The British government will bend over backwards to protect vivisectionists from threats to their well-being. The rest of the citizenry are on their own.
On August 21, 2006, a young, and by all accounts a good man, Peter Woodhams, was shot four times outside his home in East London by a gang member. The 22-year-old father of one, Mr. Woodhams had, for the better part of a year, been subjected to serious threats and bullying by local youths. No one knows why these teens targeted Woodhams — was he an easy target, did he have words with them previously which the kids took as a dissing, did he cross "their" territory? It seems nobody knows for sure.…
Article comments
26 - BCE
JOM,
***What these animal right nuts fail to admit is that 99.9% of all testing is on genetically engineered mice!***
Animal right 'nuts' probably make up less than .0001% of activists and people opposed to vivisection.
Just because the bulk of testing involves rodents does not make it either right or scientific.
The UK Government annual statistics 2005 reveal that over 2.8 million animals suffer and die in British laboratories in experiments that "may cause pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm" (experiments that are considered unlikely to cause pain do not need to be licensed and are therefore not included in the annual statistics). An estimated additional 8 million animals are bred and then destroyed as surplus to requirements. As well as mice, rats, hamsters, gerbils and guinea pigs other animals such as rabbits, dogs, cats, monkeys, horses, cows, pigs, sheep, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and even insects are used - in fact there's hardly a species that are not experimented on.
The scenario is a lot worse in the rest of the world.
In the UK experiments on great apes are not allowed, but in the rest of the world they are in danger of becoming extinct as they are captured in the wild for vivisection labs.
Ah! the provivisectionists last resort - the false dilemma- the lab rat or your mother's life?
your dog or your baby?
we've been curing cancer in mice for years, but despite billions of dollars worth of resources wasted on animal experiments, still no cure, giving false hope to patients and directing precious funds away from preventive medicine (most cancers are down to diet, smoking, poor lifestyle choices and chemicals ( 'safety' tested on animals of course!) and human based research.
27 - JustOneMan
"2.8 million animals" 2.7 million are mice!
So you would let your mom die to save a mouse. Gee what a nice boy she raised!
Please stay with the facts...99.9% are mice!
jom
28 - Right On
Mice are animals. If it makes any difference, they are actually very sensitive, smart, and resourceful creatures. The fact that some people don't like mice very much does not exclude mice from the animal kingdom, nor does it mean that mice should not be given equal consideration when evaluating moral issues that invariably involve causing them endless amounts of pain, suffering, and of course death. Unless you can establish that nonhumans don't feel pain, don't value their own lives and can't suffer no matter what we do to them (good luck with that), your repeated emphasis on the fact that they are mice is irrelevant at best.
29 - Jeff
Your story was noted on the http://www.care2.com/news/member/785741862/328072Care2 News Network.
You have many supporters, especially when the atrocities of vivisection and their alternatives are exposed and promoted (see links in some of the comments).
My personal opinion? It's all about the billions of dollars stake holders stand to lose when vivisection is finally outlawed... when tired, antiquated arguments are finally seen for the shams that they are... when millions of sick people will finally be healed, fed, and prosperous... when the paradigm finally shifts away from animals as "property". All that money will be redirected to more meaningful, useful, valuable, modern, and compassionate research. AND many greedy corporate execs and politicians will finally lose their jobs and influence.
30 - BCE
JOM,
The fact is, the results have no predictive value for humans, therefore are unscientific.
Maybe you are talking about global/US percentages, but the figure is about 84% in the UK. But cold statistics ( very Cartesian- resulting in the vivisection mindset) mask the fear & suffering of the following sentient creatures:
Experiments by Species (Great Britain, 2005)
Mice: 1,961,049
Rats: 424,527
Guinea Pigs: 29,019
Hamsters: 4,232
Gerbils: 5,057
Other Rodents: 3,159
Rabbits: 22,818
Cats: 500
Dogs: 7,670
Ferrets: 970
Other Carnivores: 946
Horses/Donkeys/Cross-Bred Equids: 9,002
Pigs: 3,574
Goats: 330
Sheep: 29,329
Cattle: 19,110
Deer: 56
Birds: 113156
Reptiles: 878
Amphibians: 20,970
Fish: 232,854
Marmoset/Tamarin Monkeys: 910
Squirrel/Owl/Spider Monkeys: 24
Macaque Monkeys: 3,718
Other Mammals: 2,333
GM Animals: 957,451
It comes as no surprise that provivs can dismiss the suffering of millions of non human animals in this way. With the same callous attitude, provivisectionists write off the thousands of drug and vaccine damaged & other human casualties of vivisection-based medicine by arguing that the majority are OK.
31 - JustOneMan
"results have no predictive value for humans"
Please provide specific evidence
JOM
32 - stephanie malaspina
I worked at a research facility and saw one cat with part of its skull removed. I cannot look at pictures anymore but one sight of that poor cat in pain made
a believer out of me. STOP ANIMAL TESTING.
Use white collar criminals who make multi multi millions on insider trading, sex offenders who kill children. Use anyone but a poor animal that cannot defend itself.
Keep blogging-
33 - Mark Edward Manning
Re #29
Jeff, if I was Prime Minister, I'd outlaw vivisection. Probably wouldn't pass through either chamber of government (House of Commons or Lords), but I'd rally Parliament to the best of my ability.
And if it caused a dip in my party's war chest, so what? Better than winning seats with blood money.
And as for JOM's ridiculous comment about my mother or the mouse? Well, my own mother would rather die as well. In fact, I would have no choice but to see my mom die because she would forbid any procedure that involved torture of animals to save her life. And I would respect that, much as I love her. Want some other members of my family as well, JOM? OK, my wife and sister feel the same way as well! We all feel that when our number is up, it's up, and if our lives can't be saved through alternative means, then so be it.
34 - Mark Edward Manning
In fact, I think every single person, the likes of JOM and NL especially, should be exposed to a lengthy film about what goes on in these labs and if, by the end of the video, they've cried their eyeballs dry or fainted or have to be dragged out of the room because they're paralyzed by the cruelty they witnessed, then so be it. People like JOM just blindly support animal research because they don't want to know about it. They know damn well that torture goes on, but they're moral cowards for not wanting to witness what they defend.
So how about it JOM or NL? There's plenty of footage of experiments on animals on the 'net. Will you look it up and educate yourselves about what really goes on or will you just do the typical "nah, I don't need to see it to know I agree with it" bullshit? You don't want to see it because you know you'll find it agonizing. And if you DON'T find it distressing, then you have no right to be calling me the cruel one!
35 - BCE
JOM,
In March 2006 the spotlight was thrown on the business of clinical trials, and the transition from animal to human tests, when a phase 1 drug trial in the UK went horribly wrong( the 'elephant man' trials )leaving 6 young men in intensive care with multiple organ failure. The drug TGN1412 had been shown to tbe safe in animals (cynomologus maqaque monkeys).
Most of the victims are showing early signs of lymphatic cancer and are likely to suffer a range of premature autoimmmune disorders. Many experts in the field concur with the headline in The Times: " Tests on animals create a false sense of security" and could never have predicted the catastrophe, while tests in human tissue could have done.
There is a long long list of catastrophes - from thalidomide to Vioxx - adverse drug reactions are the 4th leading cause of illness & death in the west- all are tested on animals- adverse results may not show up for years in humans, which is why we are always the real guinea pigs.
Sometimes the results of animal tests coincide with results in humans, but sometimes they don't. Even If the tests gave incomplete, but correct indications most of the time they might be of use, but they are misleading and therefore dangerous, because the researcher has no way of forseeing whether a fortunate coincidence can be verified or not- hence the many disasters. This 'flexibility' however, works in favour of the drug companies who claim that the required animal tests were done , & that anyway, animal tests cannot accurately be extrapolated to humans, to escape liability when things go wrong.
36 - BCE
Interesting that 'volunteers' for Phase 1 clinical trials ( right after the animal tests) have to be enticed with substantial payments and their ranks are usually from the umemployed, cashstrapped or uneducatted, many of whom do not fully understand what is about to be done to them, if indeed it is fully explained at all.
Some are so desperate for the money they probably wouldn't care anyway.
It would be far more ethical, and cheaper, if the researchers themselves, and all provivisectionists had to sign up for the trials, being fully informed and having so much faith in the preceding animal tests.
37 - BCE
The UK is reputed to have the best vivisection legislation in the world. April 2007 is the 21st anniversary of the Animals (Scientific Procedures)Act- the law governing animal experiments. The facts suggest otherwise:
Number of prosecutions under the Act.....nil
Number of experimenters who have had their licences to carry out animal research withdrawn...nil
Number of labs that have had their licence withdrawn.....nil
Number of Home Office inspectors to monitor the Act....30
Number of premises with a licence for inspectors to monitor.... 227
Number of animal experiments for inspectors to monitor...2.8 million and rising
Proven offences against the Act that have not resulted in prosecution include brain-damaged monkeys left unattended after surgical procedures, dogs punched in the stomach, fabricated results, and researchers laughing as they killed live mice by smashing them against bench tops.
If this is representative of the 'best vivisection legislation in the world', it's god help the animals ( & of course the humans who suffer from the results of these horrors [devine retribution?]) elsewhere.
And since many countries do not keep records of vivisection procedures, where does JOM get his 'factual' figure of 99.9% mice from?
38 - BCE
And let's not forget the really privileged class of vivisectors.
Perhaps the most inexcusable recent research trend is the doubling over the past 5 years in the number of animals used in British military experiments, including biological and chemical warfare tests(heaven knows what the US & world figures must be).
More than 21,000 animals, including monkeys, ferrets and pigs were experimented on in 2005 - a rise of 76% since 2007. Details are hard to come by, but it is known that monkeys have been exposed to anthrax and pigs have had 40% of their blood drained before injection with E coli. Others have been exposed to poison gas and lethal nerve agents.
Historically there are also many examples of experiments on servicemen, without their knowledge or consent.
It is just coming to light, after a cynical American cover up, the depths of depravity the Japanese sank to in WW2, turning their Chinese prisoners into human guinea pigs.
The Americans took the view that all this research data ( medical & biological warfare experimentation) was so valuable, Japan was let off the hook.
So fine, if all the gullible and starry eyed provivisectionists out there want to believe scientists are all beavering away ethically for the good of mankind, in tandem with moralistic governments, that medical progress will collapse without vivisection and that it is mostly mice which suffer, it's up to you. But you're all going to look pretty silly when it's abolished and the game is finally up.
39 - BCE
'Animal Farm' ( a recent UK TV program). If you want to see some of the most mind-boggling -- and alarming -- examples of science fiction flourishing right now, this is the programme to watch.
The presenters witness genetically modified cows infected with anthrax and turned into human antibody factories. A human liver is grown in an antigravity machine. Animals are used to grow and harvest human organs and there is even the possibility that, one day, we will be genetically modified to regenerate damaged organs.
Dr Judson says farms have always existed to feed, clothe and keep us healthy, and biotechnology is simply an extension of that. "Would you prefer to die?" she asks. Frankly, yes.
40 - BCE
The moral debate was recently ignited over interspecies cloning. Scientists claim the goal is to eliminate the need for women to donate eggs for the cloning of human embryos - to be used for better understanding of genetic causes of diseases and the design of personalised medicines. The plan is to take the DNA from from patients with Alzheimer's, for instance, and fuse it with cow eggs that have had all their genetic material removed.The cloned embryos would be destroyed and the stem cells extracted.Scientists have vowed never to create a living animals through interspecies mixing!?!
The request for a government licence to use cow eggs instead of women's to generate human embryonic stem cells stirred significant controversy in the UK last year.(UK researchers must obtain government licences to work with human embryonic stem cells.)But the work is still viewed as immoral by 'social conservatives'.it has been called 'a violation of human dignity' and ' treating a human being at his or her earliest stages as a mere tool'.
Clearly, both human and non human animals are fair game in the mind of the researcher.
If these people cared so much about the human race, children would take priority ( research into childhood diseases gets comparatively little funding) and less would be spent on research into lifestyle diseases. More would be spent on preventative medicine, primary health care and education, and resources directed to third world countries where millions die from malaria, diarroehea and HIV for want of clean water & cheap drugs.
41 - BCE
Two Wesleyan Professors Receive Funding For Their Work With Epileptic Mice March 26, 2007
By DANIELA ALTIMARI, Courant Staff Writer MIDDLETOWN -- Wedged between UConn and Yale, the powerhouses of stem cell research in the state, two Wesleyan University professors are working to determine whether these building blocks of life can be used to treat epilepsy.
Full story Hartford Courant: Stem Cell Research Niche
42 - BCE
PETA BLASTS UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FOR DEADLY NICOTINE EXPERIMENTS ON
MONKEYS
Cruel, Redundant Tests for U.S. Government Aimed at "Proving" What Millions Have Known for Decades: Nicotine Is Addictive
For Immediate Release:
March 27, 2007
Contact: Alka Chandna, Ph.D.
Toronto - PETA, the world´s largest animal rights organization, is calling on University of Toronto (U of T) President David Naylor to immediately implement a policy requiring that U of T´s animal care committee be allowed to exercise oversight in all animal experiments performed by U of T faculty-no matter where the experiments take place. PETA´s request comes in light of the cruel and deadly nicotine experiments that a U of T animal experimenter recently performed on squirrel monkeys. Because the tests were conducted at a U.S.
government facility in Baltimore, they bypassed U of T´s animal care
committee. In a letter fired off to Naylor today, PETA points out that if the consent of the committee had been required, these wasteful and cruel tests may have been stopped.
PETA´s letter to University of Toronto President David Naylor is available on request. For more information, please visit StopAnimalTests.com
Full article here
[BCE: Please STOP pasting full articles from other sites into the comments. An intro plus the link to the work will suffice. Thanks. Comments Editor]
43 - Rick Bogle
I've wondered about the root motivations of vivisectors for quite a while. Money is part of it, of course; but other factors must contribute to their eagerness to hurt others.
A recent paper suggests at the willingness to sacrifice others in the name of some perceived need -- referred to as an "abnormal utilitarian pattern of judgement" in the paper -- may be due to focal bilateral damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex.
It might all come down to brain damage. For more on this.