. Until
recently, he took them back to Morgan Island, a 3,000-monkey habitat where Alpha
Genesis Inc. sold the primates. This year, he's freelancing and will sell the
monkeys himself. It's a lucrative business, but a controversial one that raises
the ire of animal rights groups and could inflame the passions of local nature
lovers who have grown accustomed to seeing the spindly primates begging for food
along the banks of the Ocklawaha. For their part, state wildlife officials
support Cheslak's efforts because they consider the monkeys a nuisance and a
potential health and safety hazard. The Florida Dept of Environmental
Protection, which manages Silver River State Park, has not allowed him to hunt
on its land for the past 3 years, but the agency reversed itself this year and
allowed Cheslak to take monkeys again. He also has trapped monkeys for the
Silver Springs Attraction, he said. The attraction did not return telephone
calls for an interview. It's unknown
how many rhesus monkeys are on state lands locally. They are non-native and not
protected, said Joy Hill, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
spokesperson. Hill said for Cheslak to capture monkeys, he needs only to obtain
a $150 permit from her agency. It is up to state officials to decide which state
lands he can hunt on. Ocalo.com. 5 Jan
Monkey
breeding facility rejected
The commonwealth Supreme Court has ruled against the monkey-breeding facility
planned for the Pueblito del Carmen sector in Guayama, the Committee against the
Establishment of the Macacos Monkey Breeding Facility has announced.
“This is the best Christmas gift that we have received in the past
years. This is needed to return the tranquility and safety to residents of
Guayama and nearby towns,” said Committee Spokesman Wilson Nazario. The
Supreme Court's ruling was 5 to 3. The committee contends Bioculture, the
company that pushed the project, misused the permitting process. “Bioculture
made of fool of the permit process with the government's support. The
government, in an unprecedented move, awarded the permits in a fast track
manner, something that raised suspicions,” he said in a press release.
“There was misbehaviour inside the offices of the Rules and Permits
Administration. It was proven in court that Bioculture obtained the permits by
providing false information when in reality they were planning a full facility
to house dangerous monkeys and use them for experimentation,” he said.
Indian
dissection ban
A staggering 19m insects and animals belonging to a variety of species will be
saved every academic year when the ban on dissection in laboratories for
undergraduate and postgraduate is fully implemented. The University Grants
Commission (UGC) last month issued guidelines asking the universities to phase
out animal dissection in laboratories for experimentation purposes, and instead
promote the use of modern methods.
The Hindu. 10 Dec
University of
Michigan Ends "Cruel" Cat Lab
After more than a year of campaigning by PETA and supporters, and a day after
the release of a shocking PETA exposé,
the University of Michigan announced that it has ended the use of
cats in its Survival Flight intubation training laboratory. More than 100,000
people, including Michigan natives Iggy Pop and Lily Tomlin, called on them to
replace crude and cruel live-animal experiments.
Rats starved to
death
The animal activist group Stop Animal Exploitation Now accused Princeton
University of allowing at least 10 laboratory rats to die of starvation.
According to the account by an anonymous former laboratory employee, the rats
were not given food or water in what was perhaps a miscommunication between
animal staff and research staff.
Where
Vivisectors Commit Their Crimes
Subsequent to winning our lawsuit against the University of Florida on Dec 30,
2011, we are now in possession of thousands of veterinary records documenting
the horrors to which non-human primates are subjected within this institution.
We have definitive proof that monkeys have been locked away in their underground
dungeons, in some cases for decades, in cages the size of a dishwasher.
They’ve been captured from their homes in the wild or bought from the likes of
Charles River and Alpha Genesis. All have been tormented relentlessly. Many have
died at the gloved hands of their terrorists. On Fri Jan 13 (and continuing
throughout 2012), we will begin to make these veterinary records public. We have
already begun to disseminate them privately to students, activists, and the
media. The veterinary records document how monkeys are consistently “knocked
down” with Ketamine and other controlled substances to be transported
from their “holding cages” to “experimental cages” within the
“Communicore Building (CB).” www.negotiationisover.net/2012/01/08/leaked-documents-floor-plans-of-uf-labs-document-where-vivisectors-commit-their-crimes/
Novo
Nordisk stops quality testing use of animals
zx` As of 28th Nov Novo Nordisk will no longer use
living animals to test the quality of the batches of medicine coming out of
production lines. These tests have for years been required by health authorities
as part of their approval of the products. “……..We have been working for
more than a decade, in close collaboration with regulatory authorities around
the world, to eliminate obsolete tests or develop and certify new laboratory
assays that can be used instead of animals to evaluate the consistent quality of
our marketed products,” says Exec Vice President and Chief Science Officer,
Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen. Novo Nordisk has a commitment to the 3R principles to
'Reduce', 'Refine' or 'Replace' the use of animal testing within the
pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, a task force was established more than 10
years ago with the ambitious aim to eliminate all redundant product control
tests in living animals or replace them with other test methods that would
guarantee the same product safety. Live animals that have been used in these
biological product control tests include mice, rats, guinea pigs, hamsters and
rabbits. Over the years, the number of animals used in this area has been
gradually reduced from more than 13,000 animals a year in the 90s, to 2,078
animals in 2000 and to 772 animals in 2010. The last living animals were used
for a virus control on 28 Nov, and in 2012 the number of biological product
control tests performed on living animals will be zero.
University
of Manchester
is building a new cancer research centre. The
university said that work in new building will focus entirely on early cancer
research that does not involve patients or patient treatment and will involve no
animal testing. We’re clearly getting through at last.
An
anti-vivisection doctor
(radiologist) and his entire staff now wear T-shirts at his practice
in Karlstadt with the slogans "Stop animal experiments" and
"Animal experiments? No thanks!" If only more medics had the
courage to do likewise!
Marshall
Farms Company Update
Marshall Bioscience farms - the US company proposing to build an intensive
breeding unit in E. Yorkshire for 2,000 beagles for laboratory experiments -
have a similar breeding unit operating in Montichiari Italy called Green Hill.
Green Hill has recently been raided by police and an Italian TV station who was
given exclusive coverage rights, documented severe breaches of welfare
legislation. This included freezers full of dead dogs in bin bags with no
paperwork, appalling conditions including faeces-covered cage floors with piles
of huddled dead and dying puppies. Following the raid and TV coverage the Mayor
of Montichiari has ordered the temporary closure of Green Hill farm. It's not
known when they will be permitted to re-open. The company have previously been
found to be breaching welfare legislation at their New York site, all of which
demonstrates the company's discredited reputation. In the UK the company's
appeal against the local E. Yorkshire Council's rejection of their planning
application to build the huge mega breeding site in Grimston is now being
considered by Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Govt.
This latest development adds to the existing arguments based on planning and
ethics, against allowing this company's proposal in E. Yorkshire. Please
write to your MP urging him/her to write to Eric Pickles and the Home Office to
reject the E. Yorkshire intensive beagle breeding site proposal by US company
Marshall Bioscience Farms AND please
also contact Eric Pickles. The Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for
Communities & Local Government, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA. Email:
eric.pickles@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Universities
will be forced to reveal details
of controversial research, including testing on monkeys, after a tribunal ruling
made it harder for them to claim exemption from Freedom of Information requests.
Newcastle University had argued that responding to requests could endanger the
safety of scientists or harm its commercial interests. But a landmark ruling by
the Information Tribunal found in favour of the British Union for the Abolition
of Vivisection (BUAV) in its 3-year battle against the university, insisting it
hand over details of Home Office licences to conduct experiments on primates.
The charity claimed the lead researcher had been refused permission by the
authorities in Germany to carry out the invasive brain techniques, which
involved restraining macaques and limiting their water supply. It also said that
no human benefit had emerged from the trials. Campaigners believe the decision
could have implications for Britain's university sector and it follows calls by
Sir Paul Nurse, the President of the Royal Society, for the FOI Act to be
reviewed. Sir Paul told The Independent that the legislation was being used as
an aggressive "tool of intimidation" against researchers engaged in
high- profile studies on climate change, tobacco or using laboratory animals.
The University of Newcastle, which has already spent £230,000 opposing the
applications from BUAV, is now expected to go to the Court of Appeal, where it
will argue the licences are exempt under the Animal Scientific Procedures Act.
The tribunal concluded that a recent decline in animal rights violence meant
researchers were unlikely to become targets for extremists. It added:
"Refusal to communicate with the public carries its own risks... creating
the impression there is something to hide." It said assertions that
disclosing details of the licences might prejudice commercial interests were
"borderline". The tribunal, which agreed to make minor redactions from
the licences, concluded: "It is not in dispute that the public has a
legitimate interest in knowing what is going on by way of animal research and
the extent to which regulatory functions are being properly discharged."
Michelle Thew, chief executive of BUAV, was delighted by the ruling. "These
are controversial and invasive experiments carried out on monkeys at a public
institution. The public has a right to know what is happening to these poor
animals and why," she said. A spokesperson for Newcastle University said:
"The university carries out a small amount of scientific work on primates
where no alternative for the research exists and this is fully regulated by the
Home Office." Independent 16th
Nov
A
protest took place calling for the University of Leeds
to stop carrying out "lethal experiments" on dogs. Animal Aid said 100
dogs had died since 1988 during experiments co-funded by the British Heart
Foundation (BHF). Protesters said tests were "medically irrelevant"
and have called on people to withhold donations to the charity. The university
and the BHF said animals were used only when there was no alternative. Andrew
Tyler, director of Animal Aid, said the experiments were "unproductive and
cruel". He said: "There
are many ways of doing research that all kinds of sane people would support -
productive methods of research that rely on human-relevant procedures such as
the use of human tissues and organ computer modelling." Mr
Tyler said people were being asked to withhold donations to the BHF to try to
encourage the charity to stop funding the experiments. He said: "We're not
going to cripple the organisation. What we're seeking to do is alert them to the
fact that what they are supporting is not useful to people and that there are
other ways of going about it."
Fusing
liver and lung cells to create “micro-lungs” the
size of a baby’s fingernail could eventually eliminate the need for animal
testing, scientists have claimed. Research from Cardiff University’s School of
Biosciences has pioneered a process of combining cells taken from human “waste
tissue” donated by people when they die. Cell
biologist Dr Kelly BéruBé, who led the project, said the potential for the
applicability of the Metabo-Lung could be worth “billions of pounds”. The
development work now under way at Cardiff University could offer a genuine
alternative to animal testing for pharmaceutical companies developing new drugs
for pulmonary disorders such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
and cystic fibrosis. More people die in the UK from respiratory disease than
from coronary heart disease or non-respiratory cancer – and researchers claim
that there have been few treatments produced for respiratory conditions in the
past 25 years. And Dr BéruBé said testing in animals had proven to have a
“high error rate” in indicating the efficacy of drugs treating lung
conditions. “Before I took over my own lab, back in 1995 or so, we used
animals in tests and it was OK then to do that,” she said. “But by the time
the mid-2000s came around, the environment had changed and the EU started to put
laws in place saying that testing on animals would be outlawed.” She said
massive pharmaceutical companies then started looking at alternatives to animals
for testing. Sure focuses the mind! Wales
online 21st Nov
US
chimp research propaganda
The National Institutes of Health wants you to believe that chimpanzee
experimentation is necessary. It so badly wants you to believe this that the
agency began to use your tax dollars to fund a propaganda campaign for
"educating the public" regarding the "importance of chimpanzees
in biomedical research." Why is
the NIH seemingly so desperate? Perhaps because the concept of ending this
morally and scientifically bankrupt practice has become so mainstream, on so
many fronts - scientific, political, ethical, financial - that on Sept. 28,
Scientific American, the most prestigious general interest science magazine in
the world, called for a ban, explaining, "Why it is time to end invasive
biomedical research on chimpanzees." One of the major reasons for its call
for the ban was the groundbreaking McClatchy Newspapers special report
"Chimps: Life in the Lab," published last April. This special report
was based on McClatchy's independent review of thousands of pages of chimpanzee
medical records. Scientific American noted that the special report's review of
these records and the details of experiments "painted a grim picture of
life in the lab, noting disturbing psychological responses in the chimps."
The NIH's use of tax dollars to fund the abuse of chimpanzees, as documented in
McClatchy's special report, is especially timely. Congress has created a Joint
Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to produce a plan by November 23 to reduce
our debt by at least $1.2 trillion over 10 years. The NIH spends more than $30m
annually on chimpanzee experimentation; ending it would save more than $300m. It
would also be completely consistent with the emerging scientific, political and
ethical consensus elucidated by Scientific American: "The time has come to
end biomedical experimentation on chimpanzees." But the NIH seems stuck in
a different time - circa 1970s, when the current chief of hepatitis research at
the NIH, Dr. Robert Purcell, began experimenting on chimpanzees, as did his
counterpart at the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Stephen Feinstone. On Aug.
11, a public workshop was convened by the National Academy of Science's
Institute of Medicine Chimpanzee Committee, which was commissioned by the NIH to
determine if chimpanzees are "necessary" for biomedical research. Dr.
Purcell, who personifies the anachronistic mind-set of the NIH, the agency
pushing the chimpanzee "model," referred to chimpanzees as
"it" - things, furry test tubes - in his presentation to the
committee. In stark contrast, at the
same workshop, the director of HCV Biology for GlaxoSmithKline, the programme
officer for research and development at the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative, and
the director for drug safety assessment at Genentech testified that chimpanzees
are not needed for development of cutting-edge therapies such as monoclonal
antibodies and vaccines for diseases such as malaria. GSK stopped using
chimpanzees in 2008. Genentech has also stopped, and told the committee that its
informal poll of "6 or 8" other biotech firms found that they, too,
did not use chimpanzees. Even the FDA - which produced a letter supporting the
NIH's propaganda campaign - does not require chimpanzee data to approve vaccines
or therapies. In September, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that a
petition requesting that captive chimpanzees be classified as
"endangered" - which would effectively end chimpanzee experimentation
- presented "substantial" evidence that such a reclassification may be
warranted, and initiated a review of the classification that includes a call for
public comments by Jan. 31, 2012. On the political front, the bipartisan Great
Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act of 2011 currently has 106 co-sponsors in the
House, while the EU banned chimpanzee experiments last year. The US is the only
country in the world that currently allows large-scale chimpanzee
experimentation. The
Sacramento Bee 22nd Nov
A
group that opposes laboratory research
on animals filed a complaint with federal regulators alleging mistreatment of
monkeys at a drug development company's facility in Alice. The group, Stop
Animal Exploitation Now, cited records from the University of California in San
Francisco showing that primates shipped from the facility arrived with injuries
including muscle wasting, missing fingers and damaged ears. Covance, the global
drug development service company that owns the facility, responded with a
prepared statement saying its U.S. facilities have undergone more than 40
unannounced federal inspections in 4 years with few instances of non-compliance.
The U.S. Dept of Agriculture is the federal agency that inspects animal
facilities. "In the few instances where the USDA report cited areas where
they found concerns, Covance has taken all necessary steps to assure that the
issues identified by the USDA were thoroughly addressed and resolved," the
statement said. Michael Budkie, director of the watchdog group, said the federal
Animal Welfare Act prohibits transporting animals for commerce that are
obviously sick or injured. Of 31 animals cited in the university records, 19 had
injuries, Budkie said. One of the reports involved a monkey that showed signs of
self-injury so severe that it had to be euthanized within 24 hours of arrival at
the university laboratory. Budkie filed his complaint with the USDA. Agency
spokesman Dave Sacks had not seen the complaint but said the agency usually
sends inspectors to facilities in response to such complaints.
Monkey
abuse in US lab
Where do laboratory workers turn when their repeated pleas to supervisors to
stop the abuse of animals in the company's laboratory are ignored? A distraught
whistleblower from Shin Nippon Biomedical Laboratories (SNBL), a notorious
Everett, Washington-based animal testing conglomerate, recently contacted PETA
to reveal shocking allegations of mistreatment of animals used in painful and
lethal experiments. The
whistleblower shared photos and videos taken inside SNBL showing sick,
traumatized monkeys suffering horribly from tests in which they were injected
with experimental chemicals. Monkeys tethered to their cages shivered
uncontrollably as an ice-cold solution was continuously dripped into their
veins. Other monkeys endured the pain of severely bruised arms, swollen eyes,
and broken fingers and tails, resulting from violent and sometimes sadistic
handling by callous workers. PETA has filed a complaint with the U.S. Dept of
Agriculture urging it to investigate these disturbing allegations and issue
fines for any violations that it uncovers. In addition to conducting cruel tests
on dogs, monkeys, mice, rabbits, and other animals, SNBL also imports thousands
of monkeys each year into the U.S. for its own use and to sell to other
laboratories. These monkeys are transported to the U.S. in the dark and
terrifying cargo holds of planes, often on passenger flights just below
unsuspecting customers. While most major airlines refuse to take part in the
violent primate trade, an increasingly small group of airlines continues to
profit from animals' misery by transporting monkeys destined for U.S.
laboratories. Please
take a few moments to urge airlines that still transport monkeys to U.S. labs,
including SNBL, to adopt a formal policy against the transportation of nonhuman
primates for use in experiments. Go to: http://tinyurl.com/blztyfh
The
largest primate research facility in the US
has been accused of breeding chimpanzees in violation of government rules, and
possibly the law. At the heart of the case is whether the New Iberia Research
Centre systematically broke National Institutes of Health rules while breeding
chimpanzees, or simply made a few mistakes. Some of the chimpanzees are owned
privately by companies or universities, and others are government owned. While
the National Institutes of Health permits New Iberia to breed privately owned
chimpanzees, which is how it satisfies its own need for new research chimps,
they’ve banned federally owned chimp breeding since 1995. New Iberia receives
approximately $1m annually from the National Center for Research Resources, the
branch of the NIH that oversees chimpanzees, to maintain its chimp colony.
Respecting the ban is a condition of the grant. Should New Iberia be found to
have engaged in large-scale chimp breeding in violation of the ban, the
implications could be dramatic. The Humane Society has asked the Dept of Justice
to pursue New Iberia for fraudulent use of federal money, and wants the Dept of
Health and Human Services to cease funding the laboratory. Either of those
outcomes would represent a major blow to ongoing medical experiments on
chimpanzees in the US, which is the only country other than Gabon to permit such
research. Long a controversial practice, it’s become a mainstream issue in the
last year, with many scientists joining activists in saying that suffering
inflicted on chimpanzees in research is morally unconscionable. New Iberia is
the flagship of U.S. chimp research. If it sinks, the fleet may follow. For the
immediate future, the Humane Society has asked that New Iberia retire all
chimpanzees born in violation of the federal ban to sanctuaries. If the infants
are 5 years old or younger, the Humane Society asks that their mothers be sent
with them. Wired Science 14th Nov
A
man underwent a hunger strike
in protest against Government plans that could lead to animal suffering.
22-year-old Edmund Maile began his strike on Saturday to highlight
changes to animal rights laws which could come into force in 2013. He stood
outside the Senate House, King’s Parade, and only drank water. Mr Maile handed
out postcards to send to David Cameron condemning the new EU directive which
would see Britain’s laws on the treatment of animals in laboratories fall in
line with the rest of Europe. This directive could dismantle Britain’s current
laws, replacing them with lower
levels of protection. This means animals may be exposed to long-lasting
suffering, severe pain or inhumane methods of killing. Mr Maile said: “If that
is what it takes to get people’s attention then that is what I will do. “I
have been getting huge amounts of support but it will only be a success if the
legislation is not passed.” Despite suffering heckling and abuse on the city
streets, he had the support of Animal Rights Cambridge. Sue Hughes, a member of
this group, said: “People have been going to check on him on a regular basis
to support him…he wants to inform the public about what is going on.”
The
RSPCA has also announced its opposition to
any weakening of British laws. Head of the RSPCA’s research animals
department, Dr Maggy Jennings, said: “Successive governments have made proud
claims that the UK has the highest standards in the world for animal research
and testing.’” She calls the possibility that this legislation could be
weakened as “unacceptable.” Changes to laws about the treatment of animals
in laboratories are particularly relevant to Cambridge, since the University
uses animals for some of its research. A Freedom of Information Act revealed
last year that 117,212 experiments involving animals were conducted in 2009 in
University laboratories. Responding to a fresh outbreak of criticism, a
University spokeswoman said: “Without animal research, which is only used when
there is no alternative, many treatments we take for granted today would not be
possible.” Varsity
18th Nov Same
old mantra from the abusers
Supplier
Samedan Ltd stops dealing with HLS
Today, after the start of protests outside their offices last Friday, we have
received a statement from Samedan Ltd confirming that they will not have any
more dealings with HLS, either directly, or indirectly. We thank Samedan
Ltd for making the right choice to stop being involved with HLS and also thank
all campaigners who have contacted Samedan Ltd. Gulia Selby, Samedan's MD
has stated: "Following our previous statement dated 14 Nov 2011; we can
confirm Samedan Ltd and all our publications have severed all links with HLS and
terminated all contract with HLS, and we will not he dealing with them now or in
the future either directly or indirectly". Please continue to politely
contact and protest against the other remaining 'new' suppliers listed at: http://shac.net/2011supplierleak/index.html
and ask them to follow the 4 recent suppliers that have dumped HLS!
Why not get involved in upcoming action weeks? See: www.shac.net/action/diary_dates.html#action
21st Nov
Articulture
Landscaping LTD – Stops working for HLS
Articulture Landscaping were caught out doing tree work for Huntingdon Life
Sciences. After a flood of emails
and calls from
supporters during Sunday evening and Monday morning to their offices they first
stated that: "It was a one off job and they were pulling off site on
Monday. SHAC has now received a signed statement from them confirming that they
will not have any more dealings with HLS, either directly, or indirectly. 30th
Nov
Billy
Bowie also pulls out
Billy Bowie tankers were seen inside HLS which is why they were listed recently.
On 20th Oct Billy Bowie's general manager, Alisdair Clark contacted
the campaign. After further emails and phone calls, Billy Bowie have now given
SHAC a statement to say that they have changed their Self Drive hire policy so
that their vehicles can not be used at either HLS locations. They have also
confirmed that they will not deal with HLS, directly or indirectly in the
future. We thank Billy Bowie for making the right choice and thank everyone who
contacted them.
UW
fined in primate death
The University of Washington confirms it was fined $10,893 this year by the U.S.
Dept of Agriculture after a primate died during laboratory research in 2009. The
fine was uncovered by the group Stop Animal Exploitation NOW!, which filed a
federal records request of the UW's primate research practices. Michael Budkie,
a spokesman for the group, said the reports show that 3 primates under the UW's
care died - one from starvation, and 2 from infections of head implants. But UW
spokeswoman Tina Mankowski said she knew of only one primate death, in 2009,
which was reported to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Animal
Welfare. Budkie said between 5 and 10 research labs are fined each year.
"The fact that they take any kind of enforcement action at all is
unusual," he said. The animal-rights group estimates that there are 125,000
primates kept in U.S. laboratories, and the NIH awards grants of about $1.5
billion a year for labs to use primates in research. In 2008, the UW had to
return $20,000 in federal research grant money after a finding that it had
allowed unauthorized surgeries on primates. Inspectors found serious
deficiencies in animal-care facilities in 2006 and put the UW on probation.
Since then, however, the UW has spent millions to upgrade animal-care facilities
and is now fully accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation
of Laboratory Animal Care. Seattle
Times. 18 Oct
Another
2 Canadian universities
have agreed to stop using live animals in trauma-medicine training courses,
marking the end of the practice completely in Canada, according to the
doctor-led animal-rights group that has lobbied for the controversial change.
Doctors and other trauma trainees at Quebec’s University of Sherbrooke and
Sacré Coeur hospital in Montreal have begun practising on human-like,
computerized simulators instead of pigs or dogs.
Blinkered
animal testers challenged
Safer Medicines Trust joined forces with 22 senior scientists to call on the
Prime Minister and Health Secretary to compare animal tests for drug safety with
newer tests based on human biology. Their letter was published in The Lancet on
4th June. Predictably, the pro-animal-research lobby attacked the
letter with a response published in The Lancet on 9th July. In it
they stated, amongst other things, “animals are crucial for understanding
their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and for detecting unforeseen toxic
effects.” Safer Medicines Trust’s response
to such a false and ill-informed attack was published in The Lancet on
28th Oct. It stated: “Our letter called for the UK Government to
invest in an assessment of new technologies for safety testing. Balkwill and
colleagues take the position that not only should this research not be done, but
that even to question whether animal testing best assures pharmaceutical safety
means the questioner is opposed to all animal research and is therefore standing
in the way of progress towards new life-saving cures. Nothing could be further
from the truth. We are calling for a paradigm shift in which new models of
pharmaceutical safety testing are allowed to compete on their scientific merits
against old models. The only thing we have against animal testing is the
attitude that it is the only and the best technology for assessing safety. We
are in favour of whatever best assures safety. Therefore, we are in favour of
assessing which particular in-vivo or in-vitro tests are best. Animal research
is far more expensive and labour-intensive than in-vitro research. Since
pharmaceutical safety testing is regulated by the UK Government, the market
forces that would otherwise cause costly and inferior technologies to be
naturally supplanted by superior technologies are impaired. We call on the
Government to support research to assess the performance of new in-vitro and
other technologies relative to the old in-vivo technologies so that progress
towards safer and more economical new pharmaceuticals can be accelerated.”
A
US company that trains military medics
in field operations using live pigs is trying to bring its courses to Germany.
Animal rights group PETA believes the company is using US Army protection to
bypass German animal protection laws.
Deployment Medicine
International (DMI), which claims to be the biggest trainer of US military
forces in operational medicine, is trying to introduce courses for US soldiers
stationed in Thuringia. The company’s so-called “Trauma Training” courses
allegedly involve live pigs being given broken bones, punctured organs, and
bullet wounds under a general anaesthetic and then being operated on by
trainees. The animals are then euthanized while still asleep. PETA has long
campaigned against the practice in the US. However, Major Audrey Gboney-Leon,
spokeswoman for the US Army in Europe, told The Local this week: "We are
not currently conducting, nor do we plan to conduct, any such training in
Germany." DMI requested permission to carry out the experiments in Bavaria
last year. “But the requests were denied by state veterinary offices,” said
Christina Esch, a vet and PETA spokeswoman in Germany said. The firm is now
apparently looking for other possibilities in Thuringia, despite Germany’s
animal protection laws. DMI has already had one request denied by the Thuringian
consumer protection office, but is now appealing the decision in a regional
administrative court. DMI denies that its legal requests are being made at the
behest of the US Army. According to the company’s lawyer, Annette Steuber, DMI
trains doctors - including military medics – to carry out field operations in
conflict regions that lack medical infrastructure.
She added the training was necessary because injuries from explosives and
bullets are nothing like those sustained in civilian life, for instance in a
traffic accident. “The case is currently being processed,” a court spokesman
recently told the Hamburger Morgenpost newspaper. PETA scientific adviser
Edmund Haferbeck told The Local. “But there are territorial exceptions for US
army property. It’s a difficult legal area, but there are legal arguments that
say German animal protection laws aren’t valid on US army property.” PETA
says DMI killed nearly 15,000 pigs between 2001 and 2010 during military
training in the US. The animal rights group says the pigs have limbs removed,
holes cut into their chests and limbs, blood vessels severed, and are stabbed in
the heart. The German army does not use live animals in military training, which
was one of the reasons cited by the Bavarian court to deny the DMI request.
“The Bundeswehr does not carry out any animal experiments,” a Bundeswehr
officer was quoted in a PETA statement saying. “In training exercises,
soldiers are trained with very good models, and animal experiments are not
necessary.”
Animal
testing losing favour
The Netherlands is at the forefront of a global trend turning away from using
animals for scientific and commercial tests. Technological advances are making
animal testing less necessary and, at the same time, a vibrant animal rights
movement is mobilising public opinion. Recent developments
in the Netherlands underpin this trend. Major Dutch research centre TNO has
announced it will immediately cease testing on all species of primates. There
are currently about 1,600 primates used for testing in the Netherlands to
develop medicines to treat infectious and chronic diseases. Most of the animals
used are imported from China. A citizen’s initiative to ban testing on cats
and dogs recently got enough support to be presented in parliament. It was
ultimately rejected, but only on procedural grounds. Animals Rights Party
MP Esther Ouwehand was pleased with the initiative and is convinced the ban will
come eventually. In 2009, the last year for which data is available, about
600,000 animals were used for testing. That is less than half the level of 30
years ago. Public pressure has increased in the last few years. The Animal
Rights Party, the first political party in the world expressly founded to
represent the rights of animals, has become a stable and effective factor in
Dutch politics. Non-governmental organisations also enjoy popular support and
have proven effective lobbyists of both the government and the private sector.
The government strictly regulates animal testing and researchers are required to
reduce, refine or replace animal testing wherever they can. There have been a
number of animal rights incidents in which research facilities were targeted,
although attacks have decreased in the last 2 years. Economic considerations
increasingly play a role in decisions whether or not to use animals for testing.
Alternatives are less expensive and in some cases security measures add to the
cost of animal testing. The TNO annual report announcing the halt of testing on
primates cites economic factors as part of the motivation. In the light of these
developments, the Dutch government is looking into the value of alternatives to
animal testing as a potential new niche for the Dutch research and development
sector. The National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) has
also contributed to a decrease in animal testing worldwide. The RIVM set up a
website back in 2006 with physiological and anatomical data on people and
animals. A survey of users of the website recently showed that it has helped
them avoid 20,000 animal tests per year. Of course, public pressure against
animal testing and increasingly strict regulation have pushed many companies to
outsource testing to other parts of the world. Some business has gone to
Singapore and China, although figures are hard to come by. Beijing has become a
major player in biotechnology partly due to a permissive environment for animal
testing. China too is starting to embrace alternatives, in part because the
European Commission is considering a ban on data based on animal testing.
Dutch-based multinational Unilever held a conference in Shanghai last spring on
exploring alternative to animal testing. Aside from the testing facilities
in China itself, the country is also an exporter of primates for testing
elsewhere. This is also the case with Indonesia. While the EU has already banned
animal testing in the cosmetics industry and a ban on sales of cosmetics tested
on animals will take effect soon, China and countries in Latin American actually
require cosmetics to be tested on animals.
Propofol
tested on beagles for defence case
The shocking news that Dr. Conrad Murray's
defence team tested the drug Propofol on beagles to help with his case in the Michael
Jackson death trial has outraged PETA so much that they're calling for a
federal investigation, saying it would have caused "enormous suffering in
the animals." The defence team commissioned a study testing the effects of
the powerful anaesthetic to bolster their claim that Michael Jackson orally
overdosed on the drug. "I cannot imagine any use for this information at
all," PETA's Vice President of Laboratory Kathy
Guillermo said. "These tests cause enormous suffering in
animals." PETA filed a complaint with the U.S. Dept of Agriculture. PETA
asserts that if attorneys from Flanagan, Unger, Grover & McCool did
commission the tests for the drug propofol - the toxic effects of which have
been extensively studied in dogs and humans - those tests were likely conducted
in violation of the federal Animal Welfare Act's prohibition against tests on
animals that duplicate previous experiments. PETA has filed a complaint with the
State Bar of California as well. The animal rights organization is also
requesting that the California State Bar investigate "how and why these
cruel and archaic tests on beagles were allowed and, should violations of the
law be found, to punish those responsible." Whether or not the dogs died
during the tests that Dr. Murray's team conducted is unclear, but PETA says the
tests torture the innocent animals. "In toxicology tests, large doses of
chemicals are pumped into dogs' bodies, slowly poisoning them. Substantial data
is publicly available about the oral toxicity of propofol in dogs and other
animals, and propofol toxicity and propofol infusion syndrome have been
extensively studied in humans. PETA is calling on the USDA to also investigate
whether the tests reportedly commissioned by Dr. Murray's defence team were
conducted at a registered facility and whether they were properly reviewed and
approved by an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. “This was
obviously a cruel attempt to drag out this trial and confuse the jurors, adding
more victims to the death toll in this sad case." Guillermo added: "If
we find evidence that the testing occurred the USDA will cite the lab, but
nothing is going to bring the dogs back."
Wildlife
advocates are protesting a government plan to kill an undetermined number of
bison from Yellowstone National Park after scientists conduct a birth-control
experiment on the animals with an EPA-registered pesticide. Government officials
say the 7-year study by a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture seeks to
lessen the prevalence of brucellosis, a disease that can cause domestic cows to
abort, within the nation's last wild herd of pure-bred buffalo, or bison.
Protesters
target Air France KLM investors
On 3rd June
protesters targeted investors in Air France KLM in London, as the airline is
reportedly the largest transporter of animals for vivisection. Franklin
Templeton and Bank of New York were both targeted. The
protesters first hit up the offices of Franklin Templeton Investments based in
The Adelphi south of The Strand. A banner was unfurled in the lobby and after 15
minutes or so the protesters moved outside. A Flight Centre on the Strand was
also targeted, followed by Bank of New York at Canon St and at Canary Wharf.
Organised by the National Anti-Vivisection Alliance, London's protest was part
of a week of actions held globally against Air France KLM.
Monarch
Air Group transported
vervet monkeys from St. Kitts to Miami on June 2nd for Primate
Products, Inc., a Florida-based company with a record of shoddy animal care and
reckless decisions that have led to animal suffering. There have been a number
of serious incidents that suggest major problems at Primate Products. In July
2009, Primate Products dumped close to 100 owl monkeys that they could not sell
at a roadside zoo in Homestead, Florida. Within a week, at least 25 of the
monkeys were dead. In 2010, disturbing photographs surfaced of monkeys inside
Primate Products suffering from horrible wounds and crude surgical mutilations.
In April 2011, Primate Products was cited by the U.S. Dept of Agriculture for
leaving monkeys who were still under anaesthesia in an enclosure without
supervision, and in the hot sun. Each year, on the islands of St. Kitts &
Nevis and Barbados, hundreds of green (vervet) monkeys are torn from their
families and forest homes and either exported directly for biomedical research
or imprisoned on farms to produce offspring to be exported to laboratories in
the U.S. and around the world. Help the primates by contacting Monarch Air Group
and suggesting that they end their involvement in the cruel primate trade.
Attaching graphic photographs to the email is a good way to help them
understand exactly what we are talking about. Tim Eames - Director of Operations
Monarch Air Group Fort Lauderdale, FL Phone : 1-954-359-0059
1-877-359-6732 tim@monarchairgroup.com,
info@monarchairgroup.com, vic@monarchairgroup.com,
richard@monarchairgroup.com
Cardiologist
opposes animal research
Professor
Anne Keogh is currently Professor in Medicine and Senior Heart Transplant
Cardiologist at St Vincent’s Hospital and was President in 2000-2001 of the
International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation. She is vehemently
opposed to the use of animal models in heart research on both ethical and
scientific grounds. Read her
interview with Antidote Europe at: http://antidote-europe.org/interviews/anne-keogh-heart-specialist
Battle
won by BUAV
Animal
rights campaigners have won a legal battle against Newcastle University over
controversial animal testing data. The British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection (BUAV) launched action after a failed Freedom of Information (FoI)
request on experiments carried out at Newcastle University. The BUAV asked the
university’s medical research department for details on testing procedures and
welfare controls for tests on primates undertaken in 2008. Almost 21,000 animals
were used in medical experiments at the university that year, including Macaque
monkeys for examining new treatments for Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s
and spinal conditions. The BUAV claim the tests, which involved implanting
electrodes into the animals’ brains to record activity while they underwent
various tasks, were “highly invasive” and would have caused “a high level
of distress”. But university bosses rejected the FoI request, claiming the
institution itself did not hold the information requested and that sensitive
research programmes would be endangered if details were released before the work
was completed. They argued that research details remained the “intellectual
property” of individual scientists and not the university until work was
finished and published in UK medical journals. The Government’s FoI
Commissioner initially agreed with the university’s stance but BUAV leaders
appealed the decision. Last year the Information Tribunal in London found that
it would be “remarkable if the university did not hold important information
about extensive animal research carried out on its premises by its employees”.
Now the Upper Tribunal has upheld the ruling, meaning the university could be
forced to reveal the data. Michelle Thew, BUAV Chief Exec, said: “We are
delighted with this ruling. Once again, the courts have dismissed Newcastle’s
attempts to say they have no information about the thousands of animal
experiments taking place at the University.” She added: “The public has a
right to know what is happening to these poor animals.”
A
Newcastle University spokesperson said: “Newcastle University is currently
taking legal advice following the decision. “The studies carried out with
primates at the university aim to improve our fundamental understanding of how
the brain works, and to apply this knowledge to treating conditions such as
Parkinson’s disease and spinal cord injury. “The university carries out
research that involves the use of animals only when there are no alternatives.
Before any research is conducted on animals, the research proposals must be
approved by an ethical review committee, and then by the Home Office.” The
case will go back to Information Tribunal to decide whether 2 other exemptions
apply.
Sheep
die in decompression tests
Special
prosecutor in Wisconsin has declined to charge University of Wisconsin
researchers who animal rights groups accused
of breaking the law when sheep died undergoing experiments in a hyperbaric
chamber. Wisconsin law prohibits killing an animal using decompression methods.
The statute was aimed at animal shelters using decompression as a euthanasia
technique, a practice now widely considered inhumane because it’s painful. The
sheep were part of a Navy-funded study aimed at helping its divers by learning
more about decompression sickness, commonly called “the bends.” PETA and
another animal rights group tried to rally prosecutors to charge top university
officials with violating the animal decompression law after learning about the
deaths, which were not intentional. Several months ago, the Dane County District
Attorney concluded that the university violated the law but that pursuing the
violations “would not be a wise use of resources of this office,” he wrote
in a letter to university lawyers. PETA then seized on a little-invoked state
law to aid their case. The law allows citizens to petition a judge to order
prosecutions when there’s probable cause to believe a law has been violated
and when a district attorney has refused to issue a complaint. “It
is hard to imagine that the legislation was to prohibit veterinarians from
attempting life-saving procedures on animals,” special prosecutor, David
Geier’s report said. “It is as perhaps as implausible that the legislative
purpose was to prohibit experiments where the intent is not to kill the animal
by decompression.” Geier also noted, “this does not mean that the UW or the
individuals involved in decompression research…should receive a free pass”
noting that “it belies common sense that a research university, such as the
UW, does not have a consistent review of both state and federal laws and
regulations which apply to activties which take place on campus.” PETA’s
Kathy Guillermo, in an email, called the decision a victory regardless of the
outcome because the university ended the experiments. “We would have liked the
sheep to have their day in court, especially after the circuit court judge said
the university repeatedly violated the law,” she said. “No other sheep will
suffer the agonizing pain and death of decompression.”
SPEAK rally
& march for Fran
On Sat 21st May 80 people met up in Broad St, Oxford for a march and
rally to remember Fran, a dedicated SPEAK campaigner, who died last year, as
well as the countless animals who have died such lonely and agonising deaths at the hands of Oxford
University scientists.
People then set off, armed with banners, placards and leaflets to inform
the public about the suffering that goes on inside the lab. The march passed the University’s new animal lab, where people stopped
to lay a wreath and hold a minutes silence to quietly remember our friend Fran
and the thousands of animals killed by this institution. As the march progressed along Mansfield
Rd, the Oxford University security team was laying in wait. It was clear that
they were trying to goad those taking part, trying to get a reaction. However, oto
those of us used to the sneaky and underhand ways of Oxford University this came
as no surprise. After expressing our contempt to the security, the march carried
on its way. Throughout the event campaigners conducted themselves with both
dignity and passion. The march ended at Gloucester Green
where words were said by several of Fran's friends in celebration of her life. Throughout the duration of the march a
SPEAK information stall was manned, first on Broad St and then at Gloucester
Green, and much support was received from the public. As usual, many people were
genuinely shocked to find out about the barbaric and unnecessary experiments
carried out on living creatures in the University laboratories. Fran may no
longer be with us, but her passion to end all animal suffering lives on in all
those who continue the fight against animal cruelty.
Oxford
dealers in death
It
will surprise nobody to learn that the wars in
Afghanistan
and
Iraq
—so deadly to those who have suffered in them—have reaped enormous profits
for arms companies. What may come as a surprise is that many of the UK's
most respected universities - including Oxford - have also cashed in on these
wars. And
we expect them to care about primates!!!!
Animal
rights activists staged a protest in Cambridge city centre in a bid to urge shoppers
to dump cosmetic products made by Procter & Gamble (P&G) in favour of
“cruelty-free” companies. Members of Animal Rights Cambridge took part in
the 15th annual international Boycott Procter and Gamble Day by staging a
protest outside Boots in the city centre on Sat 14th May. But P&G stressed
it did not test cosmetic products on animals, and its research policy stated it
would only test on animals in “very rare cases”.
And
in Brighton 2
stalls were held on opposite sides of the busy London Road shopping area.
There were many very positive comments from the passing public about the
campaign.
IBC
cancel flight
A Fort
Lauderdale air charter company cancelled plans to fly a shipment of monkeys into
the USA for scientific research after a campaign by animal rights groups in
Florida and the UK. IBC Airways had planned to bring African green monkeys from
the Caribbean island of St. Kitts to Miami International Airport for delivery to
a research laboratory. But BUAV, which has investigated the trade for years,
received a tip about the shipment, notified its members and the Animal Rights
Foundation of Florida. The 2 groups organised a campaign of phone calls and
emails to the company to call it off, telling company officials that it was a
cruel business that inflicts suffering on sensitive animals. The company sent an
email to the groups saying it has cancelled the shipment and that it will join
the growing list of companies – including British Airways, Delta and several
other major airlines – that refuse to ship live primates for research.
Global
week of action against Air France-KLM
On Sat 21st May 3 activists dressed as air hostesses from the
airline company "Air Souffrance" braved the draconian security
surveillance systems of Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris to inform the
passengers at Terminal 2 about the transport of laboratory animals by Air
France. 1,000 leaflets were
distributed to travellers, the majority in front of the Air France ticket
office. The leaflets were written in French and in English to ensure the message
was relayed effectively. The full report and pictures of the action can be found
here: www.airsouffrance.fr/en/20110521_air-france_cdg.html
Major
new expose of Air France-KLM
Footage
of a shipment of 120 long-tailed macaques being loaded on to an Air France
flight has been released by the BUAV. On their website they state that the
flight took place on May 12 and that the monkeys were transported from Vietnam
to Covance in the USA. Fortunately, the Air France Cargo shipment number is
clearly visible in the video, and by using this we have been able to trace the
monkeys' journey from Vietnam to the USA in minute detail. We can now
confirm that the monkeys were transported from Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, via
Paris, to Chicago in the USA. They were transported between May 11th
- 13th, and that they travelled on both an Air France passenger plane
and an Air France-KLM Cargo plane during their journey to hell!
According to records seen by Air Souffrance; the shipment of monkeys,
weighing 896Kgs, was originally booked on the 29th April, and the
monkeys were delivered to the Air France-KLM Cargo handlers at Ho Chi Minh
airport at 07:12 GMT on May 11th by an unknown cargo shipper. They
were then flown to Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, (CDG), on Air France
passenger flight AF153 from Ho Chi Minh, which left at 11:23 GMT on May 11th
and arrived at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport at 03:40 GMT on May 12th.
During this flight the monkeys were literally travelling underneath the feet of
Air France's human passengers! The monkeys remained in Paris for an 8 hour
"rest stop" and veterinary checks, until they left Paris CDG at 12:24
GMT on Air France-KLM Cargo flight AF6802 destined for Chicago O'Hare
International airport, where they arrived at 21:05 GMT on May 12th.
Finally the monkeys were collected at Chicago by a representative of Covance
Research Products at 03:24 GMT on May 13th. They will then have been
transported for at least another 2 hours by road to Covance's research facility
in Madison, Wisconsin. It is not
known how long the monkeys' journey from the farm to the airport in Vietnam was,
nor how long they spent loaded in their crates prior to departure, but they
can't have arrived at Covance earlier than 05:30 GMT on May 13th and
therefore, when we include their road journey in Vietnam, they must have been in
those transit crates for at least 48 hours! Studies carried out by scientists
have shown that transportation causes profound negative and lasting effects on
the welfare of primates. The long-tailed macaque in particular has been
identified as a species unsuited to transport, yet Air France-KLM continues to
transport thousands of them to research labs each year. The BUAV claim to have
evidence of one primate from Vietnam being found dead in Paris, and
another that had been transported from Mauritius being found dead on arrival,
but they don't specify which airlines were involved. It is still not known who
supplied the monkeys, however it's likely that they were supplied by Nafovanny,
(the largest captive-breeding primate facility in the world with at least 30,000
primates on site). The British Animal Scientific Procedures Inspectorate, (the
same inspectors who regularly ignore shocking animal abuse in British labs),
visited Nafovanny in March 2005 and identified "shortcomings in animal
accommodation and care". Undercover investigators from the BUAV also filmed
shocking conditions at Nafovanny in 2006. To view the recent footage of the
monkeys and to read the details of the expose, please visit: www.airsouffrance.fr/en/air-france/20110519_primate-flights.html
Dublin
Uni outed
An
almost half page 'Exclusive' by the Irish
Daily Mirror into animal experiments at the University
College Dublin which has been outed for spending €240,000 on animal
experiments including mice, rats and frogs. Dogs are also used in Irish
experiments which most people would not be aware of. In the article, ARAN
called on universities across Ireland to abandon their outdate use of animals in
experiments and called for more modern, sophisticated and reliable research that
does not involve any animals.
Rabbit
Farm Plans in Nottinghamshire withdrawn
Planning
applications for 2 large rabbit farms in Notts have been withdrawn. Philip
Kerry, of Grantham-based T & S Nurseries, wanted to build 2 rabbit-breeding
farms in E. Bridgford and Granby. Some local residents and campaign groups Viva!
and PETA opposed the plans, with the latter sending 1,600 letters of objection
to Rushcliffe Borough Council. Writer Richard Adams, author of childhood
favourite Watership Down, also backed campaigners opposing the plans. Now Mr
Kerry has withdrawn his plans, which would have seen 3 poly-tunnels, a barn for
breeding and an access track built. He also wanted to set up an agricultural
barn for breeding of rabbits in a field off Barnstone Lane, Granby. A spokesman
for PETA said: "The proposed farms would have been the first rabbit factory
farms in the UK in 15 years and would each have housed up to 1,100 rabbits in
wire cages stacked 3 high inside windowless barns. "This kind of unnatural
environment – which provides no fresh air or sunlight – can cause extremely
painful bone disorders and foot inflammation and lead stressed animals to resort
to neurotic, self-destructive behaviour."
The
European Coalition to End Animal Experiments (ECEAE), a coalition of key animal
protection groups across the EU, has warmly welcomed a statement by the Swedish
Government opposing a delay to a ban on the marketing of animal tested
cosmetics. At an ECEAE meeting in London, ECEAE Chief Executive Michelle Thew
said, "We are delighted to receive the support of the Swedish Government.
Animal testing for cosmetic purposes is an issue of strong public interest
across the EU." Cecilia Mille,
International Affairs Manager at Animal Rights Sweden said, "We are very
happy that the Swedish Government is taking a lead with this ethical stance. Our
colleagues from other European countries tell us they expect many other
governments will be supporting Sweden's position." There has been a ban on
conducting animal tests for cosmetics in the EU since 2009. However, cosmetics
tested on animals outside the EU can still be sold. A sales ban that would
prevent this is due to come into effect in 2013, but this could now be delayed
by up to ten years. If that happens, hundreds of thousands of animals will
continue to die in cruel cosmetics tests for beauty products sold in the EU. The
Swedish government is convinced that the 2013 ban should remain as an incentive
to develop alternative methods.
P&O
Ban Lab Animal Shipments
Intense
campaigning has led to the transport of laboratory animals through Britain's
airports coming to a significant standstill. As such, the vivisection industry
has reverted to shipping animals by ferry and are looking at the Port of Dover
as the solution. NAVA has obtained sufficient evidence showing that large
shipments of laboratory animals, including primates and beagle dogs, are being
transported through Dover on a weekly basis. One such shipment was an
export of dogs from Harlan in Belton for a Dutch research organisation. Primates
are also imported following transportation from Charles de Gaulle Airport
in Paris and beagles from a number of European breeding establishments.
Shipments were made onboard passenger ferries belonging to P&O Ferries and
we contacted their executive team with details. We received a full statement
from P&O Ferries placing an embargo on the transport of laboratory animals: "Thank
you for alerting us to this matter and your concerns. You may be aware
that we already have a long standing ban on the carriage of livestock that is
destined for slaughter or fattening prior to slaughter, and also on the carriage
of primates for research. It would be inconsistent not to extend this
policy to a ban on the carriage of any animals destined for research.
Accordingly this company has decided that it will not knowingly accept such
consignments, with immediate effect. Communications department P&O
Ferries Ltd" With
airlines and now ferry companies rejecting the transportation of animals for
laboratories and related breeding, we call upon the research industry to get in
line with the times and public concerns and end vivisection.
Tell
DFDS to do the same
DFDS
Seaways are a Denmark-based company who own 2 of the ferry fleets sailing out of
Dover. They have a policy of not being involved in transporting animals for
slaughter abroad - please ask them to extend this to laboratory animals. You
stopped P&O within 4 hours, now it's time to do the same with DFDS.
Head Office: DFDS A/S Sundkrogsgade 11 DK-2100 Copenhagen Tel: +45 3342
3342 Fax: +45 3342 334 incoming@dfdsseaways.dk,
sales.uk@dfds.com
Dover Office: Norfolk House, Eastern Docks, Dover, Kent CT16 1JA Tel: +44
1304 218400 Fax: +44 1304 218420 dover.freightbookings@dfds.com
Management: Torben Carlsen (CFO) torben.carlsen@dfds.com
Eddie Green (EVP - Logistics Division) eddie.green@dfds.com
John Crummie (MD - UK Operations) john.crummie@dfds.co.uk
PA - Tel: 0191 293 6225 // debra.mcknight@dfds.com
Søren Brøndholt Nielsen (Director - Investor Relations & Corporate
Planning) Phone: +45 3342 3342 Direct: +45 3342 3359 Mobile: +45 2944 2858 sbn@dfds.com
The
Cockburn Veterinary Group are
a small practive in Leicestershire. They were leaked to NAVA as the company who
regularly visit Harlan's beagle units and act as their veterinary surgeons. On
the CVS website they list clients who have used their services and many of their
staff are involved in rescuing animals, fundraising for animal charities and
similar work to benefit animals. Please politely contact them and let them about
the dogs Harlan breed for vivisection. Remember that they are also involved in
saving animals' lives so remain informative: Cockburn Veterinary Group, 100
London Rd, Coalville, Leicestershire LE67 3JD Tel: 01530 836654 www.vetscoalville.co.uk
info@vetscoalville.co.uk, cockburn@vetscoalville.co.uk
Rough
start for Florida conference
A
message was sent this morning to Primate Products and Scripps Biotech at a
remote primate testing and breeding facility in Hendry County…
A road blockade appeared earlier this
morning, obstructing potential participants in an animal testing conference
scheduled this week in a remote location near the rural town of Immokalee. The
blockade consisted of large debris, including tires, tree stumps, concrete block
and pallets, interwoven with chain and cable, covered in tar which obstructed
the entrance way to the laboratory facilities owned by Primate Products. A
message left on a banner, read “Stop Primate Torture” and a sign was painted
“Go Vivisect in Hell.” According
to the programme for the primate research conference, this week’s activities
include trainings on “behaviour modification” for primates, to make them
into “willing workers” in scientific studies where they are tortured through
animal testing practices including forcing diseases and drug overdoses, sensory
deprivation and unnecessary biomedical procedures. The event also boasts classes
on how to convince facilities to “buy in” on animal research. The Pdf with
details on the conference can be viewed on Primate Products website, www.primateproducts.com
Several participants in this conference have been the target of animal
rights advocates around the world, due to their records of profit-driven abuse
and mistreatment of animals, including non-human primates, the closest known
genetic relatives to human beings. A
messages was also left for Scripps Biotech.
“If Scripps Biotech moves forward with plans to expand their laboratory
facilities, using $579m in public money, for vivisection and genetic engineering
in Palm Beach County, they will become one of the largest animal testing
facilities in the southern United States.”
Stephen
Fry Speaks Out Against Animal Testing
British
actor Stephen Fry is urging fans to sign a petition in favour of a ban on animal
testing for cosmetics sold in Europe. EU
officials plan to introduce legislation outlawing the sale of products tested on
laboratory animals in 2013, but critics fear the ban could be pushed back by 10
years. Fry is backing a petition drawn up by animal rights campaigners urging
politicians not to delay the move and he has asked his fans to pledge their
support too.
California
High School Bans Dissections
In a
win for animal rights activists, foregoing the formaldehyde-laced high school
rite of passage, Rancho Verde High School in Moreno Valley, California will swap
real frogs for their virtual counterparts. In exchange for a minimum 5-year
commitment, the school will receive free software courtesy of animal-rights
groups who advocate for the virtual curriculum.
No
pigs for trauma training
An
animal rights organisation is congratulating Vanderbilt University for no longer
using pigs in trauma training. Medical teaching institutions are replacing live
animals with human simulators, such as TraumaMan, for physicians to learn the
lifesaving procedures. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, or
PCRM, learned that Vanderbilt had stopped the practice when surgery professor
Dr. Richard S. Miller responded to an email in April.
Adverse
drug reaction & animal testing
Scientists
have written to the Prime Minister and Health Secretary Andrew Lansley
expressing their concern about drug failures and adverse drug reactions. More
than 10,000 people die every year from bad reactions to prescribed treatments
and scientists are calling for a fresh approach. The experts believe adverse
drug reaction has reach "epidemic proportions" amid rising costs in
prescriptions. Drug testing on animals before they are used on humans is being
partly blamed. The letter claims many increasingly prevalent ailments, like
Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, cancers and stroke, remain without adequate
treatment. An important factor contributing to these problems is the
over-reliance of the pharmaceutical industry on the use of animals to predict
drug behaviour in humans. The letter, published in the Lancet, adds studies have
shown animal tests frequently fail to translate to the clinic. Scientist Tony
Dexter, who runs a research lab in Cheshire and is a signatory, said: "A
fundamental problem is that a rat is not a human. "They are different
sizes, have different metabolisms and have different diets, so using animals to
predict effects on humans is difficult. "50% of compounds that prove to be
safe in rats prove not to be safe in humans, so it really is the toss of a
coin." The experts are now calling for the use of more human biology-based
experiments where chemicals are tested on human cells to see how people might be
affected by new treatment. The annual costs of treating patients who have had
bad reactions to their treatment is around £2bn a year. It is believed millions
of deaths could be prevented with the use of new technology available. Some 148
members of parliament have signed a motion is support of the proposals. A
spokesman from the regulatory body Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory
Agency said: "The use of non-animal testing has been extended wherever
possible and the MHRA will continue to encourage this approach. "It is very
important to recognise that at present there are no laboratory methods available
to totally replace animal testing of medicines." In 2008, the European
Commission estimated adverse reactions to treatment kill almost 200,000 EU
citizens annually at a cost €79 billion. The news comes at a time when costs
of new medicines are rising creating an ever-increasing burden on the NHS.
BOOK
- The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments
Are
animal experiments justified? A book just published by Palgrave Macmillan
sheds new light on one of the greatest controversies in animal ethics.
Few ethical issues create as much controversy as invasive experiments on
animals. Some scientists claim they are essential for combating major human
diseases or detecting human toxins. Others claim the contrary, backed by
thousands of patients harmed by pharmaceuticals developed using animal tests.
Some claim all experiments are conducted humanely, to high scientific standards.
Yet a wealth of studies has recently revealed that laboratory animals suffer
significant stress, which may distort experimental results.
Where, then, does the truth lie? How useful are such experiments in
advancing human healthcare? How much do animals suffer as a result? And do
students really need to dissect or experiment on animals? What are the effects
on their attitudes towards them? In The
Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments, bioethicist and veterinarian
Andrew Knight presents more than a decade of ground-breaking scientific
research, analysis and experience to provide evidence-based answers to a key
question: is animal experimentation ethically justifiable? By using
meta-analyses of large numbers of animal experiments selected randomly - the
'gold standard' when assessing biomedical research - and analysing more than 500
scientific publications, Knight offers unprecedented insights into the
contributions of animal experimentation to human healthcare and the extent to
which laboratory animals suffer. He provides the most recent evidence-based
estimates of laboratory-animal use globally and in major world regions and
reviews the types of procedure animals are subjected to and their level of
invasiveness. "When considering costs and benefits overall," he
states, "one cannot reasonably conclude that the benefits accruing to human
patients or consumers, or to those motivated by scientific curiosity or profit,
exceed the costs incurred by animals subjected to scientific procedures.
On the contrary, the evidence indicates that actual human benefit is rarely, if
ever, sufficient to justify such costs." Knight concludes with an overview
of key regulations governing animal experimentation in Europe and N. America and
proposes a set of policy reforms to make it easier to use alternative
research and testing strategies. He concludes that, "rigorous
implementation of policies such as these would restore to animal research the
balance between human and animal interests expected by society, intended by
legislation and demanded by detailed ethical review." AUTHOR: Dr
Andrew Knight, Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
Email: info@animalconsultants.org
Mob: +44-(0)7824 376 709 Web: www.oxfordanimalethics.com/who-we-are/fellows/
Victory
in row over animal testing data access
Animal rights campaigners have won a legal row with Newcastle university over
access to animal testing data. The British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection (BUAV) launched action after a failed Freedom of Information (FoI) request
on experiments carried out at the University. BUAV asked the medical research
department for details on testing procedures and welfare controls for tests on
primates undertaken in 2008. Almost 21,000 animals were used in medical
experiments at the university that year, including Macaque monkeys for examining
new treatments for Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s and spinal conditions.
University bosses rejected the FoI request, claiming they did not hold the
information and that sensitive research programmes would be endangered if
details were released before the work was completed. They argued that research
details remained the “intellectual property” of individual scientists and
not the university until work was finished and published in UK medical journals.
The Government’s FoI Commissioner agreed with the university’s stance but
BUAV appealed the decision. An appeal tribunal hearing found against the
university’s principal argument for not meeting the FoI request. In its
judgement, the tribunal, led by Judge Bartlett QC, ruled: “BUAV submitted it
would be remarkable if the university did not hold important information about
extensive animal research carried out on its premises by its employees. “This
is work for which it received the funds, for which it provided the facilities,
the training, the ancillary staff, and the necessary insurances, in respect of
which the university owed duties of care to safeguard employees and the local
community from biosecurity risks. We agree with BUAV’s argument.” If the
tribunal now rules that individual scientists would not be endangered by the
release of sensitive testing data, the university will be expected to meet the
original FoI request. Michelle Thew, BUAV chief executive, said: … “These
are highly controversial and invasive experiments and the public, particularly
in Newcastle, has a right to know what is happening to these poor animals.” A
spokesman for Newcastle University said: “We are disappointed by this ruling.
We have never hidden the fact that we carry out a small amount of work on
primates, where no alternative exists.”
Researchers at Cambridge
University
carried out more than 117,000 experiments on animals last year. Animals used
included 103,580 mice, 35 monkeys and 3 horses. It was also revealed that 2,000
out of the 117,212 experiments were classed as the highest level of severity.
Animal rights campaigners reacted with fury at the figures, released under the
Freedom of Information Act. Andrew Tyler of Animal Aid said: "These animals
are not reliable surrogates for human beings and we don't have the moral
authority to inflict such torments. These creatures aspire to something better
than to be locked in a cage - whether it's a mouse or a monkey." A
spokesman for the BUAV claimed the university is hiding the facts about its
animal testing. He said: "It receives huge amounts of public money for its
work. It is high time it came clean about the research, so that students can
make up their own minds." In 2001, campaigners released shocking details of
experiments being performed on 400 marmosets over 9 months. They alleged that
scientists sawed open monkeys' skulls and inserted toxins to simulate
Parkinson's Disease. The university refused to release precise details of tests
carried out in 2009. But it is known that animals often end up dead. A
university spokeswoman said testing could lead to improved treatment for
diseases such as cancer, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis and alzheimers. She
added: "Without animal research, which is only used when there is no
alternative, many treatments we take for granted today would not be
possible." The usual uncorroborated mantra
Airline
stops transporting lab monkeys
EL AL Israel Airlines has announced that it is to stop
transporting primates destined for the research industry. The BUAV and the
Israel animal group, Behind Closed Doors, have worked together to achieve this
important development. For many years EL AL has been a key transporter of
primates because of Mazor Farm (BFC Israel), a company based in Israel that
breeds and supplies long-tailed macaques for the international research
industry, including the UK. Only
last year the BUAV obtained documentation to show that EL AL had also started to
transport shipments of monkeys, including the offspring of wild-caught
individuals, from Mazor Farm to the USA. Mazor
Farm, a satellite company of Bioculture in Mauritius, imports wild-caught
monkeys from Mauritius each year for breeding purposes and also exports large
numbers of monkeys to Europe, including the UK. This decision by EL AL is yet
another blow for Bioculture. Oct 19th
Monkeys
imported despite ban
Between
2008 and 2009 almost 5,000 non-human primates were brought into the UK to be
used in experiments. The trade in primates continues because the ban, introduced
in 1997, does not include the offspring of wild-caught parents, campaigners
said. The figures were disclosed by Home Office Minister Lynne
Featherstone in response to a parliamentary question. The BUAV said it had
uncovered evidence of extreme suffering inflicted on captured wild monkeys.
An investigation carried out this year in Mauritius found that monkeys sustained
injuries and broken limbs during trapping and while being transferred to holding
pens. Sarah Kite, the BUAV's director of special projects, said: ''The British
public is misled into thinking our Government has taken a principled position
against the involvement of wild-caught primates in research when the reality is
very different. ''By allowing the importation of monkeys born to wild-caught
parents, the UK is fuelling a cruel and unnecessary trade which is morally
unacceptable. “We call on the Govt to ban the import of these primates and
stop perpetuating this appalling cruelty.''
Test
tube tumours used to test drugs
Realistic
cancers have been grown from human tissue in the lab for the first time, raising
hopes of faster and more effective testing of new drugs. The “test-tube
tumours” grew in culture dishes in the same way as they did in the body, only
much faster, and scientists believe that they will be a useful new tool for
studying the progression of cancer. US researchers took normal human cells from
the skin, throat and cervix, turning them cancerous by using a virus to tweak
genes that control growth. They built up a model of human skin in the lab,
watching the cancerous cells break through healthy tissue, as they do in cancer
sufferers. The scientists used their 3-D tumours to test 20 experimental cancer
drugs, many of which could not easily be tested on animals, identifying 3
promising options that stopped the cancer invading surrounding tissue.
“Studies of this type, which used to take months in animal models, can now
occur
on
a timescale of days,” said Paul Khavari, of Stanford University, who led the
research, published in Nature Medicine.
Animal
tests for PG tips, Lyons and Lipton teas
The
multimillion-pound company behind PG tips, Lyons and Lipton teas has caused
animals to suffer and die so that the company can make health claims about its
teas. PETA has uncovered numerous cruel tests that the maker of PG Tips, Lyons
and Lipton has conducted on animals to evaluate the effects of tea. The
following are just a few examples: • Rabbits
were fed a high-fat diet, giving them abnormally high
cholesterol levels and hardened arteries and then fed tea in their water. After
the experiment, the rabbits' heads were cut off. Mutant
Mice bred to suffer bowel inflammation were administered tea
ingredients in order to see if there were any effects on their condition. After
the test, the mice were killed by neck-breaking or suffocation. • Rats
were forced to eat a high-fructose diet, damaging their brains. Others had their
abdominal wall punctured and were fed radioactively labelled tea ingredients
through a tube in their stomach. All the animals were later killed. • Piglets
were exposed to E coli toxins which cause diarrhoea. As part of the tests,
experimenters cut the pigs' intestines apart while the animals were still alive.
The pigs were then killed. Typhoo, Twinings, Tesco and Fortnum & Mason have
given PETA written confirmation that they don't test their teas on animals –
but the maker of PG tips refuses to end its torment of animals.
Call
for labelling
“I've
been working with Jenny Elliott-Bennett on a petition that calls for changes to
the law so that product labelling has to say if the product or ingredients have
been tested on animals. The petition is at: www.labellingclarity.org.uk
Please let people know about this. Jenny is trying to get enough
signatures for the issue to be debated in the House of Commons. If she succeeds
it will be a big step forward in raising awareness of product testing. It's a
big task, and every single signature will help! Many thanks Cris
Vet
calls for end to drugs testing on monkeys
The cruel practice of testing drugs and chemicals on monkeys is outdated and
"bad science", according to a new report. Veterinary surgeon and
zoologist Andre Menache has produced research calling for an end to use of
non-human primates in toxicity testing. He told how the monkeys are captured in
the wild and torn away from their family groups before being shipped in crates
from countries including China, which takes 54 hours, to the UK. "Once here
they are put in single cages, nothing resembling their natural environment, and
taken away from their families. They go bananas, biting and beating
themselves," Mr Menache, director of the non-governmental organisation
Antidote Europe, said. "Before they’ve even been experimented on, the
animals are so stressed it invalidates the data... They will be killed at the
end of the experiment or may be used more than once before they are
killed." His report has been backed by BBC wildlife presenter Charlotte
Uhlenbroek and seeks to show that now scientists have access to human cells and
DNA there is no need to use monkeys in experiments. "We are told that
toxicity tests are performed on non-human primates to safeguard human health,
because of their similarity to us," Dr Uhlenbroek said. "However, by
the same token we have a duty and an obligation to afford them special
protection. Given that modern science has the means to obtain the required
safety data without the use of animals, we must act immediately and decisively
to end those animal experiments." Mr Menache, who has given up working in a
veterinary practice to concentrate on his work for Antidote Europe, aims to get
modern scientific methods to replace animal experiments within EU legislation.
"The UK experiments on more monkeys than any other country in the EU –
3,000 a year, which is massive," he said. "It is for ticking boxes –
to get a drug on the market you have got to show it’s safe and the easiest way
is to test it on an animal. But the data you are going to get is relevant to the
monkey." Animal experimentation is a bad habit or bad science left over
from the 19th century. There is no excuse now human DNA is available,
we do not need to test on the monkey. It is a chain reaction. Once the public is
made aware it will put pressure on the politicians and the politicians will put
pressure on the regulatory authorities." When you see these animals with
tattoos across their chests being subjected to horrific procedures I think any
normal human being would say that’s not right," he said. His report has
been aimed at politicians and regulatory authorities to prove that testing on
monkeys is no longer necessary now that there are more accurate methods. Dr
Uhlenbroek said: "I have been privileged to observe the behaviour of
non-human primates in their natural habitat. "I have watched how they
develop long-term bonds of affection and show emotions of happiness, fear and
even jealousy. "They most certainly have a sense of self and there is now
documented evidence to show that non-human primates grieve when members of their
social group die."
NASA
scientist forced from job
When
April Evans, an aerospace engineer at NASA, discovered they planned radiation
tests on monkeys she thought these sorts of tests were part of NASA's past. She
contacted her managers to find out how to file a complaint. Within days her
request for information would pass through Human Resources, NASA's legal
department, the Department of Equal Opportunity & Diversity, and back to the
legal department, where it would be suddenly halted. No one seemed able to
answer her questions and no one seemed to share her frustration. And Evans
claims her job was threatened. At a meeting with nearly 150 colleagues
listening, she asked Michael Suffredini, manager of the International Space
Station about the demonstrations taking place and his thoughts on the primate
testing. He appeared to misunderstand her question so she asked a follow-up one.
He seemed flustered and annoyed and said, "Um, I'll get back to you. I
think that's how they told me to answer questions like that." 5 months
later she is broke and unemployed after resigning her dream job. She's been
misidentified as a PETA activist. And branded as someone filled with anger about
the agency she loves. Jim Bates was there in the '60s when NASA was in its
infancy and when Dr. Charles Barnes, a renowned veterinarian, walked into NASA
with his "big fat briefcase" and pulled out charts and graphs and
images of healthy chimpanzees and the corresponding results from varying dosages
of radiation. "It made you nauseated," says Bates, who retired from
NASA in 2004. According to the
documents for the proposed tests, NASA aims "to evaluate the
neurobehavioural and neuropharmacological effects of different types of ionizing
radiation encountered during deep space travel." Meaning, after X amount of
time, will a crew still be able to do what it's supposed to do out there?
The details of the tests lead to questions that no one is willing to
answer publicly. How does a single dosage equal months of prolonged exposure?
How do the tests account for things like solar flares or other unexpected
occurrences? She was told her that animal discrimination was not an issue worth
discussing and "that if I continued asking questions I would be putting my
job in jeopardy." That day she went home and wrote her letter of
resignation, addressing it to her first-level manager. She talked about how
working for NASA was a "childhood dream" and that she was aware of
decades-old prior experiments that sent monkeys into space. But in hearing about
NASA's endorsement of experiments on non-human primates, she could not "in
good conscience work for NASA. She
wasn’t the only person concerned. In
a letter to Animal Defenders International (ADI), Jean-Jacques Dordain, the
acting director general of the European Space Agency wrote, "there is
absolutely no research interest or planning for experiments with primates."
In a letter to ADI, dated June 28, 2010, retired Russian cosmonaut Valentin
Lebedev also publicly opposed the tests. Lebedev once held the world record for
the longest single spaceflight, along with a fellow Russian cosmonaut. Lebedev
noted the tests were unnecessary because "the existing knowledge received
from past experience of long time space flights is quite enough right now to
predict their influence on people even regarding radiation issues."
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine referred to the tests as
"piling bad science on top of bad science," claiming that the initial
decades-old primate research failed to produce any data that applies to humans.
Members of the group also pointed out that the research would violate NASA's
stated principles regarding animal ethics. With the help of ADI, Evans put
together a robo-call that went out to Brookhaven employees and a video piece
that was sent to members of Congress. She delivered a 10-minute speech in the
Capitol building, Washington DC to an audience of 35 people, comprised of
members of Congress, congressional staffers and animal rights people. In his
speech on April 15 - when the NASA and JSC landscape shifted and 5,000 job cuts
resulted - President Obama said, "After decades of neglect, we will
increase investment right away in other groundbreaking technologies that
will allow astronauts to reach space sooner and more often, to travel farther
and faster and for less cost, and to live and work in space for longer periods
of time more safely. That means tackling major scientific and technological
challenges. How do we shield astronauts from radiation on longer missions?"
Read the long article at: www.houstonpress.com/2010-10-07/news/intelligent-life/
Animal Defenders International
launched a campaign to secure public support to prevent the Russian
Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) from performing radiation experiments on
monkeys as part of plans to travel to Mars. To see the disturbing images of
Russian space monkey experiments: www.ad-international.org/media_centre/gallery.php?g=88&page=1
www.ad-international.org/nasa
Society
for Neuroscience targeted
San
Diego Animal Advocates (SDAA) and Stop Animal Exploitation NOW (SAEN) are
targeting the Society for Neuroscience (SFN). At issue are brutal experiments
performed by SFN members that utilise barbaric practices like electric shock and
water deprivation. Huge enlargements of lab insider photos of neurological
experiments on primates will be used in the protest. Dr. Lawrence A. Hansen,
Neuroscience Professor of UCSD, will be available to discuss the scientific
invalidity of animal based neurological research. Dr. Hansen recently penned an
article for the highly-respected Chronicle of Higher Education criticising
animal experimentation in which he says: " . . . neuroscientists wedded to
primate vivisection as a way to conduct research are simply too biased by their
own training, research agendas, and career considerations . . . " "It
is criminal that barbaric experiments which deprive animals of water, utilise
severe confinement, and bolting devices into animals' heads are still
allowed," said Michael A. Budkie, Executive Director, SAEN.
"Neurological experiments like this should be illegal."
Substance-abuse
tests on monkeys
The
state must turn over documents that detail taxpayer-funded experiments conducted
on monkeys and other non-human primates for substance abuse research, a state
Supreme Court justice ruled. The state Office of Mental Health attempted to
block the Freedom of Information Act request filed by the Physicians Committee
for Responsible Medicine saying that the scientists who performed the studies
may be targeted by animal-rights ‘terrorists’ if the details of their
experiments were disclosed. State Supreme Court Justice Richard M. Platkin threw
out nearly every argument OMH offered. PCRM requested public records relating to
OMH-funded research done by 3 Columbia University scientists at the New York
State Psychiatric Institute in New York City, including grant applications,
complaints filed against the researchers and research protocols. OMH provided 27
pages of information but denied the group access to the bulk of the records.
Many of the experiments involved conditioning rhesus monkeys to have drug and
alcohol addictions, and then testing whether various medications broke those
addictions, said Dr. John J. Pippin, PCRM senior medical and research advisor.
OMH declined to comment. In court documents, OMH argued that "the
well-documented, increasingly frequent threats and acts of violence directed by
militant animal rights extremists at research facilities and individual
researchers who are engaged in research using animals" was evidence that
the information should not be made public. The court noted PCRM already knew the
names of the scientists and said that much of the information was already
available on the Internet in published articles. Platkin wrote: "State
government routinely engages in activities that some individuals might find
objectionable or inflammatory, but OMH can point to no precedent for insulating
the work of New York State government from public scrutiny on the basis that
disclosure could upset or incite those who lack respect for the rule of the
law." The ruling said that in its "watchdog" role, PCRM has a
legitimate purpose for its request and that is to assess "the scientific
value and social utility of the research being performed and whether public
resources should be continued to be devoted to this research." Pippin said
OMH is trying to hide the details of the experiments. "They know that this
research can't stand the light of day, that when the public knows about this,
they are going to be outraged."
More
SHAC activists jailed
The
6 defendants in the second SHAC trial were hammered with vicious sentences. The
harshest was the 6 years handed down to Sarah Whitehead. Sentences for the other
defendants Tom Harris, Nicole Vosper, Jason Mullan, Nicola Tapping and Alfie
Fitzpatrick ranged from a 2 year suspended sentence for the youngest, Alfie, to
3 ½ years for Nicole Vosper. All the defendants were also given lengthy ASBOs,
which will prevent them from any further participation in animal rights
activism. All 6 were charged with 'conspiracy to interfere with the contractual
relations of an animal research organisation' under the SOCPA legislation, a law
brought in by New Labour to specifically target the animal rights movement. They
were arrested in a massive series of raids in 2007.
A lot of rubbish has been talked about this trial and the defendants in
the mainstream media. Most of the press has been happy to reprint the NETCU line
that the defendants were personally involved in planting bombs and conducting
violence against individuals. The Mail has claimed that SHAC and the ALF are one
and the same thing. The BBC carried an article entitled 'Under Siege' that
claimed that the 6 individuals were personally responsible for vandalism at a
man’s home over a period of 7 years. In
fact the nature of the conspiracy charge means that the prosecution did not have
to prove anything, except that the defendants knew one another and were part of
the SHAC campaign against HLS – and that at least part of this campaign
involved illegal activity. These 'catch-all' conspiracy cases are being used to
attack a militant and successful movement against UK corporate interests. The
last SHAC trial saw activists receive up to 11 year sentences on similar
conspiracy charges. NETCU were of
course gloating about the verdict, saying, 'We are very satisfied with the
outcome today. In 2004 a major police investigation was launched into the
criminal activities linked to SHAC. Specialist support was also provided by the
Serious Organised Crime Agency and the City of London Police's Economic Crime
Unit'. It is unlikely that the 'major police investigation' ended after the 2007
raids. Long-term police infiltrator PC Mark Kennedy (AKA Stone) attended animal
rights events as recently as Sept 2010. Has
this stopped SHAC? During the sentencing, which took 3 days, demonstrations took
place simultaneously, in London, at the gates of the 2 HLS sites as well as
their beagle suppliers at Harlan Huntingdon and their rabbit breeders at
Highgate Lincolnshire. There was even a brief foray into Cambridgeshire Police
HQ looking for the National Extremism Tactical Co-ordinating Unit's (NETCU)
office.
SHAC
demo report 5th Nov
London
activists started their day of protests at the financial lender of HLS - Fortress
Investment Group at 5 Savile Row. Despite the annoying police inspector
who spent most of his time hassling peaceful activists we got our message across
to Fortress, that we are not going away while they are the main financial reason
HLS continues to kill and torture animals. While at Fortress, other activists
had been having a loud and spirited protest at HIG Capital
Europe, 25 St George St W1, owners of Amerijet,
one of the few airlines that transport animals to laboratories. Amerijet fly
thousands of primates for vivisection each year and activists were outside their
offices to remind them of the consequeneces of their actions. As most airlines
across the world refuse to be involved in the transport of animals for
laboratory experiments, it is only a matter of time before Amerijet follow suit
and pressure will continue to be put on this company and airline until they pull
out for good. Then it was on to JP Morgan at 125 London
Wall, as they are one of the top 4 shareholders of Fortress Investment
Group. A very loud and focused demo ensued during this busy lunch time period,
getting the message across to the many JP Morgan workers what their company is
involved with. Many flyers were handed out with support from the staff and
passers by. After about an hour we moved on, but pledged to keep coming back to
JP Morgan until they ditched their blood money shares in Fortress. Activists
then moved outside Bank of America at Merrill Lynch
Financial Centre, 100 Newgate St/2 King Edward St, to remind them that
while they have 8m shares in Fortress and also recently lent $280m to Fortress,
they will continue to be a target for this campaign. Last stop of the day was Nomura's
UK HQ offices at One Angel Lane, off Upper Thames St. We arrived just as
Nomura workers were starting to leave the offices for the weekend and used this
opportunity to highlight Nomura's collaboration with Fortress and HLS. Nomura is
the largest shareholder with over 120m shares, along with other stocks in
Fortress, sharing directors with them AND lending money for the purchase of
Fortress' offices in London - Nomura is a major financial collaborator of
Fortress. They have a great deal of influence and we call on Nomura to put
pressure of Fortress to pull out of their loan with HLS or dump Fortress.
SHAC
eco bags
I manufacture and sell official SHAC eco-friendly shopping bags. By
"official" I mean I have SHAC's permission to do this and they get a
percentage of the proceeds. The bags are 100% cotton canvas and bear the words
"Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty" on one side. Cost:£7. Do you know
anyone who would like to distribute some? Rhonda
Moorhouse, Liverpool extremeknitting@yahoo.co.uk
Stop UBC Animal Research Now
has submitted a letter calling on the University of British Columbia to
"fully disclose information about its animal research programme." The
letter, signed by 60 animal advocacy groups from across Canada, the US and
Europe, was sent to UBC President Stephen Toope on Oct 11. Signatories to the
petition included PETA, the Animal Alliance of Canada, and the Vancouver Humane
Society. "We are troubled the university has been less than forthcoming
about its research activities," read the letter. "UBC has yet to
provide public interest groups with animal research protocols and has twice
denied requests for information under provincial freedom of information
law." STOP is advocating that UBC release information about animal testing
done at the university over the past 10 years, including the guidelines UBC uses
to ensure ethical treatment of animals, and photos and videos of experiments.
Brian Vincent, spokesperson for STOP, said he is unhappy with the university's
response to their campaign. "We've got nothing but push back from UBC,"
he said. "You would think that the university would want to promote
openness and transparency and instead animal research is hidden under this veil
of secrecy."
In support of National Primate
Liberation Week,
the Portland Animal Defense League hung a banner that read "OHSU:
Stop Killing Monkeys Now!" for morning commuters to see. "It's
animal abuse that's happening here, but they're calling it science," said
Stephanie Boston, an Animal Defense League volunteer. "We're in a campaign
to let people know what their tax dollars are funding." The sign - removed
by authorities shortly after it went up - is the latest in an ongoing clash
between activists and the Primate Research Centre, which houses about 4,200
primates and is one of 8 national primate research centres. In June,
demonstrators blocked the entrance to the lab, and police arrested 5 activists
for obstructing traffic. Stop Animal Exploitation Now recently ranked the lab at
Oregon Health & Science University as the nation's 6th worst
animal lab out of 44 others. The group and Animal Defense League say 259
primates at the research centre have been abused or deprived of food and clean
cages, citing an annual report that the primate centre files with the USDA.
Covance
Lab in USA Closes Up Shop!
5
years ago, PETA exposed the horrors of Covance's
Vienna, Virginia, lab, where workers physically abused animals, screamed
obscenities at them, and forced them to endure torturous daily tests.
Primates at Covance's lab suffered from stress, and baby monkeys experienced
daily nosebleeds because workers shoved hard tubes up their nostrils to pump
drugs and chemicals into their stomachs. Now,
after decades of battling the cruelty the lab is finally closing down!
In addition to the Vienna location closing, Covance has
also cancelled their plans to build another facility, which will save the lives
of thousands of animals.
Senate
votes to bar monkey breeders
In some of the harshest language ever expressed by a legislative body, the
Commonwealth Senate repudiated the experimentation with several types monkeys on
Puerto Rica. Led by New Progressive Party Sen. Melinda Romero, the Senate
approved a resolution that not only expressed its concern regarding the use of
ITAL macaca fasciculavis primates for biological experiments, but denounced the
company that attempted to introduce the practice to Puerto Rico. “I want to
make sure that the federal authorities understand the problem here regarding the
use of these animals for testing," Romero said. "I’m completely
opposed to the issue on the grounds that other things could be done before a
life is sacrificed.” Last year, Bioculture of Puerto Rico tried to develop a
medical facility in which they would use the monkeys for research. The idea was
heavily criticised by local animal rights groups. Their concerns prompted the
city of Guayama to cancel the company’s operating permits. 2 resolutions were
signed by Mayor Glorimari Jaime and the city assembly banning the company from
entering Guayama. However, the concerns prompting the Senate resolution were to
keep them from trying to set up shop in other island towns or cities. Senate
Resolution 1514 will send a letter to the US Dept of Agriculture and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Services requesting that they also cancel the operating
permits granted to Bioculture on the grounds that the company lied to local
officials when it requested them. “We never knew what the real number of
monkeys was. They were dishonest to us all the time and that’s something that
we need to report,” added Romero. Not all senators were in favour of the
measure that generated an unusually intense debate on the Senate floor. The only
verbal opposition to the measure came from NPP lawmaker Carmelo Ríos who
cited the job-creating nature of the companies such as Bioculture for his
opposition. “It is important to realize that we in Puerto Rico need to develop
a medical research industry and that testing on animals is an important part of
that effort," Rios said. "We need more industries, not less. If we
send this letter, what other research company will come here?” Popular
Democratic Party Sen. Jorge Suárez rebuked Ríos calling him
"insensitive" to the people who don’t want a company such as
Bioculture on the island. “If the only argument presented to oppose this
measure is that of jobs, that is sad," Suárez said. "We don’t need
a monkey farm to generate work. That company and many like them are performing
work which goes against our beliefs and that’s why I support the
resolution.” Puerto
Rico Daily Sun. 12 Oct
Ignore
the animal data - Arena shareholder Douglas Park tells the Wall
Street Journal. Investors are particularly incensed by the panel's reaction
to preclinical signs of tumours in rats injected with the therapy (lorcaserin, a weight loss drug) noting that the agency's own rules allow panellists to disregard data from animal
results based on doses 25 times stronger than what's given to
humans."
Miniature
human livers
have been successfully grown in the laboratory, heralding the possibility of
customised transplant organs. US scientists have created working livers the size
of a walnut. The breakthrough could solve the shortage of organs and improve
testing of drugs.
Sheffield
City Council votes to Clean Up Cruelty
BUAV is delighted that Sheffield City Council has voted to go cruelty free at
its meeting on the 3rd Nov. The motion was introduced by Cllr Ian
Saunders, who supports the BUAV's Clean Up Cruelty campaign which seeks to end
cruel animal testing for household products and their ingredients. Sheffield
City Council’s cleaning contractors in schools and civic buildings across
Sheffield will now work towards using only BUAV approved products. Products
approved carry the Leaping Bunny logo, an internationally recognised and
patented cruelty free certification. The BUAV has spearheaded the campaign to
end the use of animals in household product testing since March 2008. A high
profile and successful campaign, Clean Up Cruelty has already gained widespread
support from politicians, retailers and the public. Since its inception, BUAV
has taken Clean Up Cruelty around the UK , visiting MPs and politicians to
encourage them to make their offices cruelty free. The BUAV’s campaign also
won a huge victory recently, when the Coalition Government pledged to ban the
use of animals to test household products in its plan for government. 81% of the
public said they support a ban on the testing of household products on animals.
Despite public opinion, many ingredients in UK household products have been, and
continue to be, tested on animals. Councillor Ian Saunders said: "….we
will introduce a clause in all future contracts that will ensure that no
products used by or for Sheffield Council will have been tested on animals. I
hope that other local authorities will now follow Sheffield's lead".
Cut
in lab inspectors
Osborne's cuts will mean that the current number of 30 Home
Office inspectors who have to report back on the welfare of 3m animal
experiments in the UK each year (an average of 100,000 per inspector) will be
cut to 16 inspectors. As André Menache wrote in a letter to The Independent:
The UK conducts more animal experiments than any other EU member state. Is it
possible that we could cut back, not on the number of inspectors, but on the
experiments themselves? Would such a move endanger public health? The ethics of
animal experimentation is what fuels the current debate. However, there is also
another side to this issue: do these experiments actually work? The facts on the
ground speak quite differently. In just such a parliamentary question to then
minister Caroline Flint in 2004, she replied “The Home Office has not
commissioned or evaluated any formal research on the efficacy of animal
experiments and has no plans to do so”. In scientific terms, animal
experiments are about as predictive for humans as tossing a coin. This
revelation comes, not from the anti-vivisection movement, but from data
originating from within the pharmaceutical industry itself. Animal researchers
and politicians who continue to ignore these facts will have some serious
explaining to do when the public finally gets wind of this information.
The Chemical Industries
Association
(CIA) has reminded its members of the need to use alternatives to animal
experiments wherever possible. The BUAV has welcomed CIA's decision to write to
its members to stress the obligation under REACH to avoid testing products on
animals where an alternative is available. Chemical
Watch 10 Nov
Mini-pigs
for lab use
Mini-pigs
are being lined up as Europe's preferred laboratory animals. The pigs, which can
cost more than £1,000 for a piglet, have captured the hearts of various
notables, from George Clooney and David Beckham to Paris Hilton and Megan Fox.
Now they could be about to replace monkeys, mice, rats and dogs in the testing
of new drugs and chemicals. A 5-year study sponsored by the EU has concluded
that miniature pigs are better models for testing the effects of new drugs on
humans than other creatures, because of their "close physiological and
anatomical similarities to man". Developed from species such as the Vietnamese
pot-bellied pig, mini-pigs first appeared in the West in the 1960s and were
initially bred for medical research. But since the 1980s they have become
increasingly popular as pets, thanks to their smallness: they weigh about
150lbs.
Scientist
against animal research
Genetic
research scientist Dr. Jarred Bailey has been looking closely at chimpanzee
research. Bailey believes that, in spite of the primates' close similarity to
homosapiens, chimps make bad research models. "Researchers will hold the
opinion that chimpanzees are a good research model," Bailey said. "The
problem is that point of view is not supported by scientific evidence."
Bailey's background is in genetics. He has a doctorate in virus genetics and
worked for 8 years with premature human births. "I moved into this field
because I was very concerned about why people were using animal models," he
said. He has been performing chimpanzee research and said all the evidence shows
the animals to be irrelevant to human disease. "We would be better off
concentrating on other research methods," he said. When Bailey began
working with the New England Anti-Vivisection Society, one of the first studies
he conducted was a simple citation analysis, which looks at up-to-date research
and notes how many times a certain subject is cited. "If scientific
study is important, what proportion of chimpanzee papers are cited in these
medical papers?" Bailey said. "We found less than 15% was cited with
any relevance to any human medicine breakthrough." The 15% cited was
generally not critical to the research, he said. Most of the chimpanzee research
only duplicated other findings. Bailey has also done research on the
importance of chimpanzee in relation to diseases like hepatitis A, B and C, AIDS
and cancer. Chimpanzees, Bailey said, don't get the diseases humans get.
Chimpanzee use in AIDS research has decreased in magnitude, he said.
"You can infect them with HIV, but they don't get AIDS from it."
Bailey said his research found 85 different AIDS vaccines that had been tested
in primates, mostly chimpanzees. All 85 worked in chimps, curing them or having
therapeutic effects. In 200 human trials, not one of those vaccines worked. He
also said the evidence is not good that chimps are a good model for hepatitis.
"Chimps don't actually get hepatitis, you can inject them, but they don't
get the symptoms we do. They might have been useful as bioreactors to grow the
virus to use for the research." The hepatitis B vaccine was developed 25 to
30 years ago, Bailey said. Research methods have improved by leaps and bounds
since then. "We have techniques we never even dreamed of," he said.
"Even if we accept that they were useful so long ago, we just don't need to
use them anymore, whether they are a good model or not." Bailey said he has
also been exhaustively looking at hepatitis C and has written 2 papers that are
coming out in the next several months. "They will show the claims about
hepatitis C are false and dishonest," he said. "We found chimpanzees
aren't at the basis of the findings. Clinical studies of people and societies
have all provided the more powerful data about hepatitis C." Part of
Bailey's study looked at how heavily chimps were used in hepatitis C research
and found the numbers have decreased. "You would think if they were a good
model, chimpanzee use would increase," he said. "The use of
alternatives has increased by 80 fold and use of chimps dropped
dramatically." Bailey also worked on a paper on chimpanzees and cancer
research because cancer is one of the biggest killers of humans. They found
chimpanzees are not used very much at all. "We found that chimps had barely
been used in cancer research at all," he said. Incidents of chimps having
cancer are extremely rare, he said, and the tumours they did find in chimps are
not tumours humans get. "If chimpanzees were a good model, why are they
using them only in the United States?" Bailey asked. "If the promise
was there, they would be used all around the world." Bailey said looking
from a human perspective, researchers can do a better job at using other
methods. "It is patently obvious chimpanzee research is not the effective
way to do this," he said. "How much negative data do you need that
chimpanzee research doesn't work and if it doesn't work, how can it be
considered essential?" Dr. Theodora Capaldo is director of the New England
Anti-Vivisection Society. She said the organisation hired Bailey because of his
scientific background. She said more people are paying attention to the issue
because chimpanzees are much like humans and the American people are fascinated
with the question. She is a clinical psychologist and has observed chimpanzees
in laboratory environments. "What I saw is no different than working with
human trauma survivors abuse, war and sexual abuse," she said.
"Chimpanzees under stress show the same psychological symptoms as humans.
They disassociate, are self-abusive and are hyper-vigilant. They, too, suffer
from complex post traumatic stress syndrome and identity confusion. Trauma is no
different than if it happens to a human child." She said the American
public reluctantly endorses chimpanzee research because they are told it is of
benefit to humans. "But it's not only unnecessary, it's useless," she
said. "They are not helping my uncle with Alzheimer's or my father with
cancer."
Wickham
labs demo
On
Sept 25th about 50 people gathered in fine weather in Wickham for a
rally, march and protest against the lab. Many
people (incl. one speaker) who planned to attend were thwarted by the A27 being
closed at Chichester, with no warning signs on the roads leading up to it,
ending in massive traffic jams. The
march made its way along the A32 causing massive tailbacks to the town centre
where there were speeches from several people including André Menache from
Antidote Europe. He spoke of the efforts being made to reduce the number of
animals to be used for chemical testing in the EU. A huge number of these
chemicals are used in the cosmetic industry so it’s no wonder they’re
fighting tooth and nail to extend the length of time for animal testing to be
phased out At the lab wreathes were
laid and poems read. A silent march
lead by a single drum beat lead the march back to the car park. This lab is
planned to close and Cartmell, the owner, had hoped to be moving into a new one
at Lower Upham but has failed to gain planning permission.
Long may he struggle!
SHAC
activists for sentencing
4
animal rights activists, Jason Mullan, Nicola Tapping, Thomas Harris and Alfie
Fitzpatrick pleaded guilty to interfering with and blackmailing companies linked
to Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) in an attempt to close the animal testing lab
down. 2 others, Sarah Whitehead and Nicole Vosper went guilty at an earlier
hearing. In effect they have pulled the curtain down on what was intended to
be a another show trial of the animal rights movement. The trial was scheduled
to begin at Winchester Crown Court mid Sept. 2 of the activist plead guilty to a
lesser charge under the SOCPA legislation. This was the 2nd major
SHAC trial and was a result of continuing massive police action against the
militant animal rights movement. Many of the movement's leading figures are now
serving long prison sentences. The
judge adjourned the case for pre-sentence reports. A 2-day sentencing hearing
will take place at Winchester Crown Court on Oct 21. The maximum jail term for
conspiracy to blackmail is 14 years and the conspiracy under the Serious
Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 is 5 years. Despite the attacks the SHAC
campaign is still going strong – with the major target now being Fortress
Finance, a US-based high risk venture capitalist firm who are now HLS's major
backers. Ocean Finance, who are a subsidiary of Fortress found themselves under
siege in early Sept, shutting down their Tamworth HQ. Meanwhile
US activists are keeping up the pressure on Fortress themselves with demos in
Washington D.C
Fortess
seek $440 million loan
Stop
Huntingdon Animal Cruelty has announced it will target all companies linked to
Fortress Investment Group LLC, in particular those who are considering assisting
Fortress with their upcoming re-financing. The news comes after the revelation
that Fortress is seeking $440m in a pair of loans to re-finance the company due
to increasing debt. Fortress have been deemed a top priority target by SHAC
after it became known that they had secretly loaned $70m to HLS in 2006 after
Stephens Inc. pulled out, which as a result kept the 7 times exposed animal
testing facility open throughout severe financial difficulties during the past
few years, helping to fund the continuation of the torture and deaths of over
600,000 animals. Full article on: http://www.shac.net/news/2010/september/26.html
Non-animal
research experts at Scottish Parliament
Scotland
for Animals arranged for 2 of the worlds leading experts on non-animal research
to speak at the Scottish Parliament on 5th Oct. Dr Ray Greek,
President of Americans for Medical Advancement and consultant Dr Andre Menache
joined animal charity Scotland for Animals in asking MSP's and the Scottish
Government to take urgent action to end the use of animals in experiments.
Scotland for Animals said: "We've contacted all MSPs
personally inviting them to attend – sadly only 3 bothered and 2 others sent
representatives. We want them to look at the evidence we have that using animals
in research is holding medical progress back and jeopardising the lives and
health of Scots. This isn't just a question of the rights of animals not to be
subjected to pain but of the rights of us and our families not to have to suffer
as a result of poor scientific practice, lazy research and the power of vested
financial interests."
The
EU has agreed on new rules aimed at reducing the number of animals used
in lab experiments and tightening controls over such procedures. Euro MPs backed
the new EU directive after long negotiations and EU member states have 2 years
to make it law. Labs will have to get approval from national authorities for
animal tests and if recognised alternatives exist then they must be used, the
rules say. Animal welfare groups say the directive still does not go far enough.
Those in favour of tighter controls on vivisection have ended up being
disappointed, as some strongly protective measures recommended by the European
Commission were diluted by MEPs during the negotiations. Accusations were made
that the compromises were a consequence of serious lobbying by interest groups
such as the pharmaceutical industry and animal suppliers.
The UK-based anti-vivisection group BUAV called it "a missed
opportunity". "The dropped proposals include strong restrictions on
the use of non-human primates, strong restrictions on re-using individual
animals, and a clear ban on experiments which involve severe and prolonged
suffering," it said. But BUAV said it was "pleased, however, that the
Commission has clarified that non-animal alternatives have to be used wherever
they are scientifically suitable". The new directive, approved by the
European Parliament, replaces EU rules on animal testing that dated back to
1986. The new animal welfare standards will have to be embraced by all EU member
states. The new member states - mainly in Central and Eastern Europe - that
joined the EU in 2004 and 2007, will have to embrace the new animal welfare
standards. The legislation imposes a general ban on the use of great apes, such
as chimpanzees and gorillas, in scientific tests. But other primates such as
macaques can still be used – a point on which the Commission was overruled by
MEPs. The directive also sets out categories of pain, ranging from
"mild" to "severe" - an innovation designed to prevent
repeated suffering. The re-use of animals will be allowed after tests involving
"moderate" pain - though the Commission had proposed re-use only after
tests classed as "up to mild" pain. MEPs argued that re-use of animals
helped reduce the total number of animals used. They were also concerned that
Europe should not fall behind in research on chronic human ailments such as
Alzheimer's. According to EU data, about 12m animals are used in EU countries'
lab experiments each year. The directive obliges national authorities to carry
out regular inspections of labs that use animals - and some of the visits must
be unannounced. The Commission will oversee these checks. The animal protection
group Humane Society International said the new directive would still not
prevent "severe suffering" in certain types of animal testing. But it
voiced hope that other countries, including the US, would now "follow
Europe's lead so that standards are improved globally".
The
UK’s Green Euro-MPs criticised
the European Parliament for voting against stronger provisions to protect
animals used in experiments, as part of ongoing negotiations to update EU law on
the practice. The Greens in the Euro-Parliament had put forward 3 amendments: to
drop the restriction on national governments to introduce higher animal welfare
standards than those required under EU law; to restore Parliament's original
demand that an alternative to animals must be used when available (subject to
individual Member State laws); and to strengthen restrictions on the use of non
human primates. The Green amendments were all defeated, as were the Group’s
calls for the whole report to be referred back for further development.
Therefore the report now becomes the Parliament's official position. Keith
Taylor, Green MEP for the South East, expressed his disappointment at
Parliament’s failure to provide adequate protection for the millions of
animals being experimented on in EU labs every year. He said: "It’s clear
that this proposed legislation is not yet fully developed. Greens have long
lobbied for animal protection to be enhanced and have been waiting many years
for the update of this Directive. Sadly, today’s vote represents a missed
opportunity for guaranteeing animal welfare. "It’s true that there are
some improvements in the compromise text, particularly on inspections, on the
new authorisation process for experiments, and a proper classification system.
“But there are also concerns among animal welfare NGOs that the proposed
legislation will allow for experiments on living animals for didactic purposes,
experiments on stray dogs and cats – and for the permission of experiments
without anaesthesia and/or painkillers. “This is not about obstructing medical
developments into human health; it is about wanting to minimise the unnecessary
use of animals in experiments. A civilized society cannot remain indifferent to
cruelty. Jean Lambert, London’s Green Euro-MP, said: “The EU has an
opportunity to lead the world in progressive animal research legislation,
recognising the latest developments in viable non-animal alternatives. The
Greens will call for further deliberations until we can secure genuine
improvements in animal welfare and protection.”
Former
Broxtowe MP Nick Palmer has
landed a role at the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection He has been
appointed as the new director of international and corporate affairs, a new role
that will help the organisation develop its international work and help build on
its campaign to persuade companies to stop animal testing. Dr Palmer was Labour
MP for Broxtowe from 1997 until 2010 and has a long history in working on animal
welfare related issues. BUAV has previously worked with him in his role as
vice-chair of the All-Party Animal Welfare Group. Dr Palmer has also undertaken
the role of Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Animal Welfare Minister and
chair of the Parliamentary group for the Fund for the Replacement of Animals in
Medical Experiments. Dr Palmer said: "This is a dream job for me. I hope to
promote and build on BUAV's record of constructive dialogue."
Animal testing gives false hope
Time
after time headlines in the news will spotlight a recently developed drug that
may potentially provide treatment to patients that suffer from diseases like
Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and multiple sclerosis. These drugs appear in the
news because they have reached the late or near final stages of the drug
development process where they can be tested in clinical trials involving humans
who are living with these diseases. But so often these drugs are discontinued at
this late stage and don’t become the medical therapies their developers had
hoped to create. Why? One of the reasons that The Lancet Neurology gives to
explain drug failure is the animal issue. Before a drug can be tested in humans,
it must go through an animal model that is designed to be as humanlike as
possible. This way researchers can observe how the drug will react with the
newly developed treatment as if it were being tested in a human system. However,
it is almost impossible to create an animal model that will react to a treatment
in the same way a human would or one that can “accurately reflect human
pathogenesis.” So, after experimentation, what a researcher has actually found
is a drug that appears to cure, alleviate symptoms of and repair damage from a
disease in an animal. Yet, when the drug is tested in humans and it does not
have the same effect as it did in the animal model. Then it’s back to the
drawing board. Sent
by VIN
Multiple Sclerosis is an autoimmune disease. At least, that’s what has been accepted
for years – based on the best of attempts to recreate MS in animals. The
EAE mouse model has some of the same symptoms, and has guided MS research or
years. New research indicates that it’s an illness of the veins. A
constriction on the jugular vein causes a build up of blood in the brain and the
terrible condition. Already a simple procedure has been used on MS
patients with excellent results. Although the findings are just emerging, this
is showing itself to be a clear and damning case in which desperation to use an
animal model has led to false theories and misdirected research which has denied
research into the real condition for a generation of patients.
Sent
by VIN
Gateway
to Hell has
been relaunched as part of the National Anti-Vivisection Alliance (NAVA) in the
UK. The majority of animal used in UK laboratories are sourced from outside the
country, ranging from xenopus to beagles, primates and even horses. This is due
to the 2 main breeders, Harlan and Charles River, not having enough breeding
stock to be able to supply the needs of the vivisection establishments
nationwide. Other factors include the copyright placed on genetic strains of
animals and the inability to breed primates in the laboratory environment,
meaning many have to be captured in the wild or imported from holding centres
such as Mazor Farm in Israel. The simple fact is that the UK vivisection
industry is reliant upon these imports of animals to be able to continue.
Without them, laboratories would struggle to conduct experiments and the 2 major
breeders would not be able to make sufficient revenue to continue without their
exports to foreign clients. We have already had a number of victories since the
campaign relaunch. El Al (Israel's
flagship carrier) has vowed never to fly primates, nor any other animal destined
for vivisection, following a co-ordinated international campaign. As the only
airline willing to fly monkeys into or out of Israel, this will have a massive
global impact. Not only can companies such as BioCulture and Noveprim not
transport primates from Mauritius to Israel, as they have regularly done for
decades, but the Mazor Farm (BCF Israel) may be forced to close down as they
have now lost the ability to supply 90% of their clients, consisting of UK, US,
German and Belgian laboratories. Manchester
Airport - The G2H campaign has seen a mass amount of disruption in the
import network of primates and laboratory animals into the UK. We know for a
fact that primate imports through Manchester International Airport make up over
75% of the UK's primate supply, with these monkeys being sent to HLS, Covance,
Charles River, AstraZeneca and others. It is also the main gateway into the
country for beagle dogs, coming from Marshall Farms breeding kennels in New York
and Italy. However, ZorEx and 2 other airlines pulled out of the import network
following our discovery about their involvement in the monkey flights. Airbase
Flight Support, who was acting as ground handling agents for beagles and monkeys
coming through Manchester, also issued a statement never to be involved again.
The UK's largest airport handler, Servisair, have also pulled now and issued a
policy. The potential to replace companies who cease involvement has also been
cut-off with over half of those offering relevant services within the airport
refuse to be involved in the lab animal trade. Please also take part in our
email action alert, "Shut Down the Manchester Monkey Flights" For more
information and to follow the Gateway to Hell campaign, please visit: www.antivivisection.info/g2h
We
have a substantial amount of information about these flights into
Manchester from Impex organising them and delivering the primates to the labs in
unmarked vans. Documentation has been falsified, the cost of over £5,000 per
flight, quarantine centres used, and that police and private security escorts
are given to each shipment. Now is the time to stand up against this sickening
trade and call for an end. Listed below are the 3 airlines we know have been
flying primates over the past fortnight into Manchester, as well as 2 who were
approached by Impex for future use and have not ruled out transporting animals
for labs. Please contact them to voice your disgust: AERONOVA:
Avda. dels Arcs, 10, 46940 Manises, Valencia, Spain Tel: +34 96 152 11 36 / 902
105 742 Tel (24hr) + 34 67023022 Fax: +34 96 152 68 87 info-cargo@aeronova.com, info@aeronova.com,
info-training@aeronova.com, mserusi@aeonova.com,
jmpenandes@aeonova.com, mjimenez@aeronova.com,
ralbarrilla@aeronova.com, ipoos@aeronova.com,
sspina@aeronova.com,
pablolago@pablolago.com
Netherlands base: The Hague Airport, Rotterdam Airportplein 60 3045 AP
Rotterdam T: +31(0)10 - 446 34 44 info@rotterdam-airport.nl
UK base: Coventry Airport, Coventry Airport South, Siskin Parkway W.
Coventry CV3 4PB Tel: 024 7630 8600 info@coventryairport.co.uk Grupo
Suner (Majority Shareholder in Aeronova) Avda. de Los Deportes, 21, Edificio
Ma Carmen Suner info@gruposuner.com
AEROCORP: Gif sur Yvette,
Technoparc de Gif, 2 route de la Noue, FR-91190 Gif sur Yvette, France Tel: +33
180 856 658 // +33 (0)1 80.86.61.80 Mobile : +33 680 173 908 Fax: +33 (0)1
80.85.58.42 info@aerocorp.aero,
p.duran@aerocorp.fr,
c.debont@aerocorp.fr,
b.gilles@aerocorp.aero, b.gilles@aerocorp.fr
BUSINESS WINGS: Flughafen, 34379 Calden, Germany Tel (24hr): +49 (0)5674 92150
Fax +49 (0)5674 9215-29 info@businesswings.de AIR
MANA: Aéroport Dijon Bourgogne, BP26 21601 Longvic
Cedex, France Tel (24 hr): 03 80 666 232 devis@airmana.com,
ops@airmana.com,
dov@airmana.com,
rde@airmana.com,
jm.guillon@airmana.com, jp.peuchot@airmana.com
BIN AIR: Maria Probst-Str.22, 80939 München
Germany Tel (24 Hr): +49 (0) 171 322 66 22 Fax: +49 (0) 2203-6995411 info@binair.eu
A
new report "Mauritius: The trade in primates for research" released
to The Associated Press on Sept. 21, 2010 says that wild, long-tailed monkeys
sustain broken limbs and other injuries when trappers catch the primates and
transfer them to breeding farms on Mauritius. Mauritius has 4 major breeding
farms and a 5th farm is to be opened soon, evidence that the trade is
expanding, said the report by the British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection. Photos in the report
showed handlers swinging monkeys by the tail and monkeys confined to small,
rusty metal cages. Their brutal
capture from the wild and forced captivity in Mauritius is morally
unacceptable," said the BUAV's Sarah Kite. "We call on the government
of Mauritius to put an end to this brutal trade and for the USA, EU and Israel
to ban primate imports and stop perpetuating this appalling cruelty." The
Associated Press contacted several government offices in Mauritius to seek
comment on the report. When AP asked a question of an official in the Ministry
of Agro Industry and Fisheries, which oversees wildlife, the official hung up.
Another official said government employees are not permitted to talk to
journalists. Last year 2,257 monkeys were imported into Britain from
Mauritius. Only the US bought more. And during 2008/9 more than 5,000 live tests
were carried out on monkeys – a rise of 16%. Tests include horrific
experiments where the animals are pumped with massive amounts of drugs to see
how long they can survive. 75% of the monkeys are used for toxicology tests on
new drugs. The remainder are used in studies for conditions such as
Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s and Aids. Animal rights charities are now
calling on the Government to end the cruel trade. BUAV’s director of
special projects Sarah Kite said: “By allowing the importation of monkeys from
Mauritius, the UK is fuelling the cruelty inflicted on thousands of animals.
“This trade is morally unacceptable. We call on the Government to ban the importing
of these primates and stop perpetuating this appalling cruelty.” For more
information, go to www.stopthebabytrade.org
Rick Gervais is backing the BUAV campaign to stop the cruel trade in baby
monkeys.
Brow
Well Fisheries
As
part of the campaign to end the sourcing of animals for laboratory experiments,
we must focus on all weaknesses of the vivisection industry and stop the supply
of species which can only be sourced domestically - one of which are fish. Their
use is often forgotten, yet they bear the brunt of almost every eco-toxicology
experiment inside laboratories in order to pass agrochemicals and household
cleaning products onto the market. Fish are impossible to import due to their
vulnerability to contrast in temperatures, yet without them every single
eco-toxicology department using animals would have to close down. Brow Well
Fisheries are the UK's largest supplier of fish to laboratories, yet their owner
arrogantly believes they are doing good by supplying Huntingdon Life Sciences,
Covance and many universities. Please contact them to ask how it is good to
poison fish to death on behalf of international chemical companies. Contacts:
Brow Well Fisheries Ltd Phoenix Cottage, Town Hill, Hebden, Skipton, N.
Yorkshire, BD23 5DH Tel: 01756 753 132 Fax: 01756 753 132.
Fish farmed at: Old Mill Lane, Grassington, Skipton, BD23 5BX Tel: 01756
752 808. Costa Spring Hatchery
(Subsidiary) High Costa Mill, Marton Lane, Pickering, N. Yorkshire, YO18 8LW
Tel: 01751 473 770. A.E. Fishery (Subsidiary) Parkgate, Dumfries, DG1 3LY Tel:
01387 860673 Fax: 01387 860207 Management: Dr Ian Christopher Jowett
(Joint-Owner) ian@brow-well.co.uk
Jonathan Paul Jowett (Joint-Owner) Mob: 07901 626593 jonathan@brow-well.co.uk
Mark Campbell (Manager - Costa Spring) Mob: 0777 4186 399 mark@costaspringhatchery.co.uk
A
maximum security laboratory next to St Pancras station will
(allegedly) be at the front line of Britain's fight against the next
flu pandemic (another false scare?).
The £600m “super lab” will be one of the largest in Europe and employ 1,250
scientists, many of whom will work in a bunker to prevent the spread of airborne
disease. The UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation, the body behind the
Somers Town building, claims the site will be totally secure with no risk of
virus particles escaping into nearby homes. But campaigners are angry that no
housing is planned for the site, and are concerned the huge building could
become a terrorist target and the focal point for protests against animal
testing. The glass, brick and metal lab will be secured to “biosafety level
3+”, that is capable of containing bacteria including malaria and
tuberculosis. Along with cancer, they will be some of the many deadly diseases
studied at the “global centre of research excellence”. John Cooper, chief
operating officer and interim chief executive of UKCMRI, said: “UKCMRI is
planning to study different strains of flu, including H5N1 (bird) flu. “Some
of these viruses need to be studied in special, secure laboratories. The
founders' scientists and technicians are extremely experienced in ensuring these
viruses are studied safely.” UKCMRI is a conglomerate of the Medical Research
Council, University College London, Cancer Research UK and The Wellcome Trust.
About one third of the building, which is up to 154 ft high in places, will be
underground. A pressure group called Stop Camden Lab has been formed to oppose
the plans, which were formally lodged last week. Councillor Roger Robinson,
Labour representative for St Pancras and Somers Town, said: “Why they want to
put a lab in the middle of a built-up area is beyond my comprehension.” The
building will replace the ageing Medical Research Council laboratory in Mill
Hill, which led Britain's bird and swine flu research.
Lab closes after exposé
Just one week after PETA released the results of its shocking undercover
investigation at the North Carolina contract animal testing facility
Professional Laboratory and Research Services, Inc. (PLRS) -which uncovered
workers' appalling abuse and neglect of dogs, cats, and rabbits tormented in
tests for flea and tick products - and filed a 70-page formal complaint with the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) alleging violations of the Animal Welfare
Act, PLRS is shutting its
doors for good and surrendering more than 200 dogs and cats left at the facility
to animal shelters. PETA's
investigation revealed that dogs, cats, and rabbits abused by PLRS suffered from
untreated illnesses, injuries, and burns and that many animals were covered with
sores that were likely caused by poor housing, stress, and boredom. PETA's
investigator also documented that PLRS employees kicked, threw, grabbed,
dropped, and dragged dogs; roughly grabbed and lifted rabbits by their ears; and
violently threw and slammed cats into cages.
Vet
college stops animal use
Effective
this academic year, the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC) will end the training
of students through terminal surgeries which have taken the lives of hundreds of
healthy dogs. The termination of these animal experiments, and their replacement
by models, cadavers and supervised clinical learning opportunities with shelter
animals, was announced on the OVC website following a sustained campaign.
The
process of change began in 2009 with a friendly beagle, Rainbow, who was one of
the OVC dogs whose fate was to be killed after surgical practice. Dr. Anya
Yushchenko, InterNICHE National Contact Assistant and then veterinary student at
OVC, conscientiously objected by refusing to participate in the killing of an
otherwise healthy dog. With the help of Dr. Olivier Berreville, InterNICHE
National Contact for Canada, and lawyer Nick Wright, Dr. Yushchenko fought for
her right to a veterinary education free of harmful animal use. In the process,
Dr. Yushchenko was able to save Rainbow’s life, and placed her in a loving
home. Following this achievement, a collaborative effort between InterNICHE and
Animal Alliance led this year to the rescue of several other dogs, and the
subsequent decision by OVC to eliminate terminal surgeries. “We congratulate
the Ontario Veterinary College and Guelph University for stopping outdated,
cruel terminal surgeries and for choosing to join the increasing number of
universities and colleges worldwide that now use modern, ethical methods to
teach their students”, says Berreville. “We will strive to provide any help
needed by the OVC to ensure that the new curriculum and methods used are fully
ethical.”
InterNICHE
provides a range of resources to support the implementation of humane
alternative methods and replace the harmful use of animals in education. These
include the book and database of alternative methods ‘from Guinea Pig to
Computer Mouse’ (2nd ed.); a number of Alternative Loan Systems
(libraries) for free access to humane learning tools; and a Humane Education
Award grant programme to help fund progressive curricular transformation.
Researcher
shows no respect
A
primate researcher at Wake Forest University, in a PowerPoint presentation at a
National Institute on Aging workshop which appeared on the NIA web site until
July, finds the primates who will give their lives to science…funny. The first
photo shows an orangutan who someone has put in an aqua coloured flannel dress
with white diamonds on it. Her face is contorted in terror. A green, comic strip
style balloon is coming out of her mouth. It says, “I just don’t know what
to think,” as if her anguish stems from research questions in the lab instead
of her tenure there. Ha ha! The next mirthful photo shows a chimpanzee appearing
to have typed a page on a typewriter to illustrate the “cognition research”
being performed in the lab. Get it? A third amusing photo shows a capuchin
monkey who someone has dressed up in big, black eyeglasses that are barely
supported by her little skull. She is also commenting about the ongoing research
in the lab. There is a chain around her neck and she appears to be held in
position by human hands. Also pictured, reminiscent of Dr. Harry Harlow’s
“pit of despair” experiments at the University of Wisconsin, is a cynomolgus
monkey that has been “psychosocially stressed” to serve as a model for the
“perimenopausal transition.” Harlow, famous for his “rape rack” and
“iron maiden” inventions for primates, is considered the architect of the
National Primate Research Centre’s system which still operates a lab at the
University of Wisconsin-Madison and operates labs at other locations. The
presentation, called Cardiovascular Health and Cognition: Perspectives on Using
the Primate as a Model, was part of an official NIA workshop in 2004 and created
by Wake Forest’s Thomas Clarkson, DVM. When a reporter asked about the
derision shown toward animals and science itself, the PDF was removed from the
NIA site. Barbara Cire with NIA’s Office of Communications and Public Liaison
said, “As to the imagery on the slides, NIH posted the presentation as
delivered. Questions about the images should be directed to the speaker.” Cire
says NIA “does not fund” research by Clarkson except for “an NIA
conference grant to organise a meeting in conjunction with the 20th annual
scientific meeting of the North American Menopause Society in September,
2009.” But it has funded similar research with ovariectomised cynomolgus
monkeys by Wake Forest researcher Mary Lou Voykto in which Clarkson donated
monkey hypothalami. In this research, monkeys “were restrained with ketamine,
deeply anaesthetized with sodium pentobarbital and perfused transcardially with
cold 0.1 M PBS. The brains were rapidly removed and sliced into 1-cm slabs with
the aid of a monkey brain matrix,” according to an article in The Journal of
Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (Vol. 88, No. No.2 655-662) The world
health problem the monkeys served? Menopause. Of course it’s no secret that
ever since the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, government research supported by our
tax dollars is quickly translated to industry uses. In fact Wake Forest’s
Women’s Health Centre of Excellence for Research conferences, attended by
industry-linked researchers including those accused of ghostwriting, have been
unabashedly funded by both NIA and hormone makers Wyeth and Pfizer. Nor is it a
secret that the grisly menopausal hormone research on primates underway at Wake
Forest and at Mount Sinai School of Medicine threatens to revive the hormone
therapy which more than 5,000 women say gave them cancer. (Why revive a therapy
that caused endometrial cancer in the 1980s and breast cancer in the 2000s? A$k
industry.) What is surprising is that a researcher who is also a veterinarian,
sworn to relieve animal suffering, would actually find such research funny.
The
chimpanzees of the Alamogordo Primate Facility in New Mexico are being called back to
duty. The 186 chimps, already grizzled veterans of medical research, will be
pulled from an unofficial retirement and sent back into the lab by the end of
2011, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced. But the decision has
brought to a head a simmering debate about the use of chimpanzees for medical
research in the USA - a practice finally banned by the EU. After a visit to
Alamogordo on 21 Sept, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson renewed a vow to
fight the NIH plan, which would send the chimps to the S.W. National Primate
Research Centre in San Antonio, Texas. Richardson has said that he will push
Congress to legislate that the chimps' present home, at which about 40 people
are employed, be converted into an official sanctuary managed by non-profit
agencies, or be run by nearby universities for non-invasive behavioural
research.
Seinfeld
Writer Supports Animal-Friendly Research
Comedian
and author Carol Leifer, who has written for “Seinfeld” and “Saturday
Night Live,” is starring in a new national campaign to promote health
charities that don’t fund or conduct animals experiments. In the new 30-second
radio public service announcement produced by the Physicians Committee for
Responsible Medicine (PCRM), Leifer urges potential donors to “Give and Let
Live” by supporting compassionate charities that provide vital care to
patients and advance research without using animals. The ad introduces The
Humane Charity Seal of Approval, a unique certification program that allows
potential donors to quickly identify those health charities that match their
values and don’t fund animal tests. The Humane Charity Seal of Approval offers
a rapidly expanding directory of charities that fund only humane, human-based
research or patient services.
In
a landmark action the
municipality of Guayama, Puerto Rica, has enacted a new law banning the import,
export, breeding, and use of monkeys in experiments within its boundaries. This
means that Guayama—and its mayor, Glorimari Jaime Rodríguez—have dealt an
apparently fatal blow to Bioculture Puerto Rico, Inc.'s much-criticized plan to
capture more than 4,000 monkeys from Mauritius, cruelly confine them to cages in
Guayama, and then sell their offspring to foreign laboratories for use in
painful and deadly experiments. Puerto Rico's Senate is also set to vote on a
resolution sponsored by Sen. Melinda Romero Donnelly, which, if approved, would
urge U.S. agencies to "deny Bioculture any and all permit requests to
import monkeys into Puerto Rico."
Nearly
90,000 lab mice are used each year in
the EU just to test batches of BoTox, according to the journal Nature. That
number has increased from 33,000 mice in 2005. The EC report singled out BoTox
testing as a major reason that animal experimentation persists at sustained
levels in the EU despite being reduced in many other fields.
Artery-on-a-Chip
Studies Heart Disease
Scientists
from Canada have developed a microfluidic platform on which fragile blood
vessels can be fixed, allowing the factors that promote and sustain
cardiovascular diseases to be studied. Microvascular structure and function are
currently studied using either an isometric approach, where small arteries are
mounted on 2 wires, or an isobaric method, where arteries are drained and filled
using glass micropipettes. Both of these procedures require manually skilled
personnel and are not scalable - key factors which have limited the number of
laboratories carrying out essential microvascular research. However, Axel Günther
and colleagues at the University of Toronto have overcome several of these
limitations by developing a microfluidic platform to mount arteries on, which is
scalable, inexpensive and has potential for automation and standardisation. The
device could be used to routinely screen drug candidates on viable arteries,
potentially speeding up the drug development process and reducing the need for
animal experimentation.
New
non-animal research grants
Dr
Hadwen Trust for Humane Research has just given out new non-animal research
grants. They are: Epilepsy research
at Newcastle University; Bone
Disease at Cardiff University; Brain Cell Imaging at Birmingham University;
Nanotoxicity Testing at Nottingham University; Abdominal Pain Studies at Barts
& Queen Mary’s, University of London.
Current projects include research into breast cancer, multiple sclerosis,
cystic fibrosis, skin cancer and brain infections.
Brain
waves tracked in conscious cats
4
animal rights groups have joined forces to demand that the Health Ministry halt
a medical experiment that involves forcing cats to remain awake in order to
monitor their brain function. The organisations said the cats in the study at
Ben Gurion in Negev are confined in
small enclosures and force-fed food containing substances to keep them awake
during testing. Research in Israel into feline brain function is generally
conducted while the cats are anaesthetised. They are often killed when the
experiments are completed. The study in question, led by Dr. Opher Donchin of
the university's Dept of Biomedical Engineering, investigates neural activity in
Purkinje cells in the animals' cerebellar cortex. Researchers ultimately plan to
study at least 7 cats. Last month a representative for animal rights groups on
the ministry's National Council for Experimentation on Animal Subjects, asked
council chairman Ehud Ziv to look into complaints that the cats were subjected
to unnecessary discomfort during testing. A veterinarian and a scientific
consultant who were sent by Ziv to Donchin's laboratory wrote in their report
that the experiment complied with the ministry's animal testing regulations. In
response, animal rights activists asked Ziv for permission to visit the lab and
see the tests on the cats for themselves. When their request was rejected, they
decided to take up the matter with the university directly. A further letter was
sent to Ziv and to the university’s president demanding an immediate halt to
the study. "This research is being conducted on conscious felines,
subjecting them to prolonged, extreme suffering," said the groups'
attorney. He said the experiment does not comply with the 1994 Animal Welfare
Law. The letter said the suffering caused to the cats far outweighed the study's
potential "negligible scientific benefit" and that nothing could
justify subjecting such sentient beings to prolonged, harmful tests, confinement
and surgery for the purpose of dubious scientific gain. The activists said they
are considering legal action against the study's organisers. Director of the
group Behind Closed Doors comments. "A cat can't be expected to sit in
confinement for over an hour without moving. It breaks the animal physically and
emotionally, leading to a state of powerlessness. In such a state the cat is
likely to fall asleep, and inserting food into its mouth to keep it awake is
both cruel and disproportionate. We ask for proportionality to be considered
before approving any experiment in
Israel
, as required by law." Ben Gurion University said in a statement that while
"Society grants scientists the authority to use animals for research and
teaching purpose, in the recognition that animal research seeks to advance the
saving of human life, the world and the university are increasingly using
substitutes whenever possible to prevent unnecessary suffering to lab
animals”. Haaretz
5 Aug
Military
experiments prohibited
The
U.S. Army in
Germany
intended to injure pigs and goats at a military training area in
Bavaria
to train their medical staff. The German association Doctors Against Animal
Experiments (DAAE) and other animal rights groups protested against these plans.
The authority has now rejected the application of the U.S. Army because it
violates the German Animal Welfare Act. When the plans of the U.S. Army became
known in May this year several animal rights and antivivisection organisations
called for protests. The public outcry resulted in the Army withdrawing its
first application only 1 day after the plans became public. The experiments were
supposed to be conducted and organised by a German company specialised in trauma
training. DAAE pointed out that
military trauma training is not compatible with the German law according to
which animal experiments for the development or testing of arms, ammunition or
military equipment are forbidden. In addition animal use in education and
training is prohibited, if its purpose can be achieved by non animal means.
Trauma management can be taught with advanced simulation tools and in war areas
where real casualties have to be helped. According to the Doctor’s Association
this is the only useful and effective teaching method. DAAEG
11 Aug
Bill
to end unnecessary experiments on chimps
A
bill in the
US
that aims to save chimpanzees from unnecessary scientific experimentation
across the country has been launched. The Vermont Independent was approached by
members of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine who said much of
the experimentation common for these apes is unproductive and does not warrant
their harm "Millions of wasted dollars and decades of failed experiments
have demonstrated that chimpanzees are bad models for researching human
disease," said a committee senior medical and research adviser. "This
new bill would release chimpanzees and ensure that no more taxpayer dollars are
wasted on ineffective chimpanzee experiments." Although there are no
testing labs in Vermont, Sanders became aware of the issue from a number of
concerned state residents."The bill would mandate the retirement of 500
government owned apes from 6 testing laboratories. It also would phase out the
use of chimpanzees in laboratory settings over 3 yrs. "Chimpanzees are no
longer needed for research, yet we remain the only country besides Gabon to
continue holding these animals in laboratories as possible subjects for invasive
research," Sanders said in a statement. "It is time to release these
animals from the laboratories where they are currently housed and allow them to
live in humane sanctuaries Burlington
Free Press 9 Aug
Replacement
for Draize
After
more than a decade of scientific research and lobbying by animal protection
groups, the Organisation for economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has
approved a new, non animal testing guideline for skin irritation. The guideline
adopted is now available for use by companies and governments worldwide. The
OECD guideline allows for the use of 3 artificial human skin models engineered
by SkinEthic in
Nice
,
France
, and MatTek of Ashland, USA, or other methods that meet the guideline's
specifications. These methods in all but a few circumstances will fully replace
the 1940s era Draize rabbit skin test, which has traditionally been conducted to
assess skin irritation by applying chemicals to shaved, raw skin on the backs of
rabbits. These new methods, however, provide a humane and more accurate
assessment of the potential damage a substance poses to human skin.
Manufacturers use excess skin cells from surgical procedures to construct a 3
dimensional layer of skin that closely mimics the properties of human skin.
Substances are applied to the skin model to assess the potential for skin damage
when used in industrial or consumer applications. The International Council for
Animal Protection in OECD Programmes provided scientific expertise that helped
create the new guideline and ensure its acceptance. In addition members have
individually lobbied for regional acceptance of in vitro skin irritation tests
or provided direct financial support for the rigorous scientific trials that
demonstrated the efficacy of one of the new methods. "The science of safety
testing has come a long way since the 1940s," says an ICAPO representative
of toxology. "Taking animals out of the equation will reap dividends for
industry and consumers in the form of faster tests and safer products."
ICAPO comprises of 11 animal protection groups from Europe, Asia, & N.
America for a combined representation of over 20m citizens, and is dedicated to
the replacement, reduction, and refinement of animals in OECD guidelines and
other programmes. The OECD produces safety testing guidelines for its 31 member
nations, which represent many of the world's largest economies.
PR
Newswire 2 Aug
EC weakens cosmetic animal testing ban
The
ECEAE (European Coalition to End Animal Experiments) has accused the European
Commission (EC) of acting unlawfully by attempting to weaken legislation
introduced to bring an end to the controversial testing and marketing of animal
tested cosmetics within the EU. In 2003, following many years of campaigning led
by ECEAE, the EU introduced a number of animal test bans for cosmetics under the
7th amendment to the Cosmetics Directive. This was a huge step
forward for animal welfare in the EU and received widespread political and
public support. The Cosmetics Directive included an unqualified ban on animal
testing for cosmetics in the EU which came into force in March 2009. It also
included a marketing ban on the sale and import into the EU of cosmetics tested
on animals outside the EU. This too came into force in March 2009 although an
exception was agreed for 3 tests - repeated-dose, toxicokinetics and
reproductive toxicity. For these tests, the deadline was initially set at March
2013, although this can be extended even further if these tests do not meet
non-animal alternative availability criteria. In the past few months, the EC has
organised a series of working groups to prepare a report on the status of the
availability of non-animal alternatives methods. This report forms the basis for
the public consultation launched on the 23rd July. However, the EC
appears to be attempting to weaken the Directive by having inexplicably included
2 additional animal tests - skin sensitisation and carcinogenicity tests –
which were not included in the marketing ban exception and which now have to
meet the non-animal alternative before the marketing ban is implemented. The
relevant working group’s findings suggest that replacement methods will not be
available until 2017-2019 for skin-sensitisation; for carcinogenicity the
working group is unable to say when they will be available. The Cosmetics
Directive is, however, clear and the ECEAE has received strong legal advice. For
skin sensitisation and carcinogenicity, both the testing and import bans are
unqualified and came into effect in March 2009, with no facility to extend that
deadline. Whether particular scientists believe there are suitable alternatives
is irrelevant. As far as repeated-dose, toxicokinetics and reproductive toxicity
are concerned, the ECEAE believes that the assessments of the working groups are
scientifically ultra conservative and, lack understanding of the creative
potential of non-animal methods. The European public wants a clear, immovable
line drawn in the sand with regard to animal-tested cosmetics. The ECEAE will be
scrutinising the reports very closely. ECEAE Chief Executive, Michelle Thew
states: “This move will be extremely disappointing to citizens across the EU
who support this ban. The EC appears to be extending the goal post by including
additional animal tests that need to pass the non-animal alternatives test. The
ECEAE is concerned about this unlawful attempt to weaken the Cosmetics
Directive. The marketing bans for skin sensitisation and carcinogenicity tests
were not conditional on non-animal alternatives being available. This was a
directive based primarily on ethics, not science.”
Budget
cuts and non-animal research
With
over £60billion of budget savings to find, more science spending cuts are
looming and Britain's research base is certain to take a hit. Accessing funds to
develop animal-free research methods has always been a challenge. Dedicated
alternatives funders are scarce, high-impact journals have an illogical
prejudice against research without animal data, and without impressive
publications, achieving more mainstream funding is hard. It's a frustrating
catch-22 for the scientists. "Perversely, research that doesn't use animals
is perceived as high risk by funders," explains Debbie Holliday, of the
Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine. "In my work on breast cancer, if I
made funding applications based on the mouse model, it would be more likely to
get funded despite the well-known limitations of that approach, because it's the
established method." Her ground-breaking work advancing the world's first
3-dimensional multi-cellular test-tube model of human breast cancer has been
much more of a funding challenge. Overcoming those challenges has been
worth it. Dr Holliday's model offers a more physiologically relevant approach to
breast cancer research than experimenting on mice, and it's captured the
interest of oncology researchers internationally who are interested in its
potential wider application. As well as medical benefits, it could also replace
painful tumour experiments that use 400 mice at a time. Unfortunately, decades
of underfunding means replacement science is still playing catch-up. For years
the government allocated a derisory £280,000 annually to the 3Rs (replacement,
reduction, refinement of animal experiments), barely enough to fund a single
project. The National Centre for the 3Rs (NC3Rs) now has a more respectable £4.5m
budget (2009) - but for how much longer? Spending cuts would hit precisely when
alternatives are starting to make a real impact. Dr Holliday is concerned that
tightening the squeeze on already scare funding could encourage scientists to
abandon non-animal work, research choices becoming increasingly dictated by
where the funds are rather than the best scientific options. "There's a lot
of talk about the potential loss of gifted scientists from non-animal
alternatives, it's a real issue," she told me. This is exacerbated by the
fact that many scientists rely on charities, and they too are slashing budgets.
Stifling innovation is a potential outcome. Cell biologist Kelly BeruBe at
Cardiff University made headlines last year with her Microlung technology -
lung cells grown on plastic spheres that mimic real human lung function. It's a
high-tech replacement for low-tech 1930s-era chemical inhalation tests in rats.
But Kelly's hit a funding wall, so work to make Microlung fully operational by
transitioning from 2-D to 3-D has stalled. Using rats, Kelly could access more
regular funding, even though extrapolating rat data to humans is fraught with
difficulties. "Their lungs are so different morphologically and
physiologically, but I am basically stuck between a rat and a hard place!" The
commercial potential for Microlung is exciting. With every pharmaceutical and
chemical company worldwide conducting toxicity studies, Microlung could be a
profitable British export. For companies, switching from animals makes good
business sense. Just a half inch of human tissue can create 400 Microlungs,
costing approximately £1,000 per test. Compare that to a standard 2-year animal
study consuming 800 rodents and costing £2.6m. Lower R&D costs, reduced
candidate failure rates and accelerated time to market mean increased profits
and quicker ROI. New EU legislation emphasising replacement of animal tests for
chemicals and cosmetics increases the incentive to act. The USA is also working
to bring chemical testing into the 21st century using
state-of-the-art human cell tests, computer science and robotics. The future of
life sciences research is bright - and animal-free - and Britain could be
leading the technology drive. Despite budget constraints, now is not the
time to cut alternatives funding. Instead, we need more intelligent and
data-driven funding strategies that resist shoring up research where there is
scant scientific justification. That means identifying poor performing animal
research that isn't delivering and investing instead in using and developing
more advanced human-relevant solutions where the scientific and societal
benefits could be considerable. Global demand for alternatives is only going to
increase, so now is the time to exploit what could be a real growth area for UK
Plc. That means ensuring our research is future-proof, inspiring the next
generation of innovators, and attracting the brightest minds. Wendy Higgins
Campaign Specialist at the Humane
Society International
A
small animal testing laboratory is
to be built at Daisy Hill, East Riding of Yorkshire, which is set to be operated
jointly by Agenda Resource Management and BOCM Pauls. Farm animals will be used
in invasive experiments related to intensive farming, agriculture, nutrition and
related fields. Agenda RM claim they are expanding into the field of Research
& Development, already having a department which conducts facilites
management of vivisection labs nationwide. The centre will no doubt be a smaller
version of Scotland's Roslin Institute and cannot be allowed to be built. BOCM
Pauls own the land on which the new laboratory is planned to be built, which
Agenda already rent for their 'top secret' offices. Despite a false company
being set up to guard the proposal, named Pepper PDS (reg to P.O. Box 289,
Beverley, HU17 6EW), animal rights activists and local papers have found out.
Agenda and BOCM have not mentioned to East Riding Council (Planning ref
10/02632/STPLF) that animals will be used. Take action here: www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/09/458031.html
Great
Ape Protection Act
Senators
Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have
introduced the Great Ape Protection Act (S.3694) in the U.S. Senate, lending
bipartisan support to end the use of great apes in invasive research. NEAVS/Project
R&R Science Director Dr. Jarrod Bailey recently met with Senator
Cantwell and several other legislators, explaining how ending chimpanzee
research would have no negative impact on human health. Dr. Bailey provided the
Congress members with abstracts of NEAVS/Project
R&R’s scientific papers, along with a list of over 700 scientists
who have pledged their support for ending the use of chimpanzees in invasive
research, demonstrating impressive scientific support for this legislation.
To add your signature of support go to: http://www.releasechimps.org/take-action/sign-the-petition/
Benicia
considers permitting animal testing labs
US
planners are considering whether the need for more local jobs means they should
relax a ban on animal testing laboratories. Currently,
Benicia
allows no animal testing, but a sweeping land use review meant to help the city
recruit more research and development firms could change that. Such firms could
include biotechnology companies that raise animals for observation or research.
Planning Commission Chairman David Healey comments, "for one thing, it's an
issue of humane treatment of animals, and the other issue is we don't want to
create Godzilla through some mutation in the lab." Healy said he does not
oppose all animal testing, and that a "blanket ban probably wouldn't be
wise if we want to have a robust business park."' Commissioner Rod Sherry
in a June discussion of the issue asked city officials which types of animal
testing might be deemed unacceptable. Concern was voiced that the proposal was
too vague. The staff members so far, would permit enclosed areas for
"keeping and raising animals" to support research and development
"by using animals in experiments such as efficacy and toxicology testing
before clinical trials in humans." That would not be acceptable to one
animal protection leader in the city. Animal testing is "not humane
treatment of animals and it does not fall in line with our mission
statement," Peter Wilson, humane services director of the Benicia Vallejo
Humane Society stated. The city's eye is on job creation. In general, permitting
animal testing would allow a wider range of biotech companies to come to
Benicia
, said chief planner and Public Works Director. The commission is considering
land use changes that would allow the animal testing labs in about one third of
Benicia
's land area. Changes would allow and define as acceptable land uses
"biotechnology," "cleantech," "dry labs,"
"information technology," "nanotechnology,"
"occupational health clinics," and "vivarium" (animal
testing facilities)." Mercury
News 10 Aug
Help
save vunerable animals
The
recently published annual UK Government statistics have revealed over 3.5m
animals were ‘sacrificed’ in 2009. However, the new Coalition Government
offers a glimpse of hope for animals in laboratories with its pledge to 'work to
reduce the number of animal experiments'. Uncaged are currently lobbying the
Government. Please back this up by lobbying your MP to sign Early Day Motion 435
which calls on the Government to honour this historic commitment. http://www.vote4animals.org.uk/search.htm
Uncaged Campaigns
University
violates Animal Welfare Act
According
to the annual report filed with the USDA by the University of Kansas Medical
Centre, this facility experiments on and/or holds captive about 150 primates a
year, a relatively small amount. The report which contains this statistic is a
bland one page document which belies the cruel reality that it represents. A
cross section of the lives of these animals is represented by a stack of
documents which is just over a foot tall. The existence of these highly
intelligent animals has been reduced to so much paper and ink. Their identities
represented only by numbers, their passing marked only by the word “euthanised.”
The University of Kansas Medical Centre has become known for violating
the Animal Welfare Act. In fact, recent inspections for the period from Sep 2007
to June of 2009 catalogue 58 pages of violations, many of which involve primates
and their deaths. The USDA inspectors who wrote these documents uncovered
heinous acts of cruelty which prolonged the pain these animals endured. One
monkey was allowed to deteriorate so severely that his/her weight dropped by
26.8%. Another primate, whose skull
had been opened to have a recording chamber put into place, did not receive
anything close to adequate treatment TPC 4 Aug
Drug
companies conning public
Drug
companies have been accused of conning the public by hyping up patented
medicines with little new to offer while downplaying their side-effects. A study
concluded that up to 85% of new drugs offered few if any new benefits while
having the potential to cause serious harm due to toxicity or misuse. The author
of the research, Donald Light, professor of comparative health policy at the
University of Medicine and Dentistry in New Jersey, said: "Sometimes drug
companies hide or downplay information about serious side-effects of new drugs
and overstate the drugs' benefits. Then, they spend 2 to 3 times more on
marketing than on research to persuade doctors to prescribe these new drugs.
Doctors may get misleading information and then misinform patients about the
risks of a new drug." Professor Light presented his paper, entitled
"Pharmaceuticals: A Two-Tier Market for Producing 'Lemons' and Serious
Harm", at the American Sociological Association's annual meeting in
Atlanta, Georgia. He accused companies of conducting a "swamp the
regulator" policy – bombarding the bodies that award drug licences with
large numbers of "incomplete, partial, sub-standard clinical trials".
One study of 111 final applications for approval found that 42% were missing
data from adequately randomised trials, 40% were supported by flawed testing of
dosages, 39% lacked evidence of clinical efficacy, and 49% raised concerns about
serious adverse side-effects, he said. In a statement, the Association of the
British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) said: "Professor Light is long on
accusation and woefully short on hard evidence. There is now much greater
transparency in clinical trial results. The UK pharmaceutical industry also
adheres to a strict code of practice on the sales and marketing of its products.
"The patient information leaflet provided in every pack with a medicine
details the side effects which have been reported in clinical trials and
reviewed by the regulator."
Monkeys
from China for HLS
SHAC
has received a number of leaked documents detailing the purchase of hundreds of
monkeys from China by Huntingdon Life Sciences between 2006-2008. The documents
reveal, once again, how HLS, Primate Products, Inc and its customers are
directly responsible for the horrible suffering of monkeys trapped for the
international primate slave trade. The documents include contracts, invoices,
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service import permits, animal health certificates
issued by the People's Republic of China, shipping routes, contact sheets, and
miscellaneous e-mails (such as correspondence about a Dec 2007 trip to Florida
by 3 HLS employees to tour Primate Products, Inc.'s quarantine facility and
breeding farm). Without disgusting companies like Primate Products, Inc. who are
an important link in the chain of animal slavery and animal abuse. 10,000s of
wild caught or 'cage bred' primates would not be used as mere experimental tools
for the vivisection industry. We call on every compassionate person to show
their anger and disgust at Primate Products, Inc. for their continued
involvement in the primate slave trade. Please take the time to contact
Primate Products, Inc about their dealings with HLS: Primate Products, Inc. PTLC
& Equipment Div (HQ). PO Box 1588 Immokalee, FL 34143 USA. Tel: 001
239-867-2020 Fax: 001 239-867-2030 ptlcequip@primateproducts.com
Primate Products, Inc. Live Animal Division, 7780 NW 53rd
Street Miami, FL 33166 USA. Tel: 001 305-471-9557 Fax: 001 305-471-8983 lad@primateproducts.com
Primate Products, Inc. PO Box 620415 Woodside, CA 94062 USA. Tel: 001
650-529-0419. PPI Behaviourist Stefanie Haba Nelsen 001 239 867-2020 ext. 2242
(Office) 001 239 821-9006 (Cell) Donald A. Bradford, President: DonBradford@primateproducts.com
John P. Resuta, Jr., Operations Manager: JohnResuta@primateproducts.com
Eileen Sylvester, Office Administrator: EileenSylvester@primateproducts.com
Kathleen Turner, DVM: KathleenTurner@primateproducts.com
Stefanie Haba Nelsen, PPI Behaviorist: stefanienelsen@primateproducts.com
Josh Bradford: Joshbradford@primateproducts.com
Mike Disbrow: Mikedisbrow@primateproducts.com
Jim Nazareno: jimnazareno@primateproducts.com
Jerome Johnson: Jeromejohnson@primateproducts.com
Kathryn Litton: KathrynLitton@primateproducts.com
Sherri Schmidt: sherrischmidt@primateproducts.com
Donna Steiner: Donnasteiner@primateproducts.com
Ed Marshburn: edmarshburn@primateproducts.com
Todd Sylvester: Toddsylvester@primateproducts.com
Renate Lemke: Renatelemke@primateproducts.com
Rachelle Ford: rachelleford@primateproducts.com
Michele Surelli: michelemisurelli@primateproducts.com
Mary Muhlhauser: Marymuhlhauser@primateproducts.com
Animal
Welfare Advisory Committee disbanded
The
BUAV has condemned the announcement by Mr Peter Luff, the Minister for Defence
Equipment Support & Technology, that the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee,
has been immediately dissolved. The committee was set up to provide independent
scientific advice on the care and welfare of animals used in military research
at the top secret Porton Down military laboratory in Wiltshire. Recent animal
tests at Porton Down uncovered by the BUAV have caused a public outcry, in
particular horrific experiments in which live pigs were blown up with explosives
and subjected to massive mutilation and injury. In 2009, it was reported that
over 8,000 animals were used in tests by the MoD, including mice, non-human
primates and pigs. Animals have been largely used in research into preventing
and treating diseases used as weapons. Many of these experiments involved
substantial suffering and resulted in the death of the animals. In some tests,
there were no reports of treatment or pain relief given. Examples of other
animal tests include: Research into inhalational tularaemia, a disease caused by
a bacterium used as a biological weapon, 10 monkeys were exposed to various
doses of the bacterium in order to determine the LD50 (the dose causing 50% of
the animals to die) while their heads were restrained in an exposure chamber.
The animals suffered severe effects including fever, abnormal breathing and
internal bleeding. Some died; all survivors were killed. None of the animals
survived or were kept alive for longer than 13 days.
In research into inhalational anthrax infection and to determine the
LD50, 12 monkeys were exposed to an aerosol containing anthrax spores while
their heads were restrained in an exposure chambers. The animals developed
shortness of breath, partial paralysis, disorientation and lethargy. 6 animals
died and those still alive after 10 days were killed. The infection has painful
and debilitating effects and the monkeys must have suffered immensely before
experiencing a painful death. There were no reports that pain relief or other
supportive measures were provided. Guinea-pigs were poisoned with a nerve agent,
exceeding the lethal dose by 5 times. Various combinations of therapy drugs were
then injected into their muscles. The animals were observed for signs of nerve
agent poisoning. These included incapacitation, abnormal body temperature, and
intestinal intussusception (an extremely painful condition where part of the
intestine telescopes on itself causing blockage of blood vessels – thus
causing gangrene or internal bleeding). Animals in poor condition were killed 24
hours after the poisoning. As nerve agents cause damage to many vital organs
resulting in convulsions, internal bleeding, breathing problems (and eventually
inability to breathe), the animals would have suffered severely before they died
or were killed. BUAV’s
Chief Executive, Michelle Thew
states: “It is unacceptable and inexplicable that at a time of growing public
concern regarding the use of animals in these controversial warfare tests, that
an advisory body providing an independent overview on the care and welfare of
animals should be disbanded.”
Baboons
trapped for experiments
Medical
researchers in S. Africa are benefiting from a cheap supply of live subjects on
which to experiment – baboons trapped in the wild after wreaking havoc on
farms. At least 2 universities - the University of Cape Town and N. W.
University - use wild-caught baboons for research, a practice now banned in
Europe and Australia due to animal welfare concerns. Primate experts say
that to confine a "born free" primate in a cage is unnecessarily
cruel, and that it is preferable to use animals bred in captivity.
However, it is far more expensive to breed primates in captivity than to catch
them in the wild. Now UCT staff and researchers are locked in fierce debate over
whether to continue experimenting on wild-caught animals, and will hold a
meeting on the issue later this month. "It's a political hot potato
at the moment," said one UCT scientist, who did not want to be named.
"I don't want to stop animal experimentation; I want to make sure it
happens under the best international practice, and that includes not using
wild-caught animals." A US primatologist now based in Cape Town, Tim
Newman, said there were valid arguments for using primates in medical research,
depending what tests were done, how the animals were treated and what happened
to them afterwards. "Imagine a wild primate - they have a stress
response very much like our own. They don't understand what's happening to them,
they're almost in a perpetual state of fear ... "If one must use
primates in research, then I would think there's a big difference, morally and
ethically, between using a captive-bred animal rather than a wild-caught
animal." Newman said research animals in S. Africa were generally kept in
small cages with only artificial lighting, "conditions that would horrify
most of us". "These are social animals and, particularly if
they're wild-caught, it's got to be a horrible experience for them."
Peter Lloyd, a senior scientist at Cape Nature, said farmers who wanted to sell
baboons to researchers had to prove the animals were a threat to their crops,
and that they had implemented measures like electric fencing to try to solve the
problem. "We can't forbid it, but we can manage it by making it as
difficult as possible," he said. Lloyd said Western Cape authorities had
received only one application in the last 5 years from a farmer wanting to trap
baboons and sell them. The price for a wild-caught baboon is anywhere
between R7500 and R15000, according to Este Kotze, an inspector with the SPCA
who serves on a national ethics committee overseeing the use of animals in
research. "We oppose the use of non-human primates, but we have to
accept that some research continues," Kotze said. "We make
recommendations on alternatives." Louis Jacobs, a spokesman for N. W.
University, said the university had last used baboons for medical research 4
years ago. "16 baboons, categorised as problem animals, were caught
with the assistance of and permits from nature conservation, at a holiday resort
in Rustenburg," he said. "Upon completion of the research, the animals
were humanely put down." Jacobs said all research on animals at the
university had to be approved by the ethics committee on which the SPCA served.
Most medical research on baboons involves testing medicines, including potential
Aids treatments, and surgical procedures. Lloyd said "huge" numbers of
baboons were taken from the wild in the 1970s for use in heart transplant
research. "It's still not a perfect system; but we're in the middle
and we have to address issues from both sides." Toni Brokhoven, a spokesman
for the animal rights group Beauty Without Cruelty, condemned all research on
live animals. "Whether they're wild-caught or captive-bred, the point is
that they're still wild animals," she said. "2 or 3 generations down
the line does not make them happy to be worked on, and does not make them any
less uncomfortable being in cages." Sunday Times 8th Aug
GM
animal drug failures
New
drugs developed following GM research for Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, cancer
and many other diseases continue to show promise in animals, but fail in human
trials. Recent high-profile failures such as Alzheimer’s drugs MK-677 (Merck)
and AN-1792 (Elan), plus the 95% failure rate in new anti-cancer treatments,
have led to academic and industry admissions of the lack of human relevance of
GM animals’ usage. Human investigations, meanwhile, are providing genuinely
useful results. Extract
from a letter by Michelle Thew and Fleur Dawes, BUAV
Highgate
Farm
After
the success of last year's camp at Highgate Farm in Lincolnshire - which breeds
rabbits and ferrets for vivisection - another protest camp was held in August.
Protesters occupied public land next to the farm but police said that due to
previous protests and complaints from the Lamborghini-driving owner of the farm,
Geoffrey Douglas, the camp would violate Sec 42 of the Criminal Justice and
Police Act 2001 (brought out to stop home demos). To get around this the protest
camp was to be between the hours of 7am-7pm each day. Like the previous camp,
the protest was non-violent. On the second day police arrested 2 protesters for
using a megaphone - charging them with 'contravening a direction given by a
police officer', and banning them from Lincolnshire until the case goes to
court! Then they banned the remaining protesters from going to Highgate Farm for
28 days – presumably under Sec 42 - it remains to be seen whether this was
lawful. So the camp is gone, but the farm continues - and would probably love
more visits from animal rights campaigners. It's at Highgate Lane,
Normanby-by-Spital, Market Rasen, LN8 2HQ. For more info call 07973722978 or
07973722978 or see www.closehighgatefarm.com
University
fined
Vanderbilt
Uni will be fined and undergo an inspection of its laboratory procedures after a
2008 laboratory accident killed a baby galago monkey. The U.S. Dept of
Agriculture, responsible for inspecting the care and appropriate treatment of
laboratory animals involved in medical research, fined Vanderbilt $8,156.
A lab worker put cage bedding into a washing machine without noticing
that the baby monkey was wrapped in the material, resulting in the monkey’s
death. The same year, 5 hamsters died or were euthanised as a result of being
injected with an incorrectly mixed compound during experimentation This is not
the first time Vanderbilt Uni has been cited for animal treatment violations. A
May 2005 USDA report cited Vanderbilt on 13 violations, including failure to
follow proper protocol, failure to use any aseptic during procedure and
inaccurate records. The number of federal violations rose to 9 in July 2006 and
lab animal deaths were reported through 2007. Inside
Vandy 30 Aug
Photos
of injured monkeys leaked
An
underground group calling itself the Animal Liberation Investigative Unit has
leaked 10 photos showing monkeys with deep gashes and open wounds the photos
from inside the walls of Primate Products Inc. in Doral. "Those pictures
may be the tip of the iceberg," said Don Anthony, spokesman for the Animal
Rights Foundation of Florida. "Who knows what else may be going on behind
the scenes?" Primate Products imports monkeys and sells them to
universities and pharmaceutical firms for medical research. The company also
sells restraints used in animal research and is registered with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture to conduct its own research. 2 watchdog groups. The
Animal Rights Foundation and Stop
Animal Exploitation Now filed complaints with the USDA alleging violations of
the Animal Welfare Act. The federal law sets standards of minimum care for
animals used in research, zoos and circuses. A federal inspector will show up
for an unannounced tour of the Doral facility to look for potential violations,
said USDA spokesman Dave Sacks. The photographs show "Frankstein like"
conditions at the facility. Some of the animals may have been kept in restraints
too long, leaving their hindquarters red and irritated, as evidenced by the
photos. Sun
Sentinel 2 Sept
Wickham
Labs – LATEST:
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 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.
| |
|
