Animal Testing // Current TV

TELL TEXAS TECH TO END LIVE CAT LABS FOR GOOD

***Go to the link to send an email to Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center***... more

ajrmy
added this
3 years ago
|
2 comments

Top Nine Insane Weapons Of War

poojam [removed]
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

Drug Testing on Beagles

For six months, an undercover investigator worked in an Ohio lab where beagles were... more

EthicalVegan
added this
3 years ago
|
3 comments

How to Spot An Animal Testing Company

Many cosmetics companies misleadingly claim their products are ‘not tested on... more

EthicalVegan
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

How To Promote Animal Rights

I'm a huge proponent of animal rights despite the fact that I have not yet taken... more

sfinfgeld2
added this
3 years ago
|
8 comments

Petition to Tell Clorox to Stop Animal Testing

Tell Clorox: Stop Animal Testing!

EthicalVegan
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

Missouri University no longer using live cats for experiments, PETA says after protest

A northwest Missouri hospital is switching to high-tech mannequins for medical... more

animaladvocate
added this
3 years ago
|
2 comments

PETA: Using Sex to Save Lives?

For years, actresses, reality TV stars, even porn stars have been stripped down and... more

MEnglish
added this
3 years ago
|
14 comments

PETA Game Discourages Animal Testing in Breast Cancer Research

Animal rights group PETA has posted a new online game designed to spotlight the use of... more

Nettle
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

If you care anything about primates, hypocrisy or justice, you’re going to want to read this blog entry from Priscilla Feral, President of Friends of Animals.

In a nutshell, PeTA is, for the third time, again suing Primarily Primates, Inc., a non-profit animal sanctuary in San Antonio, Texas that is managed by Friends of Animals (FoA) and operates solely to house and rehabilitate various non-native animals, such as primates, birds and an African lion.

These animals are typically the throwaways from pet trade and biomedical research facilities and without PPI’s intervention would have had an uncertain future – if any at all.

After two unsuccessful lawsuits, both of which were dismissed for unsubstantiated claims, one would think PeTA would not only examine its own agenda for legitimacy, but seriously reconsider wasting further donation dollars on giddy court cases. But, as Feral writes in her blog;

“As a $30 million per year organization, PETA can afford to file all the frivolous lawsuits it wants, hire as many lawyers as it wants, and make all of the frivolous arguments it wants. However, PETA is hard-pressed to explain how this lawsuit helps any of the animals in PPI’s care…”

The mission statement of Friends of Animals is to ‘cultivate a respectful view of nonhuman animals, free-living and domestic.’ They engage in nationwide spay and neuter campaigns, strongly support veganism and are staunch advocates for animal care, activism and compassion. Funny, but according to PeTA’s PR machines, they do, too.

So, we’ll be watching this case closely in the coming weeks. In the meantime, we hope you will send a letter to PeTA expressing your outrage that donation dollars are being spent on eating one of their own.

Personal Note:
I have always been a strong supporter of PETA. I have also supported Friends of Animals and many other organizations that promote animal rights, animal welfare legislation and environmental ethics. So, readining a post like this is disturbing.
I can't imagine where PETA would expect them to go. It would think the primates are in the best place possible. If this news is true, it would be disappointing on many levels...If you care anything about primates, hypocrisy or justice, you’re going to want... more

julesrs007
added this
3 years ago
|
3 comments

Cruel Animal testing

Rabbits are used for testing of many products humans use such as makeup, and house... more

Jmisery
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

Dying to Learn: Exposing the supply of dogs and cats to higher education.

“Dying to Learn: Exposing the Supply and Use of Dogs and Cats in Higher... more

julesrs007
added this
3 years ago
|
0 comments

Class B animal dealers deemed “unnecessary”

A National Academies report released Friday concludes that researchers have no need to deal with “random source” dealers of laboratory dogs.

Random source, or class B dealers are those that procure and sell dogs and cats from the general animal population to laboratories, rounding up dogs and cats from animal shelters, auctions, private individuals and other “random sources.” Class A dealers are those that sell animals bred for a life in the laboratory.

The report comes in response to a request by Congress through the National Institutes of Health for an evaluation of the need to use random source dogs and cats in NIH-funded research.

The report states that “despite new enforcement guidelines and intensified inspection efforts, not all origins of (Class B) animals are or can be traced. The USDA simply cannot assure that stolen or lost pets will not enter research laboratories via the Class B dealer system.” The U.S. Department of Agriculture licenses Class B dealers.

The findings in the report — mostly praised by both the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS) — could provide momentum in Congress to eliminate Class B dealers, whose numbers have been rapidly shrinking.

According to the report, 20 percent of cats and dogs used in research were obtained from Class B dealers in 2002; by 2008, only 3 percent were.

One of the alternative sources suggested in the report — which stopped short of ruling out the use of random source animals entirely – is for researchers to buy animals directly from pounds and shelters.

“AAVS is extremely disappointed, however, that the Committee fell short of recommending entirely against the use of random source animals, including former pets, in NIH research. The Committee suggests that if the use of random source animals is deemed necessary, one option is that NIH research laboratories actually go directly to animal pounds and shelters to acquire cats and dogs for experiments.

The AAVS says that approach, known as pound seizure, could led to problems, with laboratories focusing on poor and overcrowded shelters, and shelters that cooperated losing public trust.

“A shelter (or) pound that releases animals directly to research facilities will lose the public’s trust, and this could decrease the number of animals brought to the shelter … and increase the number of abandoned animals,” the AAVS said. “AAVS encourages Congress to eliminate Class B dealers and to address the public’s concerns about former pets ending up in research by prohibiting the provision of random source animals for research.”

The report failed to consider other means of scientific study that do not involve the invasive or harmful use of cats and dogs, AAVS said — even though such alternative methods are receiving increasing attention.

AAVS’s educational division, Animalearn ( http://www.animalearn.org/home.php) recently released a report, Dying to Learn: Exposing the supply and use of dogs and cats in higher education. To view and download the report, visit http://www.dyingtolearn.org/.A National Academies report released Friday concludes that researchers have no need to... more