-
related tags:
- Animal Testing
- Animal Liberation
- Animal Research
- Animal Rights
- Animal Welfare News & Animal Welfare Videos
- Primates
- Animal Abuse
- Shelter Dogs
- Animal Cruelty News & Animal Cruelty Videos
- animal cruelty
- aeta
- Companion Animals
- Eco-Terrorism
- Chimps
- HSUS
- shac
- Abuse of Power
- Chimpanzees
- Animal Welfare
- Cures
- Animals
- Monkeys
- Laboratory
- Animal Videos and News
- Mice
- Patriot Act
- Rats
- Environmentalism
- Dogs
- Animal Shelters
- Go Vegan
- veganism
- Animal Rescue
- Animal Protection
- Research
- Science
- Pigs
- Activism
- Ethics
- Dog Videos & Dog News
- FBI
- Corruption
- Environment
- Cat Videos & Cat News
- Green
- Kids
- Government
- Pets
- Wildlife
- Law
tagged w/ vivisection
-
Pro-Animal Cruelty Activists and their Million Dollar Campaigns of Misinformation
...
Due to a drop in support for heinous cruelty and slavery of our animal comrades suffering in laboratories, biomedical industry front group "The Foundation for Biomedical Research" has started a campaign to spread lies about the significance of the torture of nonhumans to humans.
Aside from the fact that these millions of dollars could be going to actual human based methods that could save lives- the campaign itself doesn't even have a shred of realism in it. Part of it involves putting up bill boards that say:
"Ever had leprosy? Thanks to animal research, you won’t."
Here's a little bit on how treatments for leprosy were developed. The first leprosy wonder-drug that worked in other animals quickly became useless in humans due to a resistance to its effectiveness. Another, clofazimine, found successes in vitro, so nonhuman animal suffering was not needed (even though they used them anyways). Rifamycin also showed promise in in vitro studies aside from it beig used in other animals. The need for nonhuman animals in the discovery of these drugs is completely fabricated.
Let's not forget that vivisection only ever came about due to the rule of the Catholic church and their insistence on making human cadaver dissection and other methods illegal. Oh so scientific!
Also keep in mind that the majority of animal testing is not done to cure diseases. It involves force feeding puppies household cleaning products or opening the heads of monkeys to record from brain cells. Animal testing is done to make money, to protect corporations from chemical and product toxicity suits, and to fulfill research interests of real life mad scientists will to learn what they wish to learn at any cost to human or nonhuman animal life.
On the bright side, the animal research medical-industrial complex is terrified. They're losing support every day and people are waking up to the reality of the cruel nature of nonhuman animal research as well as the detrimental effects it has on humans and the ecosystem. We must remain strong during this time as many of us do not have millions of dollars for bill boards. But, we do have the truth, solidarity, and compassion on our side. Keep it out there. Don't stop.
Other entries or news stories on this (see original link for links):
Please write about this as well. Feel free to add your link to the comments section and I will edit this entry to post it here.
http://arphilosophia.blogspot.com/2009/11/pro-animal-cruelty-activists-and-their.html... Due to a drop in support for heinous cruelty and slavery of our animal comrades... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 18 days ago
- |
- 44 comments
-
-
Yale Lab Technician Causes Two Problems for Animal Researchers
by Martha Rosenberg
Scratch that $11.2 million underground animal research facility the University of Iowa's interim vice president for research, Jordan Cohen is probably saying to his Board of Regents right about now.
Related Stories on Scoop
A 35,000-square-foot underground vivarium where researchers could move mice, sheep, pigs, rabbits and primates without ever coming above ground made a lot of sense in 2004--when activists breached Iowa labs, opening cages and ruining research.
But it doesn't make a lot of sense when the enemy is, gulp one of one's own.
The Yale community might be breathing a little easier now that a suspect is in custody in connection with the murder of graduate student Annie Le who was killed inside a high security lab in September, but the animal research community isn't.
What good are electronic surveillance, code cards and high tech security when the foe is in your own household in the form of a laboratory technician like suspect Raymond Clark III some are asking?
Did he euthanize one too many decorticated cats? See too many primates pinned in stereotaxic devices? Spend too long under the ether hood?
Or was Clark "off" before he became a lab technician--even becoming a technician because he was off? (Does the job description read, "most love animals but not get too attached to them"?)
Whatever Clark's reasons if found guilty, animal researchers now have two new fears: depraved technicians--and the public peeling back the Plexiglas curtain on the secretive, pork-ridden world of animal research.
There's a reason for the security that keeps Beagle burn videos from surfacing like egg farm videos. Animal research is too lucrative for the university/government/pharma complex to risk macaques on YouTube and the public judging the asinine and repetitive experiments many researchers know they live on.
Do you think Northwestern University--or the National Institutes of Health (NIH)--want to acknowledge that every year from l978 through l985 Associate Professor Dr. Charles Larson fused monkeys' necks to their skulls and deprived them food five days per week to make them cry out in a specific manner according to Concerned Citizens for Ethical Research? At a tax payer cost of $472,370? To "gain insights into some of the neurological disorders affecting vocalization?" Even as his colleagues scoffed?
Thanks to the Stimulus Bill, NIH has a 2009 budget of $39.9 billion--think a year of the war in Iraq--and much of it goes to animal research.
University of Washington, for example, scored a cool $1 billion this year according to the Seattle Times for research, topping all public universities, despite its little incident with assistant professor of immunology Chen Dong in 2003.
Dong withheld food from mice, removed tips of their tails without anesthesia, failed to let babies wean and failed to euthanize suffering mice per the established mouse-pain scale said the university, barring him from animal research. Dong was also charged with falsifying his scientific articles and the Journal of Clinical Investigation asked for a retraction, reported the Times.
Nor does the University of Iowa seem to be hurting financially with its plans for a $122.5 million Iowa Institute for Biomedical Discovery which will connect to the underground vivarium mentioned earlier with its state of the art animal housing facilities, cage washing facilities and aseptic surgery space.
No, for animal researchers the bigger fear from Le's murder than technicians like Clark is the public seeing the heaps of unsupervised government pork behind their Plexiglas curtain. No wonder the research community wraps a "saves lives" cloak around its work whether falsified journal articles or Larson's "speech" studies.
It keeps the public from saying YOU'RE FUNDING WHAT? For how many years? With what results? about its tax dollars.by Martha Rosenberg Scratch that $11.2 million underground animal research facility... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 1 month ago
- |
- 2 comments
-
-
Chimpanzees Suffer Psychologically Like Humans
BOSTON, Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- 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 September issue, Vol. 45 (5), of the American Psychological Association journal Developmental Psychology.
(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20090909/DC72238)
Psychologists G.A. Bradshaw, Ph.D., Ph.D., Theodora Capaldo, Ed.D., Lorin Lindner, Ph.D., and Gloria Grow, Fauna sanctuary director, examined the case histories of three chimpanzees -- Billy Jo, Tom, and Regis -- all used in research before rescue into sanctuary. The study underscores the ethical implications of cross-fostering nonhuman primates and their use in research.
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 fourteen 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 three different labs undergoing multiple procedures including 369 "knockdowns" -- anesthesia 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. Post-Trauma Self Repair in Chimpanzees follows Building an Inner Sanctuary: Complex PTSD in Chimpanzees (published April 2008 in the Journal of Trauma and Dissociation), which represented the first time human psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses were applied to chimpanzees, demonstrating that psychological suffering crosses species lines. Together, the papers provide irrefutable arguments to the growing ethical imperative to end the use of chimpanzees in U.S. research.
SOURCE New England Anti-Vivisection SocietyBOSTON, Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A recent study documents the severe... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 3 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Stolen Dogs Found in Med School Laboratory
You're out for a walk with your dog when two men suddenly appear and grab him before you have a chance to react. In an instant, your canine companion is gone. Then—as if that weren't horrifying enough—you later learn that your beloved friend is caged in a medical school laboratory, slated to be cut open and killed in a training exercise.
It's every animal guardian's worst nightmare, and it allegedly happened recently to Carmen Valverde of Lima, Peru, and her dog, Tomas.
After Tomas was stolen, a neighbor of Carmen's who works at the teaching hospital in the University of San Marcos recognized him while looking in the surgery room in which the school routinely dissects dogs.
The neighbor alerted Carmen and, wearing a lab coat, Carmen was able to sneak into the facility at the university and rescue Tomas, who was already sedated and strapped down for dissection.
While the school claims that it only dissects "dogs [who] don't have owners," after Tomas' story was made public, at least one other guardian found her missing dog in the same laboratory.
We're following this case and will keep you posted on any developments.
This problem isn't limited to Peru. Animals suffer in laboratories no matter where they come from, but laboratories that are willing to pay for animals provide an incentive for unscrupulous people to get animals wherever they can—often from our streets and yards. "Bunchers" may drug animals, pose as animal control officers, or answer "free to a good home" ads to get puppies and kittens to sell.You're out for a walk with your dog when two men suddenly appear and grab him before... more-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 3 months ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
Hidden Crimes
Eyelids are sewn shut to study effect of light deprivation.
HIDDEN CRIMES: A Photographic exhibition on vivisection
(WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTOS)
Please visit my blogger at: http://julesrs007saveanimals.blogspot.com/ for information on how you can help end the atrocity to our fellow creatures.Eyelids are sewn shut to study effect of light deprivation. HIDDEN CRIMES: A... more-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 5 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Inside HLS 1997-2008
A look inside Huntingdon Life Sciences over the past 9 years. They are still doing this as we speak. For more information, go to www.shac.netA look inside Huntingdon Life Sciences over the past 9 years. They are still doing... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 2 comments
-
-
Me and My Monkey: The confessions of a reluctant vivisector
By Daniel Engber
Updated Friday, June 5, 2009, at 7:19 AM ET
My research monkey had a pink face, dark eyes, sandy fur, and a 2-inch titanium rod screwed into the top of his skull. His name was Clayton.
It's customary to name research macaques in alphabetical order according to when they arrived at the lab. Clayton showed up after Axel and Bongo and ahead of Duper, Einstein, and Freud—but whatever institutional seniority he had meant little in the monkey room. Clayton, a juvenile, was skittish and shy, submissive as a rule, and generally afraid to leave his cage. When I'd finally manage to coax him out, he would leap straight into the "monkey chair," preferring enclosure in a small, plastic box to the thought of ambling across the laboratory floor.
Though he hardly needed it, Clayton was leashed even for these short trips from cage to chair. I'd hook a chain to his collar and slide it through a loop at the end of a 3-foot pole so he couldn't get close enough to bite or scratch. Macaques can harbor the deadly herpes B virus, and it's generally forbidden to approach one that's unrestrained and un-anaesthetized. Though Clayton and I spent hours together every day, I never so much as touched his fur during an experimental session. If he came to recognize me—and I believe he did—it was despite the surgical mask, goggles, hair net, and other safety accoutrements of any visit to the monkey room.
The monkey chair wasn't much bigger than the animals themselves, and Clayton's head poked out through sliding panels at the top. I'd roll him in front of a computer monitor and fasten his protruding metal post to an external frame. With his skull fixed in place, only his eyes could move to follow the targets that zipped across the screen. (By tracking the direction of Clayton's gaze, I'd hoped to learn something about how smooth pursuit eye movements are controlled in the brain.) His eyes would follow me, though, as I loaded up the software and filled his juice dispenser; sometimes I'd place a jelly bean or a raisin delicately on the edge of his mouth, which he'd gobble up before flashing his gums in the deferential gesture of silent bared teeth. I talked to Clayton, too, trying to keep him entertained. But every once in a while he'd show his impatience with a gesture that was disturbingly human: I remember the day he crossed his legs on the shelf of the chair and started strumming his fingernails against the wall.
The one time I held Clayton in my arms, he was asleep and swaddled in a blanket. He'd just undergone a minor surgery, probably to repair a broken eye coil. (Most of the monkeys in the lab had a thin wire implanted under one eyelid that could be used to track their eye movements.) As a junior graduate student, I wasn't allowed to do more than observe the procedure, but when it was done, one of the postdocs lifted Clayton off the table and beckoned me over. I was to carry him back to the monkey room and deposit him gently into a cage before the anesthesia wore off.
For the first time, I felt the shape of his body—the outline of his little shoulders and spindly legs. For weeks we'd interacted across bars and through thick plastic; now I had him cradled him against my chest, his eyes closed and his head tucked into the crook of my arm. He was about the size and weight of a newborn baby; with the blanket wrapped around him, only his pink face was showing, and his eyelids fluttered as I carried him down the hall.
...full article at linkBy Daniel Engber Updated Friday, June 5, 2009, at 7:19 AM ET My research monkey... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
30 Crimes the Government Chooses to Not Label Terrorism
We recently looked at why the government and the press (outside of some bloggers and opinion columnists) have not labeled the murder of an abortion provider as “terrorism.” It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t an isolated incident. The word terrorism is used by the FBI and Department of Justice only when it fits a certain political agenda.
The government has systematically labeled animal rights and environmental activists who have never harmed anyone as “the number one domestic terrorism threat.” Yet the term is not applied to individuals who have committed much more serious (and often violent) crimes either for personal gain or for right-wing motives.
Here are 30 cases that the government has chosen to not label as “terrorism”:
Plotting to assassinate the president.
Beating African-American voters because they voted for Obama.
Threatening to assassinate the President and detonate C4 at the Mall of America.
Making death threats against biologists to “kill the enemies of Christian society.”
Attacking a black man with a chainsaw because of his race.
Using a noose to assault a black man at the Pentagon.
Tying up a black student and taunting him with racial epithets as part of a high school graduation party.
Smuggling “shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, rocket-propelled grenades, and other military weapons.”
Leaving an incendiary device at a federal courthouse.
Placing a pipe bomb near a hotel and then calling in a bomb threat.
Making bomb threats on an airplane.
Impersonating an armed federal agent.
Shooting at FBI agents in a drive-by.
Threatening federal agents with an assault rifle.
Offering to sell your own child for sexual purposes.
Attempting to buy a 9-year-old girl for sex.
Selling a 5-year-old for sexual purposes.
Forcing a young woman to engage in prostitution through force, fraud and coercion.
Kidnapping 3 children.
Sending white powder to John McCain’s presidential campaign with a note reading, “Senator McCain, If you are reading this then you are already DEAD! Unless of course you can’t or don’t breathe.”
Mailing 65 threatening letters to financial institutions with white powder.
Mailing the Social Security Administration and saying ““I’m going to blow up your office and the IRS office as well.”
Sending more than 25 threatening letters to federal, state, and local governmental agencies containing fake Anthrax.
Sending a white powder through the U.S. mail to the Internal Revenue Service with a note that says “YOU HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO ANTRAX DIE!”
A former sheriff’s deputy forcing a teenage girl to perform sexual acts in his patrol car.
Three police officers shooting a 92-year old woman at her home “during the execution of a search warrant obtained by the defendants based upon false information.”
Using “deadly weapons including firearms, baseball bats, machetes, bottles or knives in the commission of numerous murders, attempted murders and assaults…kidnapping; obstruction of justice; and witness tampering.”
Stealing cattle for personal profit.
Setting fire at a petting barn and killing more than 40 animals.
Setting dozens of fires that caused “incalculable suffering.”
Of course we could keep going, there’s no shortage of examples to draw from. To be clear, I am not arguing that all of these examples are in fact “terrorism” (I’ll be outlining what I think are the top criteria for defining acts of terrorism in a future article). But if the government defines “terrorism” so broadly as to include releasing mink from fur farms and protesting legally while wearing masks, then why don’t any of these qualify?We recently looked at why the government and the press (outside of some bloggers and... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 5 comments
-
-
BUAV: Major parties unite in call for an end to the use of animals in testing household products
The BUAV, the UK’s leading organisation campaigning to end animal experiments, welcomes the announcements made by the Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Green parties to pledge to include a ban on the testing of household products on animals in their manifestos for the next election. The announcements were made at a BUAV Parliamentary Reception in Westminster on Tuesday 2 June.
The announcements follow a high profile political and public campaign by the BUAV as part of its Clean Up Cruelty campaign. The campaign aims to eliminate the cruel and unnecessary use of animals in the testing of the ingredients for household products such as washing-up liquid, bathroom cleaner, floor polish and air fresheners.
Major high street retailers are increasingly responding to public concern about this issue and signing up to the BUAV’s Humane Household Product Standard (HHPS) – the only internationally recognised scheme that enables consumers to easily identify and purchase household products whose ingredients have not been tested on animals. Already, all household products made by the Co-operative and Marks and Spencer have been approved under the HHPS. This clearly illustrates that it is unnecessary to test on animals to manufacture and sell safe and effective household products.
In 1997 the UK government made a small amendment to policy which instantly saved thousands of animals from suffering in needless cosmetics testing. The Clean up Cruelty campaign aims to do the same for household products.
Ian Cawsey, MP said: “I have been asked by Gordon Brown to look at all aspects of animal welfare policy and I am convinced that the ban we introduced on testing cosmetics on animals can be extended to cover household products. It will be central to my report to the Prime Minister and will be widely supported in the Labour Party to be in our manifesto for the next election.”
Andrew Rosindell, MP said: “Animal testing is one of the most significant and controversial areas of the animal welfare debate. It is crucial that, step by step, we make concerted efforts to reduce the numbers of animals used and the number of procedures undertaken.
“Following the successful ban on testing for cosmetic products, we must now look to see where we can extend this further. We are pleased to support the BUAV's Clean up Cruelty campaign and it is the Conservative Party’s view that we are now in a realistic position to ban the use of animals in testing on household products.
“This is the first step in the Conservative approach to continually reducing animal experimentation, there is still much ground to cover, and we will continue to press the case for greater emphasis on development into alternative methods of testing.”
Roger Williams, MP said: “The Liberal Democrats have had a long held belief that it is totally unnecessary to use animals for the testing of household goods and I am happy to support the BUAV’s campaign to ban their use.
“The British are a nation of animal lovers and the Government should reflect that by implementing steps that will lead to the eventual ban of unnecessary testing on animals. This has already happened with cosmetics and I see no reason why similar moves should not be made in the case of household goods.”
Caroline Lucas, MEP said: “The Green Party has pledged to continue campaigning to end the cruelty inflicted upon animals in the name of ‘safety’ and it is certainly timely for the progress that has been made with regard to cosmetics testing to be mirrored, and improved upon, with regard to household products.
“The Green Party fully supports BUAV’s campaign for a total ban on all testing of household products and I will be doing my utmost to press for a ban across Europe, as well as in this country.”
...full article at linkThe BUAV, the UK’s leading organisation campaigning to end animal experiments,... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Pepper, the Stolen Dog Who Changed American Science
Where's Pepper?In the summer of 1965, a female Dalmatian was stolen from a farm in Pennsylvania. Her story changed America.
By Daniel Engber
First, Ivan Pavlov would sever a dog's esophagus and sew the loose ends to its throat, leaving a pair of adjacent holes that connected, by separate passages, to its mouth and stomach. Then he'd slice through the dog's abdomen, carve a hole in the wall of its stomach, and stitch open another permanent wound.
The dog, left hungry from the night before, would be harnessed to a wooden stand and presented with a bowl of raw meat. No matter how much it ate, it never got full—the dog chewed and swallowed, but the masticated meat would erupt from its esophageal opening and dribble back into the bowl, whereupon the dog would lap it up all over again. In the meantime, a glass tube attached to the animal's stomach opening allowed its gastric secretions to drip into a collecting bottle, so they could be filtered, analyzed, and sold to the public as a remedy for dyspepsia.
As historian Daniel P. Todes writes in Pavlov's Physiology Factory, these thrice-perforated animals enabled a new approach to science—the chronic experiment—and a series of discoveries about the nervous control of digestion for which Pavlov won the Nobel Prize in 1904. (At the time of the award, he hadn't yet shown that animals would drool at the sound of a bell.) In 1935, just before his death, Pavlov approved the design for a monument to his canine test subjects, erected on the grounds of the Institute of Experimental Medicine in St. Petersburg, Russia. A bronze plaque on one side depicts the dogs on laboratory tables, tied to their wooden frames with their fistulas open. "We must painfully acknowledge that, precisely because of its great intellectual development, the best of man's domesticated animals—the dog—most often becomes the victim of physiological experiments," he had written in 1893. "The dog is irreplaceable; moreover it is extremely touching. It is almost a participant in the experiments conducted upon it, greatly facilitating the success of the research by its understanding and compliance."
No one can say exactly how old Pepper was in the summer of 1965, but every member of the Lakavage family remembers her gentle disposition. There were plenty of other dogs racing around their farm at the bottom of Blue Mountain, but the Dalmatian named Pepper—trim and affectionate, pelted with splotches of black—was always Mom's favorite.
Julia Lakavage preferred to take in strays, but she made an exception when she saw Pepper at the decrepit Spatterdash kennel a few miles down the road. Julia and her husband, Peter, lived on 82 acres in the hills above Slatington, Pa., two hours due west of New York City. Peter had a job with Bethlehem Steel; Julia had polished shells there during the World War II, but by the 1960s she was working the night shift as a nurse for the Good Shepherd Home in Allentown. They had four daughters—Star, Carol, Kathy, and Peggy—and a 7-year-old grandson named Michael.
Pepper loved a car ride, and some nights Julia would take her along to the hospital in Allentown. If Julia were the only nurse assigned to the floor, she'd bring the dog on her rounds of nursing home residents and handicapped orphans. The patients loved it, remembers Star. They would call for Pepper as soon as they heard her paws click-clacking along the linoleum hallway. One day, Julia promised, she'd buy "Nurse Pepper" a little white hat.
But Pepper didn't come to work with Julia on the night of Tuesday, June 22, 1965...
full article at linkWhere's Pepper?In the summer of 1965, a female Dalmatian was stolen from a farm in... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 1 comment
-
-
Watchdog seeks probe of leading U.S. labs
WASHINGTON, June 1 (UPI) -- Twenty-six U.S. research labs were accused of fraud in a complaint filed Monday by an independent animal research watchdog.
Stop Animal Exploitation Now filed the complaint with U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging a probe of 50 U.S. researchers for allegedly filing fraudulent documents and performing nearly identical experimentation in violation of federal regulations, the organization said in a news release.
"The animal research industry is just as unregulated as Wall Street was before the current economic crisis," said Michael A. Budkie, SAEN executive director. "If this system is not overhauled, the next meltdown will be in research laboratories."
The non-profit group based in Ohio said it filed the complaint following a study of 57 taxpayer-funded research grants valued at more than $110 million during a five-year period. The study concluded the projects have a redundancy index of 5.4 out of a possible 6.
The projects are funded at 26 separate U.S. labs, including Harvard, Stanford, Emory, University of Alabama, University of California campuses at Berkeley, Davis and San Francisco, as well as Johns Hopkins, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Rutgers and Duke. Other labs named in the complaint are Wake Forest, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Vanderbilt, University of Pittsburgh, University of Pennsylvania, University of Texas, Brown University, Smith Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, Salk Institute, Massachusetts General Hospital, City College of New York, Washington University in St. Louis, University of Chicago and University of Washington.WASHINGTON, June 1 (UPI) -- Twenty-six U.S. research labs were accused of fraud in a... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 18 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 Education” documents the hidden practices of colleges and universities in which unscrupulous Class B dealers, who obtain animals from shelters, sell former pets to education facilities, where these animals are used, and often killed, for dissection and live surgeries in teaching laboratories.
It traces the route that brings dogs like Cruella, a shepherd-mix from Michigan, to an unhappy end at university teaching labs.
The result of a two-year investigation of animal acquisition and use at 92 public colleges and universities in the U.S, “Dying to Learn” reveals that 52% are using live and dead dogs and cats for teaching, despite the availability of viable alternatives.
The report also dentifies specific schools that are obtaining animals from unethical sources.
DETAILS:
Cruella's story: http://www.dyingtolearn.org/cruella.html
Download report in full: http://www.dyingtolearn.org/dyingToLearn.pdf
What you can do to help the animals: http://www.dyingtolearn.org/takeaction.html“Dying to Learn: Exposing the Supply and Use of Dogs and Cats in Higher Education”... more-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 6 months 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-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 0 comments
-
-
No Justice for Monkey Boiled Alive
No Federal Violations for Boiled Monkey Death - Everett Judge Refuses to Allow Prosecution in Scalded Monkey Case
She was a cynomolgus monkey, also known as a crab-eating macaque or a long-tailed macaque. Whatever name you prefer, her horrifying, gruesome death followed a brief life that itself was surely lonely, frightening, and painful.
There were no trees, no gusts of wind, no natural smells, sounds, and sights, no family or companionship, no joy or wonder in her daily existence. Instead there was a tiny, barren space, with walls, ceiling, and floor made of cold metal wires. Instead there was terror.
Instead there were likely injections and restraints and intentionally inflicted pain and isolation. And there was to be far more of that, as humans tested drugs on her--and in a lab with a history of abuse and cruelty at that.
But then even before they were done with her, she was killed, and in the worst way. She died horrifically in the same cage in which she lived so sadly. She gripped the cage bars as 180 degree water and caustic, burning chemicals rained down forcefully all over her trapped body, boiling her ALIVE, melding the skin of her tortured body to the cage, permanently fusing her fingers to the metal bars that she gripped in terror and excruciating pain like we will never know.
There is no doubt that she screamed. God, how she must have screamed.
They had to peel her dead body from the cage.
To those of you out there who don't understand why animal rights activists are sometimes so angry, who think we have nothing to be angry about, who don't understand how we can cry over animals we've never met, who prefer to remain blissfully ignorant and insist that the way we use animals is fine and that animals don't suffer at our hands because, after all, we have laws to prevent and punish animal abuse, or who condemn the open or covert rescue of animals from labs, to all of you--please pay attention.
Incidents such as this, in which animals are not just abused but tortured--these 'incidents' are not rare -- WE, the general public, are informed only by mistake or by undercover work --when informed, OUR society chooses not to listen to such uncomfortable and disgraceful acts of inhumanity -- these are among our reasons for being angry.
Go read the article that first appeared early this year, http://www.kirotv.com/news/15189249/detail.html ...when a Washington news station first broke this story. Among everything else you read will be the following, which tells a not-unusual story about what happens when employees who witness cruelty, whether in a lab or a slaughterhouse, dare to speak up: they get fired, and the abuse continues.
Details of this story will shock and sadden you. Please follow links at:
http://www.kirotv.com/investigations/16341994/detail.html
http://animalrights.change.org/blog/view/no_justice_for_the_monkey_boiled_alive
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008326494_webmonkey29m.html
http://animallawonline.blogspot.com/2008/10/washington-state-judge-refuses-to-allow.html
'Protect Captive Primates Act' http://animalrights.change.org/actions/view/urge_senate_to_pass_captive_primate_safety_actNo Federal Violations for Boiled Monkey Death - Everett Judge Refuses to Allow... more-
- julesrs007
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 18 comments
-
-
Genetically engineered monkeys pass green-glowing DNA to offspring
What else will they pass on? And what then will we pass on to our own offspring in time as a result of our eating genetically altered food? Scientists claim they did this in order to test these animals to find cures for human diseases. I personally think it is cruel to use these animals for such a purpose and deprive them of a natural life. Wouldn't it be ironic however, to be using these genetically altered monkeys to look for cures to human diseases that are actually exacerbated by eating genetically altered organisms? The cures for diseases are not in green glowing monkeys... they are found in our natural world which provides all we need to survive. Why doesn't science concentrate on that instead of altering it with unknown consequences that may breed more problems than solutions? I am all for scientific research, but not when it intrudes on the natural order of our planet.
So, is this innovative scientific research, or animal cruelty?What else will they pass on? And what then will we pass on to our own offspring in... more-
- JanforGore
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 62 comments
-
-
Their Calling Is Defending Rats, Yet These Folks Aren't Lawyers
Animal Lovers Go to Bat for Lab Rodents; Karen Borga Has Something Up Her Sleeve
By DIONNE SEARCEY
In her fight for the rights of some of the smallest creatures, Stephanie Ernst offers a video of a frolicking, fluffy mammal snuggling up with a pet cat.
"Rats don't get a fair shake," she writes in an introduction to the video on her animal-rights blog. "This one is quite adorable and may lead you to see rats a little differently."
Unfortunately, stripped along the bottom of the video is an ad for an exterminator automatically generated by the YouTube.com service hosting the online clip.
"Immediate rat solutions!" it reads. "Free inspection the day you call."
Says Ms. Ernst: "It's horrible."
video
One Woman's Fight for Rodent Rights
3:15
Amber Allinger is working to shed prejudices against rats. She's even doing her dissertation on the rodents, which she calls sweet and nice. WSJ's Dionne Searcey reports.
Ms. Ernst, a resident of St. Louis, is most concerned about the welfare of lab rodents. Animal advocates say rats and mice make up 90% of animal testing conducted in university laboratories and other research facilities in the U.S. In 2002, the Animal Welfare Act was amended to exclude rodents from protections offered to bigger lab animals including dogs, monkeys and even guinea pigs.
"Rats and mice tend to get a bad rap" that influences people from the time they are children, says Ms. Ernst. "We just have these biases built in that are not really representative of who they are."
Animal-rights advocates in the U.S. have scored coups in recent years for an assortment of uncuddly animals. A new law requires bigger cages for egg-laying chickens in California. Foie gras, a delicacy made from the livers of fattened geese and ducks, has been banished from some restaurant menus.
But public sympathy for rats and mice hasn't grown much in three decades since the animal-rights movement first organized in the U.S. Viewed as pests and greeted with shrieks, rats are much less likely to attract public sympathy than, say, the furry bunnies that serve as the poster critters for cutting back on animal testing.
So, rat lovers have a tough job. Researchers who use federal funds are asked to adhere to basic guidelines for rodents, such as avoiding overcrowded cages. But privately funded research labs are legally bound by no rules in their testing of rats and mice.
"You see people shut down if you talk about how a rat can suffer," says Chad Sandusky, director of toxicology and research at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group that fights for animal rights and advocates vegetarianism.
Years ago, during his doctorate research on allergic reactions in humans, Mr. Sandusky experimented on and euthanized many rodents. The 64-year-old pharmacologist and toxicologist now works to persuade chemical and pesticide companies to carry out effective experiments using computerized tests or other means that don't involve animals.
"I'm working off my bad karma," he said.
Mr. Sandusky's transformation came gradually as he reviewed studies involving rodents and other animals for the Environmental Protection Agency. He concluded animal studies were too expensive and time-consuming, and the results didn't merit the sacrifice.
"I used to see rats and think, 'Ew,' " Mr. Sandusky said. "Now I see rats and think, 'Those rats have probably got a family somewhere.' "
Mr. Sandusky and other activists have succeeded in getting companies to listen to their concerns about using rodents in experiments. But rarely does anyone actually stop using rats and mice altogether. So activists are left to seek a better quality of life for the rats and mice in the lab.
"These animals are in full view 24-7, and they don't have any ability to do anything other than drink water and eat pellets and, well, you can imagine," says Mr. Sandusky.
...full article at linkAnimal Lovers Go to Bat for Lab Rodents; Karen Borga Has Something Up Her Sleeve By... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 6 months ago
- |
- 12 comments
-
-
Are You Boycotting Procter & Gamble Yet? Time to Start
When I started becoming more aware of animal issues, there was one mammoth corporation I learned about--and learned to watch out for and avoid--immediately: Procter & Gamble. In the world of unnecessary, cruel testing on animals, P&G is one of the bad guys. And oh, are they everywhere. If you aren't boycotting P&G yet, it's time to start--and when better to start than this Saturday, May 16, the day of global boycott and action called for by Uncaged (UK) and In Defense of Animals?
Please see the boycott lists at Uncaged and at IDA's P&G Kills site for which products to avoid (you can also go straight to P&G's own Web site for their product list). There are dozens of brands and products to cross off your list, all of them very well known. I hope that you're doing your best to purchase only cruelty-free products anyway--products labeled as not tested on animals and products without animal ingredients--but even if you're not all the way there yet, kicking the ubiquitous P&G out of your life can go a long way toward giving those cruel animal-tested products the boot too.
Please order or print out a cruelty-free guide to take with you when you shop (or iPhone users, get the iPhone app I posted about the other day; edit: there's a second option for an iPhone app now too), and also print out these separate P&G lists from IDA and Uncaged--there are too many brands in too many categories to remember, and P&G ventures into product lines (e.g., snack foods) that may not appear in cruelty-free guides (though you should be able to find reference to P&G in the small print of most P&G product packaging too). In the past, I've also had the Logos of Cruelty image up on my fridge as a reminder and quick reference.
And for this year's day of boycott and action, Uncaged and IDA are focusing on P&G brand Herbal Hurtful Essences as an example of what goes on in P&G laboratories. From IDA:
Despite claims from corporate giant Procter & Gamble (P&G) that it tests products on animals only as a last resort and only when required by law, published scientific papers show that P&G took an already approved ingredient in Herbal Essences shampoo - butylparaben - and force-fed it in massive doses to pregnant animals.
Evidence uncovered by the British animal rights group Uncaged shows that P&G force-fed butylparaben - a preservative used for decades in personal care products - to pregnant rats to see if it harms their developing offspring.
The experiment killed 1,300 animals (100 pregnant mothers and their 1,200 newborns) subjecting the mothers to stressful force-feeding for approximately three weeks, after which they were killed in carbon dioxide gas chambers. Experimenters then removed the slowly dying babies from their mothers’ bodies and killed them.
Information on the safety of butylparaben, one of a class of products known as parabens, has already been amply demonstrated at least twenty years earlier. Many of the animals used by P&G for this experiment received massive doses of butylparaben, which, according to the researcher in charge of the study “far exceeds human exposure estimates.”
These tests are not required by any law, and detailed information on this ingredient has been widely available for many years.When I started becoming more aware of animal issues, there was one mammoth corporation... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 14 comments
-
-
Primate lab slapped by USDA
Federal investigators have confirmed reports of primate mistreatment at the largest primate research facility in the US.
As The Scientist reported in early March, the New Iberia Research Center in Louisiana drew criticism after a video of alleged animal abuse surfaced. The video was shot by an investigator with the Humane Society of the United States, who in 2007 and 2008 recorded images of chimps being sedated with dart guns and falling off their perches onto the floor, and monkeys with open wounds.
Investigators with the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) visited the New Iberia Research Center, which is administered by the University of Louisiana, Lafayette, on March 17th in response to a complaint filed by the Humane Society. The report detailing their investigation was released yesterday (May 11).
Investigators were not able to observe the facility's sedation practices during their visit, but they documented several other violations of the Animal Welfare Act.
"Three adult primates individually housed with nursing infants were under sedation in their primary enclosures without adequate monitoring," the report read. "Each animal was not responsive to our presence or the vigorous attempts of the infant to arouse their mother. One of the sedated primates had their head pressed into the side of the enclosure possibly obstructing breathing. Monitoring in this manner was identified in separate areas of the facility grounds by two different inspection teams on the same day."
The report also stated that adult chimpanzees were transported improperly, with unrestrained apes set on tables and lifted by their four limbs into waiting vehicles. The report noted "the possibility of injury caused by the primate falling off of an unsecure table, injury to the joints or musculature caused by rough manipulations during the carrying or dropping during lifting the animal in to the transport vehicle."
Investigators also found that a number of African Green Monkeys at the facility were missing their tails. "Some of these tails were amputated as a result of trauma and others were amputated as a result of frostbite," the report read. "The heating of outside enclosures does not allow for the prevention of frostbite to all extremities of these primates."
The investigators uncovered further deficiencies in how the center documented animal research protocols as mandated by the Animal Welfare Act.
"USDA will be taking immediate action to ensure that these issues are corrected," the federal agency said in a statement.
"The UL Lafayette New Iberia Research Center is working with APHIS to ensure that corrective actions are taken," New Iberia Research Center director Thomas Rowell said in a statement faxed to The Scientist. The statement notes that the investigation turned up six "noncompliant issues," five of which the research center had "completely addressed" as of May 11th. The only outstanding issue appears to be the proper heating of the outdoor African Green Monkey enclosures noted in the APHIS report. The center has until October 30th to address that problem.
USDA investigator revisited the facility on April 30th and concluded that the citations uncovered in the March 17th investigation "were reviewed and addressed appropriately by the University's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee," according to the facility's statement.Federal investigators have confirmed reports of primate mistreatment at the largest... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 3 comments
-
-
Undercover at Covance Laboratories
Every year in Europe, up to 10,000 non-human primates (monkeys) suffer and die in laboratory experiments. They are mainly used in the 'safety' testing of pharmaceuticals and other chemicals, in the production and quality control of vaccines (including neurovirulence testing of polio vaccines), testing of dental materials and in fundamental biomedical research.
In the videos at the link, you can see animals being abused, restrained, and even humiliated by being moved around to music before having tubes shoved down their throats.
Covance has labs all over the world. Read more about them here: http://www.covance.backfire.dk/english/engl_start.html
The above video is an undercover investigation at a Virginia, USA Covance lab but at the link are investigations from around the world, by several organizations, finding similar cruelty.Every year in Europe, up to 10,000 non-human primates (monkeys) suffer and die in... more-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 4 comments
-
-
Air Force Taser Experiments on Pigs
Audio and footage of air force weapons experiments on pigs. Your tax dollars at work.-
- animalia_libero
- added this
- 7 months ago
- |
- 20 comments
-
