Showing posts with label biomedical research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biomedical research. Show all posts

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Animal rights gang face sentence




Six animals rights activists who targeted companies linked to
Huntingdon Life Sciences in an attempt to close down the animal
testing lab will appear in court at the start of their sentencing
hearing.

Sarah Whitehead, 53, Nicole Vosper, 22, Thomas Harris, 27, Jason
Mullan, 32, Nicola Tapping, 29, and Alfie Fitzpatrick, 20, were all
members of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty SHAC.

The gang waged an international campaign of intimidation over a
seven-year period against a host of supply companies to try to force
the closure of HLS.

--
full story:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jY27scDu465Q73RiWaxgt5ZsoFBw?docId=N0008401287626420750A

Saturday, September 25, 2010

NOT IN OUR NAME: ANIMAL DEFENDERS INTERNATIONAL CALLS FOR A GLOBAL STAND AGAINSTSPACE EXPERIMENTS ON ANIMALS

AND CALLS ON THE PUBLIC TO PROTEST TO THE US & RUSSIAN EMBASSIES

LONDON, Sept 24, 2010 -- Animal Defenders International (ADI), the leading animal welfare organisation that works globally for the protection of animals, has launched a major international drive to stop NASA and the Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) from performing radiation experiments on monkeys as part of plans to travel to mars.

The ADI offices in Los Angeles have instigated a campaign in Congress to halt the NASA experiments and the London headquarters of ADI are co-ordinating a global drive urging people to contact the US and Russian Embassies.

The campaign has attracted the backing of astronauts, former NASA employees, and a commitment from the European Space Agency not to perform monkey experiments.

At the heart of the new campaign is a compelling 4-minute video entitled 'Space Experiments on Monkeys - One Giant Leap Backwards' which recaps the prior use of animals in space research, cites reasons NASA's irradiation experiments are flawed and premature, and presents viable alternatives to primate testing. The DVD also includes an exclusive ten-minute interview with April Evans, former NASA engineer who explains she resigned her dream job with one of the world's top space agencies because of NASA's radiation tests. Both videos are also being launched online as part of a major awareness drive.

Every member of the US Congress will receive a copy of the DVD and copies will be sent to the US and Russian Embassies around the world.

Tim Phillips, Animal Defenders International Campaign Director said, "These tests are cruel, unnecessary, premature and a waste of $1.75 US million of taxpayers' money. Our video shows that these monkey experiments have been criticised from every side, scientists, animal protectionists, astronauts, former NASA employees, and even the European Space Agency. We are not opposed to space exploration, but these experiments are cruel folly."

The video reveals the horrific nature of the monkey experiments which will include: Burns, weakness, hair loss, failing organs and nausea. It also points out that there are already a significant number of sources for data on the impacts of high doses of radiation on humans including the victims of atomic bombs, X-rays and radiotherapy, the nuclear power industry, and astronauts who have spent time in space.

Tim Phillips said: "Those in the space programme often talk in lofty terms that this is about making advances for the whole of humankind. We want the world to make it clear that this cruelty is not in our name, and there are plenty of people in the space research community who agree with us."

Cosmonaut Valentin Lebedev, who set a world record for time in space, describes the tests as "inadmissible for humane reasons" citing the wealth of data available from astronauts.

Jim Bates, NASA retired, formerly Co-Chairman of the JSC Space Radiation Environment Group (SREG) 1968-1970, has noted the decades of similar experiments on animals and said: "We have probably sacrificed enough monkeys for these data, something else is needed."

The European Space Agency's (ESA) Director Jean-Jacques Dordain stated that he and ESA categorically opposed and "declines any interest in monkey research and does not consider any need or use for such results." The statement confirms the unnecessary character of NASA's tests and reveals the uneasiness of a large segment of the scientific community involved in space research about the use of monkeys in experiments.

Tim Phillips said: "These experiments are wrong every way that you look at them. There is a wealth of data available and alternatives which include cell and tissue culture study, the simulated human torso in space, and the use of scanning techniques to examine neurological function in patients undergoing partial brain radiotherapy. Even if you ignore all of this, NASA does not yet have the shielding technology to protect the astronauts on such a mission, and this would determine any type radiation exposure, so these tests are shamefully premature."

Aerospace engineer April Evans resigned her position earlier this year as a space architect on the International Space Station (ISS) program because of NASA's decision to conduct primate irradiation testing. Evans believes this experiment is a major step backward for NASA's animal testing record.

"After much deliberation, I resigned from NASA because I could not support the scientific justification for this monkey radiobiology experiment," Evans wrote in a letter to Samuel Aronson, director of the Brookhaven National Laboratory, which was contracted by NASA to conduct the tests on squirrel monkeys.

"NASA needs to focus on developing space radiation shielding because both astronauts and hardware are at risk from the space radiation environment, an issue that will have to be addressed by all space agencies. Space vehicle radiation shielding is necessary technology for a sustainable long-term human space exploration program and scientists and engineers should be given the chance and time to advance shielding technology."

For more information on the campaign, visit: www.ad-international.org/NASA where you can view and download the videos and join in the fight to stop NASA's planned experiments.

Please address polite letters to NASA requesting that they reconsider financing such horrific experiments by writing to NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden Jr, Public Communications Office, NASA Headquarters, Suite 5K39,Washington, DC, 20546-0001

Please write to the US Ambassador saying you oppose the NASA experiments: Mr Louis B. Susman, US Embassy, 24 Grosvenor Square, London, W1A 1AE.

Please write to the Russian Ambassador saying you oppose Russia's Mars500 experiments: Mr Yury Fedotov, Ambassador of the Russian Federation, 13 Kensington Gardens, London W8 4QX.

About Animal Defenders International (ADI):

With offices in London, Los Angeles, and Bogota, Animal Defenders International (ADI) campaigns to protect animals in entertainment; replacement of animals in experiments; worldwide traffic in endangered species; vegetarianism; factory farming; pollution and conservation. ADI also rescues animals in distress worldwide. ADI-gathered evidence has led to campaigns and legislative action all over the world to protect them.
ADI's Mission: To educate, create awareness, and promote the interest of humanity in the cause of justice, and the suppression of all forms of cruelty to animals wherever possible to alleviate suffering, and to conserve and protect animals and the environment.

www.adiusa.org

http://www.ad-international.org/adi_world/


Note to the editors
The White House statement on radiation shielding President Barack Obama declared in April 15, 2010: "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 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? How do we harness resources on distant worlds? How do we supply spacecraft with energy needed for these far-reaching journeys? These are questions that we can answer and will answer."
The full speech is available here:

http://www.nasa.gov/news/media/trans/obama_ksc_trans.html

# # #

Media Contact: Phil Buckley, Media Relations Director, Animal Defenders International, 0207 630 3344, 07716 018250, prdesk@ad-international.org

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Superdrug becomes BUAV Approved

The BUAV is delighted that the high street giant Superdrug has become BUAV approved as an animal testing free cosmetics and toiletries retailer under the BUAV's internationally recognised Humane Cosmetic Standard (HCS). It joins a host of other companies including Marks and Spencer, The Co-op, Argos and The Body Shop.

Superdrug's entire own brand toiletries product range now carries the globally recognised leaping bunny logo. With over 900 stores in the UK, ethical shoppers will be able to purchase typically hard to find cruelty-free products such as hair dye, sun screen and shaving products. The logo guarantees that no animal testing has occurred in any part of the product's manufacturing process.

Michelle Thew, BUAV Chief Executive said: “We are delighted that Superdrug has taken this important step to become BUAV Approved and congratulate it for doing so. I am now calling on other high street retailers to follow suit and clear all animal tested products from the shelves once and for all."

http://www.buav.org/

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Animal transplants imminent




AUSTRALIA has lifted its five-year ban on the transplantation of
animal cells and organs into humans, allowing hospitals to use pig
cells to treat diabetes, Parkinson's disease and strokes within
months.

The National Health and Medical Research Council made its decision
despite pleas from animal rights activists and transplant specialists
that the procedure had not been proven safe and could result in the
creation of deadly viruses.

Xenotransplantation was banned in 2004 because of concerns that pig
endogenous retrovirus could spread to humans.

--
full story:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/animal-transplants-imminent-20091209-kk3g.html

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

New Belgian laws announced to ban animal testing and fund alternatives

PRESS RELEASE - 17 November 2009

New Belgian laws announced to ban animal testing and fund alternatives

The Lord Dowding Fund (LDF) today welcomed announcements made in the Flemish Parliament to introduce two groundbreaking laws which would ban all commercial animal testing and give extra funding to the development of non-animal research techniques.

LDF, the research wing of Animal Defenders International (ADI), attended a press conference in the Flemish Parliament on 17 November 2009, where the proposed laws initiated by the Flemish Green Party were unveiled.

LDF believes that the two laws should be implemented together as the restrictions to animal testing would be complemented by the promotion of alternatives. The ban on the use of cosmetic testing has led the way showing that this joined up approach is very effective. Animal testing must be banned to force companies and scientists to change their research methods or develop alternatives.

LDF supports new and advanced methods of research such as cell culture, biotechnology, brain imaging and computer packages which replace the use of animals and there is growing scientific consensus that the animal model in general is not effective in predicting human reactions.

Jan Creamer, LDF Chief Executive, said: "Moving away from animal testing requires an ambitious policy from public authorities, and the initiative from the Flemish Greens delivers precisely what the public and a growing number of scientists are asking for: a rapid and efficient switch from animal-based techniques to more advanced and ethical methods."

"Belgian elected representatives should vote in favour of these exemplary laws presented by the Green Party, which will put Belgium at the forefront of ethical and scientific progress, ahead of many other European countries."

Danny Flies, Stop Dier Proeven, commented: "I salute the bravery of the Belgian Green party in proposing these two groundbreaking laws. Let this be an example for politicians all over Europe to do whatever they can to invest in modern science without the use of animals in the interest of humans and animals."

Ends

For further information, contact Amanda Gent, LDF/ADI Public Relations, Office Tel: 020 7630 3344. Email: prdesk@ad-international.org


NOTES TO EDITORS

The Lord Dowding Fund (LDF)

Founded 30 years ago, The Lord Dowding Fund is the research wing of Animal Defenders International (ADI) and the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS). The LDF awards grants totalling £300,000 a year to fund humane research across a wide range of fields, including microsurgery, toxicology, breast and lung cancer, Parkinson's disease, schizophrenia, cot death, cataracts and brain damage. Named after WW1 Air Chief Marshal, Lord Dowding, a former President of the NAVS, LDF also supports new and advanced methods of research such as cell culture, biotechnology, brain imaging and computer packages which replace the use of animals in the education of school and university level students.


For all media enquiries contact: prdesk@ad-international.org Media only, please
To make a donation: info@ad-international.org or online http://www.ad-international.org/take_action/donate.php

For campaign information: info@ad-international.org

For employment opportunities: execassist@ad-international.org

For volunteer enquiries: execassist@ad-international.org

For Intern enquiries: intern@ad-international.org

General enquiries: info@ad-international.org

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Group targets U animal scientist



The school raised security for one of its researchers after an animal
rights activist group singled him out on its website.
...
University of Minnesota police have increased patrols near the home of
a Medical School animal researcher after a posting on an animal rights
activist website displayed his name and photograph and noted that "...
we should not be surprised when the unconscionable violence inflicted
upon animals is justifiably visited upon their tormentors."

The Internet posting went up late last week on the website
NegotiationIsOver.com in reaction to a Star Tribune story about a
multimillion-dollar national campaign by biomedical researchers,
including U Prof. Dick Bianco, to increase lagging support for medical
and scientific tests using animals.

--
full story:
http://www.startribune.com/local/69622092.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUZ

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Undercover investigation exposes shocking animal cruelty and major failings by the UK government

The BUAV, one of the world's leading organisations campaigning to end animal experiments, has today revealed graphic disturbing evidence of the cruelty and suffering inflicted on thousands of animals every year in UK research; including for the first time, the appalling suffering inflicted on mice for the worldwide craze of using botox products to temporarily reduce facial lines and wrinkles.

The BUAV has also accused the Home Office, which regulates animal experiments in the UK, of breaking the law in several ways including not enforcing the use of non animal alternatives and failing to minimise the suffering inflicted on animals.

The BUAV placed an undercover worker in Wickham Laboratories in Hampshire for 8 months to the end of October 2009. She secretly filmed the appalling suffering inflicted on thousands of animals inside the facility. The laboratory carries out poisoning tests on thousands of mice every month for a product called Dysport ® (manufactured by Ipsen), which contains the deadly botulinum toxin. Botulinum toxin is licensed in the UK for some relatively rare medical conditions – and the Home Office claims it only allows the animal tests for these purposes - but is increasingly being used “off-label” in cosmetic clinics for purely cosmetic purposes where it is commonly referred to as 'botox.'

In practice it is impossible for the Home Office to ensure that the Dysport ® tested at Wickham on an industrial scale does not end up in cosmetic clinics. The Government has banned animal testing for cosmetics since 1997.

The test used is the archaic poisoning test LD50 (lethal dose 50 - this is the dose at which 50% of the mice would be expected to die when injected with the toxin), one of the cruellest and most controversial tests carried out on animals. Even the Home Office classifies it as 'substantial severity.'

Wickham also uses rabbits in pyrogenicity (fever) tests where a test substance is injected into an ear vein to detect contaminants. The rabbits are restrained by their necks in stocks with a temperature probe deep in their rectum for many hours at a time, with no access to water. According to the laboratory, damage to the ear and rectum can occur as well as damage to the rabbits' backs from struggling in the stocks. Rabbits can be starved for up to 30 hours and are re-used repeatedly in further pyrogen tests, adding to their distress.

Key findings:

The UK government is failing in its legal obligation to enforce the use of the 3R's (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) principle for non-animal alternatives where they exist and to ensure that, if animals are used, then it should be the minimum number and with the minimum amount of suffering.

The appalling suffering inflicted on thousands of animals in cruel, crude and archaic tests. Animals kept in small, virtually barren cages that failed to meet their behavioural and social needs.

The total inadequacy of measures to intervene before death with the LD50 poisoning tests - far more animals died an agonizing death than were euthanased.

Mice crudely killed by having their necks broken on a corridor floor with a ball point pen. Some staff breaking the backs of mice rather than their necks resulting in excruciating additional suffering.

Some animals suffered in tests that are no longer required by national and international regulations. This destroys the often made claim that companies have to do animals tests because regulators require them.

A glaring conflict of interest by the statutory 'Named Veterinary Surgeon,' responsible for advising on the animals' welfare. He is a director of Wickham and with his wife owns virtually all the shares. Recorded weekly visits by him often lasted just for a few minutes.

Tests such as the LD50 test for botulinum toxin and the pyrogenicity test have valid in vitro alternatives and it is outrageous that they are not being implemented. The Limulus amoebocyte lysate assay (LAL) is an 'in vitro' method that can often be used for detecting bacterial pyrogens and is recognized by regulatory authorities in both Europe and the USA as an alternative to the rabbit pyrogenicity test. Indeed, European guidelines stress the alternative is often more reliable..

The SNAP-25 assay, a method that does not use live animals but instead measures the activity of the toxin in a test tube, can be used to replace the botox mouse LD50 tests. The BUAV believes that under UK law this test should be used. Furthermore, this test has been validated by an official UK government laboratory, the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC), and has been used by them since 1999, specifically for Dysport ®. Inexplicably, the UK Home Office is not insisting on this test even after all these years.

BUAV's Director of Special Projects, Sarah Kite states: “Time and time again the government and animal research community claim that animals are only used as a last resort for vital medical research and that animal suffering is kept to a minimum. This BUAV investigation has blown those claims wide open. Our shocking findings show that crude, archaic and extremely cruel animal tests are still allowed in the UK even when an alternative test exists and animal testing is not required by official bodies.”

For further information, images and video footage, please contact: Sarah Kite

sarah.kite@buav.org

Thursday, October 22, 2009

SAFER MEDICINES CAMPAIGN-THE SAFETY EVALUATION BILL 2009!



ACTION!
Your help in persuading MPs to sign
EDM 569 is vital! A phenomenal 250
MPs signed EDM 92 in 2006, thanks
to your encouragement.
Please help us put pressure on the
Government by achieving even greater
support for EDM 569 – send
our postcard to your MP today
or write to them at: House of Commons,
London SW1A 0AA.
Contact us at the address above for
further copies of this sheet or postcard
To visit the site,read full article and take action:http://www.safermedicines.org/safetyofmedicines/index.shtml
Credit:Viva http://www.viva.org.uk/


Saturday, October 17, 2009

Cruel Bat Research at Texas A&M


Click here http://www.batworld.org/wall_of_shame/TXAMCruelResearch.html
to read our position statement. Please send an e-mail to sanctuary@batworld.org
if you would like to have your group added.


In the fall of 2008 we were alerted to a critical situation regarding cruel and unnecessary research being conducted by Dr. Christopher Quick at Texas A&M University. This research involves pallid bats, a small insectivorous bat about 3" in length. Four of these bats were injured during the research and can no longer fly well enough to be released. Thankfully -rather than being euthanized- these bats were retired to Bat World Sanctuary at the urging of one of the assistants involved in the research. An agreement was subsequently made for the retirement of the entire colony to Bat World when the research concluded. Unfortunately, we now have solid reason to believe that Dr. Quick has no intention of keeping his word, and feel the remaining bats will be used in this barbaric research until they die.

Please note that the eye witness account below contains graphic and heart wrenching testimony by individuals who were directly involved in this research, and who are now working to help free these bats from further suffering.

Beene' the first pallid bat to be
retired to Bat World Sanctuary from Texas A&M University.



Eye WITNESS ACCOUNT:

I am in need of your assistance with a critical matter involving a dwindling colony of pallid bats in a remote location in West Texas. These bats are continuing to be subjected to cruel experiments and housing once they are captured and placed into captivity. The following information outlines the years of cruelty that I personally witnessed.
CLICK HERE TO READ MY SWORN AFFIDAVIT

Dr. Christopher Quick, a biomedical engineer, heads this research currently taking place at Texas A&M University, where he has been allowed to perform experiments on pallid bats for several years. He captures bats from a roosting site which the bats have been safely using for over 20 years. As a result of the removal of so many bats, a steady decrease in the population has occurred. In the past few years he has been allowed to take over 50 pallid bats, the majority of them females. Consequently, over 40 female pallid bats were not allowed to give birth to one pup a year for over four years, resulting in the loss of 160 bats within a four year time span. Many of these pups would have also reproduced during this time.
Excluding a few bats that died as a direct result of stress, these experiments are not entirely terminal. As a result, the bats have been subjected to an unnatural environment long-term, and forced to work during the day when they should be asleep. They are exposed to up to 15 different types of drugs, alcohol and periodic painful medical procedures without sedation. They are used in experiments for up to six hours per day. Witnesses have seen the bats struggling for so long during experiments that they eventually began urinating blood due to the stress of the experiment.

One of the worst aspects of this research involves a rectal probe. The rectal probe causes bleeding and tearing of the rectum and causes such high levels of stress that the bats often self mutilate by chewing on its own arm or rectum in order to try and free itself. I witnessed bats urinating blood after this procedure, as well as rapid breathing and gnashing of teeth. The rectal probe is very rigid and made out of steel. While it is inserted using lidocaine, a short-term numbing agent, the bat is oftentimes in the box, laying in its back with the rectal probe inserted, for more than 30
A pallid undergoing an experiment under Dr. Quick's care. The bat is on its back, restrained in a Plexiglas box. The bat's wing is unnaturally stretched out and then held in place with weighted cotton swabs. The hot lens of the microscope is aimed at the delicate wing tissue for hours at a time, oftentimes causing burns.
(Photo credit: http://www.cvm.tamu.edu/cquick/BatLab/)





minutes at a time. It is not uncommon for a bat to cry out during the entire procedure. The bat is placed into the box restrained, with the rectal probe inserted, then its body is heated to see how high the bats body temperature would rise. Recordings are taken to see how long it took the bat's body temperature to go back down to baseline temperature. With the exception of Dr. Quick, everyone, including the grad students, hates this experiment. When I was with Dr. Quick in the room, he would make the bat stay in the experiment box even after the experiment was over just to play around with the microscope. He would look at the bats wing under the microscope, and I would tell him that the rectal probe cord was not long enough for him to be moving the bat around. A few times he moved the bat so much that he caused tension on the probe, causing the bat to cry out in agony. It was not until I stepped in and said enough was enough that he would grudgingly stop.

Full article:http://www.batworld.org/wall_of_shame/TXAMCruelResearch.html

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

EU blasted by campaigners over lab animal cruelty

EU blasted by campaigners over lab animal cruelty - crucial meeting on
12 October

The BUAV has today condemned the EU for ignoring public opinion after a
leaked document shows that the Council of Ministers wants researchers to
have the right to cause suffering to animals in laboratories which is
not only severe but which is also long-lasting. Such a move would result
in untold cruelty and suffering to thousands of animals across Europe.
Only recently a YouGov poll in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Sweden
and the Czech Republic showed that a resounding 84% believe that
experiments causing severe pain or suffering - i.e. whether or not
long-lasting - should be prohibited.

The leaked document ("Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals used for
scientific purposes") from the EU Presidency has been sent to the
Working Party of Veterinary Experts to be discussed at its meeting next
week, 12th October. The document also gives examples of shocking
experiments that researchers want to be allowed to continue to carry out
on animals. They include: poisoning animals to death; submitting animals
to repeated electric shocks from which they cannot escape (in order to
induce 'learned helplessness'); restraining animals to such an extent
that they develop stomach ulcers or heart failure; forcing animals to
swim until they give up in exhaustion; and giving animals a lethal dose
of radiation or chemotherapy.

The animal research industry community acknowledges that these
experiments cause severe suffering but claim, absurdly, that the
suffering is not long-lasting and would therefore not even need special
permission.

The same YouGov poll showed very large majorities wishing to see bans on
the use of primates, dogs and cats in experiments causing suffering, a
ban on all experiments which are not for life-threatening or serious
human conditions; and maximum openness, with only information which is
confidential or would identify individuals or establishments withheld.
Again, EU politicians seem determined to do the exact opposite.

BUAV's Chief Executive, Michelle Thew said: "We are appalled to learn of
the proposals that the Council has made. This is a major step backwards
for animal welfare. It's high time European politicians started
listening to the public rather than the self-interested pleading of the
multi-billion pound animal research and supply industry."

ENDS

Thursday, September 24, 2009

In Defense of Animals Wins Landmark FOIA Victory in Federal Court

USDA Forced to Disclose Records from Controversial Animal Test Lab
Huntingdon Life Sciences

http://idausa.org/news/currentnews/nr_092309.html


Washington, DC —After a seven-year court fight, including the first
trial in years involving the federal Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture has been ordered by a
federal judge to disclose 1,017 pages of records obtained during an
investigation of controversial toxicology lab Huntingdon Life Sciences
(HLS) to In Defense of Animals, the animal protection group said
today.

“These records will shed light on the USDA’s failure to enforce the
Animal Welfare Act,” said IDA Research Director Eric Kleiman. “Why did
the USDA, later joined by HLS, fight so hard and so long to prevent
the public from seeing these records? We’ll know within the 60 days
ordered by the Court.”

The records – 503 pages withheld in full, 514 withheld in part (with
most heavily redacted) – include test results, notes of observations
of primates involved in toxicology testing, Animal Care and Use
Committee minutes as well as necropsy reports and requests for
veterinary care from six studies.

IDA filed the lawsuit in 2002 against the USDA, but later HLS
“intervened” and also became a defendant. At trial, the USDA did not
produce a single witness; HLS had two.

The December 2008 trial, the first in years involving FOIA, resolved
the issue of whether HLS would suffer competitive harm if the records
were disclosed. These records, obtained by the USDA during its
investigation of the lab, formed the basis of the USDA’s formal
complaint against HLS, alleging multiple and grave violations of the
Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The charges included multiple counts of
failing to provide adequate veterinary care and inadequate research
oversight.

Within days of filing the complaint against HLS, the USDA settled it
with what IDA termed a “slap-on-the-wrist” fine. This was consistent
with multiple USDA Inspector General reports regarding the agency’s
lax enforcement of the AWA. The most recent, in 2005, stated that USDA
imposes “minimal” fines that “violators consider…a normal cost of
conducting business rather than a deterrent for violating the law.”

The FOIA trial came about as a result of an opinion by another judge,
who, after reviewing a sampling of the unredacted records in camera
(in private), expressed his doubt that defendants could prevail at a
trial focusing on the issue of competitive harm. This judge stated
that the USDA and HLS came “mighty close” to “’blatantly’
contradicting the record” in the case. He also noted that the USDA had
violated a prior court order by failing to produce an analysis of what
could be redacted from the records.

Kleiman noted that IDA has won multiple FOIA victories, including a
court-ordered public interest fee waiver for thousands of pages of NIH
records after IDA had proven its “dissemination methods and history
demonstrate that the disclosure will contribute to a greater
understanding” by the public. IDA has also used FOIA records to
document data manipulation and researcher misconduct (see “Drug Study
Hid Chimp Deaths,” at http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=11617276


“This victory is the latest in a long line of IDA campaigns that often
take years,” concluded Kleiman. “No matter how long, IDA will continue
to persevere on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves.”

The public interest law firm Meyer, Glitzenstein & Crystal represents
IDA in this case. The District Court opinion is available online at
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2002cv0557-121


First Pan-African Seminar on Alternatives to Animal Experiments

A groundbreaking initiative to promote and implement replacement
alternatives across Africa begins today in Nairobi, Kenya.

The First Pan-African Seminar on Alternatives to Animal Experiments in
Education and Training is being held 23-24 September 2009 at the Kenya
Institute of Education.

Co-organised by InterNICHE and its Partner organisation the Africa Network
for Animal Welfare (ANAW), the 2-day Alternatives Seminar brings together
22 campaigning organisations from 12 African countries, InterNICHE experts
from England, Mexico, India and Egypt, and over 100 Kenyan teachers,
surgeons and government officials.

The Kenyan Minister for Wildlife and Forestry, Hon. Dr. Noah Wekesa,
opened the animal protection workshop that is being held in advance of and
in preparation of the Alternatives Seminar. In his presentation, Dr.
Wekesa appreciated the importance of pan-African events, and acknowledged
the potential of new technology and alternatives.

The Alternatives Seminar builds on the experience of InterNICHE outreach
tours and alternatives demonstrations by dovetailing the organisation’s
skills and resources with the initiatives and local knowledge of
campaigners and teachers in the host country.

Previous outreach tours have included the training of over 400 teachers in
10 cities across India, and a 5-country tour of Latin America with over 30
seminars and meetings. The InterNICHE Multimedia Exhibition at the recent
VII World Congress on Alternatives showcased a range of teaching and
training tools from the InterNICHE Alternatives Loan System. This library
is providing over 100 software alternatives, models, mannekins and
simulators for demonstration at the event in Kenya.

Following an introduction and review of the Kenyan and African situation
by ANAW Director Josphat Ngonyo and colleagues, international experts will
provide lectures and demonstrations on humane education and the process of
replacement. InterNICHE Co-ordinator Nick Jukes will introduce the range
and quality of alternatives and explain the organisation’s commitment to
the 1R of replacement to help guarantee ethical and effective acquisition
of knowledge and skills.

India’s foremost campaigner for alternatives, Snehal Bhavsar, will
describe her strategies for catalysing curricular change across the state
of Gujarat in India, including her success in achieving 80% reduction of
animal use in education. Sofia Ponce will present the vision and
activities of the Center for Animal Alternatives in Education (CAAE)
program at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico. Fawzy Elnady from the
University of Cairo in Egypt will address information and communications
technology in relation to alternatives, with a global and African
overview.

Further presentations will include the rationale for seeing caring as an
essential clinical skill which must be placed at the heart of veterinary
and medical training; the use of the POP-trainer for live laparoscopic
surgical training without animal experiments; and the use of the Biopac
Student Lab for self-experimentation as an alternative in physiology
practical classes.

InterNICHE works with teachers and producers of alternatives to encourage
the freeing of learning tools from license restrictions and limited
geographical availability. Demonstrations and hands-on experience of
alternatives at the Alternatives Seminar will therefore be followed by
distribution of resources to the participants, including freeware and
other low-cost or no-cost alternatives whose impact can now be measured
globally.

Discussion workshops will address the opportunities and challenges within
Africa and allow for sharing of experience. The talks and diverse
international perspectives will encourage the pan-African and Kenyan
campaigners to reflect on culturally-appropriate strategies for the
introduction of alternatives in their countries.

Josphat Ngonyo from ANAW said today: “We intend that the Alternatives
Seminar will empower participants to be ambassadors for alternatives in
their own countries. They will shortly have the information, resources and
support from InterNICHE for this to be achieved. The impact on Kenya will
be considerable, particularly now with government support for humane
approaches and innovative technology in education and training.”

Nick Jukes from InterNICHE added, “We applaud the Kenyan government’s
interest in humane education and are confident in the pedagogical, ethical
and economic advantages of replacement alternatives. We hope that other
countries will follow Kenya’s lead, and that the Alternatives Seminar will
play a role in facilitating the process of change right across the
continent.”


Notes:

(1) The organisation of the event has been made possible thanks to the
generous support of the Anti-Vivisection Union (South Australia), the
Doerenkamp-Zbinden Foundation (Switzerland), the Maria Norbury Foundation
(USA), and an anonymous donor (USA).

Further thanks go to the International Association Against Painful
Experiments on Animals (IAAPEA) (UK), the On Shore Foundation (USA), the
New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS) (USA) and Hope Ferdowsian
(USA).

(2) African countries represented include DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia,
Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Tanzania,
Uganda and Zimbabwe.

(3) Kenyan government officials include Hon. Dr. Noah Wekesa, Minister
for Wildlife and Forestry; Dr. Julius Kipng’etich, Director, Kenya
Wildlife Service; Hon. Adan Duale, Asst. Minister of Livestock
Development; Dr. Peter Ithondeka, Director, Department of Veterinary
Services



*************************************************

Nick Jukes
InterNICHE Co-ordinator

98 Clarendon Park Road
Leicester LE2 3AE
England

tel: +44 116 210 9652
e-mail: coordinator@interniche.org

web: www.interniche.org

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUPS MUST STAND UP TO HUMAN EXTREMISM

Open letter to [UCLA] Vivisectors:

If what you do is ethical, moral and humane, then let it be done with transparency -- build glass laboratories with open doors, so the world can judge for itself your meritorious works. Why crouch and hide behind blatant lies in which your industry continuously omits its massive failures, while exaggerating its progress? This, as your colleagues huddle in windowless cubicles, behind bolted doors; busily "saving" the human race amid worthless, repetitious, hideous and often outrageously ridiculous experiments. Selling yourself to the highest bidder -- your corporate partners in animal terrorism -- is a conscious decision, which you and others who choose careers in areas of research using live victims, eagerly buy into. It is a business of corruption and murder for profit. Rife with scientific fraud. Perpetrating obscenities on living beings so vile, it would make any psychopath wet with pleasure. Billions tortured and slain, tossed onto the neverending
pile of souls sacrificed, just to keep the behemoth gravy train flowing. Money is the motive for what you do; and disguising that evil through public displays of pseudo-heroic rhetoric -- "saving mankind" -- is as rotten and nauseating to those of us who know the truth, as are the bodies of the abused, innocent beings which fill your labs.

Your narcissistic arrogance has you believing that those outside of your [delusional] vivisectionist clan, are too stupid and uninformed to "appreciate" your efforts on their behalf. And yet, you represent one of the most shamefully clueless, morally and ethically retarded groups within our race. A group so dense, that it must repeat the same failed experiments literally millions of times, while expecting a different outcome. Is this not the behavior of a classic moron? Or, in reality, is it about the trillions of dollars raked in by keeping the public believing that a cure to their woes is almost within reach? The carrot and the stick. Continue giving us your money [and dying from our failures] and in return we will save you...someday. It's a con game; where obscene riches, courtesy of the masses which buy the lie, feed an ever-growing, bloated monstrosity. A lie set forth by corporate vampires sucking off the decaying corpses of billions of animals
and humans, victimized and murdered by them, so they can continue to expand and thrive.

Now, more than ever, the public must be made aware of the real agenda behind the vivisection industry -- profits -- and only profits!

Please, actively encourage friends, family, co-workers and others to STOP supporting death walks -- via 5 and 10K runs -- or donations where profits are funneled into torture programs. START supporting anti-vivisectionist alternatives; create your own fund-raisers for ethical, non-invasive research and petition our govt to stop funding slice & dice research with our tax dollars. We need to drive those who perform barbaric, medieval animal experimentation back into the slime from whence they came.

Brennan Browne

The concept of 'animal rights' values the simple premise that ALL living creatures have a "right" to be allowed to live their lives without victimization- -free from brutality. It is a right that EVERY being strives for.

~Brennan Browne~

Thursday, September 17, 2009

4.5 Million Animals to be Spared in the EU

Groups Applaud Swift Action by EU Chemicals Agency

Brussels (16 Sept. 2009)--Animal protection groups today welcomed a
response from the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to their request for
clarification regarding safety testing requirements under the EU's REACH
chemicals regulation, which promises to spare approximately 4.5 million
animals from suffering and death in chemical-poisoning tests..

Animal groups--including the European Coalition to End Animal
Experiments, Eurogroup for Animals, Humane Society International -
Europe, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and PETA Europe and
the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine--wrote last month to
ECHA raising concerns about the risk of companies conducting duplicative
animal tests for some types of toxicity when registering their chemicals
under REACH. The groups' concerns arose due to the cumulative nature of
the way information requirements are listed within REACH, according to
which chemicals are required to undergo progressively more animal
testing as their production volume increases.

In particular, there was a danger that companies would conduct
'screening' tests for reproductive and general toxicity (which still
consume dozens to hundreds of animals per chemical), and would later be
required to conduct more comprehensive tests for these same effects. The
language within REACH and its guidance was ambiguous on this point.

ECHA has today issued a press statement clarifying that animal tests
need not be conducted if similar, more comprehensive tests are going to
be proposed. Companies registering chemicals that are produced in
quantities of 100 tonnes or more can therefore fulfil initial
registration requirements without performing the screening tests if they
are proposing to do more comprehensive tests later in the process.

The animal groups estimate, based on ECHA's own figures that 6,000
chemicals may fall under the relevant information requirements, that
this clarification alone has the potential to save the lives of 4.5
million animals.

The task at hand now is to make sure companies abide by this clear
instruction and do not conduct duplicative testing on qualifying
chemicals.

"We are delighted that ECHA has responded so promptly and positively to
our request and helped prevent potential duplicative testing using more
than 4 million animals. We still have other concerns regarding REACH and
its implementation, but this common sense approach is a good start."

ENDS

REACH is the EU's Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of
Chemicals regulation.

The 13 Aug. joint letter to ECHA is available online at
http://bit.ly/8Y4T5


http://echa.europa.eu/doc/press/pr_09_13_animal_testing_carification_200 90915.pdf



More specifically, 28-day general toxicity studies and screening tests
for reproductive toxicity do not need to be conducted if 90-day general
toxicity studies or pre-natal developmental studies are proposed.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Morgan Stanley Dumps LSR/HLS Shares

LSR/HLS Financial Update

Morgan Stanley Dumps LSR/HLS Shares

As part of Operation IX3, Win Animal Rights recently launched a campaign to educate the folks at Morgan Stanley, headquartered here in New York City, about the drawbacks of blood money investments. Morgan Stanley was LSR/HLS' #1 Institutional Investor with a holding of 679,225 shares, making them a 5% owner of Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Peaceful, legal demonstrations at the homes of 5 Morgan Stanley executives were held on Saturday, August 1, 2009:

http://www.war-online.org/DemoReport08-01-09.htm

Subsequently, peaceful legal protests were held at Morgan Stanley HQ and additional demos were held at the homes of additional Morgan Stanley executives on Thursday, August 6, 2009:

http://www.war-online.org/

On Friday August 7, 2009 and Monday August 10, 2009, several hundred thousands of LSR shares were dumped, resulting in a downward slide of the share price. On Wednesday, August 12, 2009, Morgan Stanley notified the SEC of their divestiture.

Thank you Morgan Stanley!

LSR/HLS Financial Update
Additionally, much has been happening on the financial front as LSR/Huntingdon Life Sciences CEO, Andrew Baker, moves forward with his plans to acquire HLS and make it a privately held company. A Proxy Statement has been filed with the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission). You can read the 132 page document by clicking on "Proxy Statement" here:

http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/sec/filing.asp?Symbol=LSR

A good analysis of the pending merger and proxy statement is provided by a New York Times financial blogger, here:
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/12/behind-the-deal-life-sciences/

The Proxy Statement makes it abundantly clear that animal rights campaigning has had a tremendous impact on LSR/HLS' financial predicament and has caused them to have limited options for the future. An in depth analysis was contracted by a special committee appointed by the Board of Directors and carried out by Plymouth Partners LLC. The Plymouth report cited the influence of animal rights campaigners over and over again, in relationship to investors, market makers, trading platforms, customers and suppliers.

Also of note in the Plymouth report was the fact that LSR/HLS was in imminent danger of defaulting on their long term debt and additionally that they were in imminent danger of being delisted by the NYSE Arca for failure to maintain the minimum levels of capitalization for continued listing. All in all, the report gave a very grim picture of LSR's financial position. A more detailed analysis and publication of selected excerpts from the reports will be forthcoming in the near future.

Meanwhile, Win Animal Rights will be moving ahead with plans to focus on HLS' primary customers. Protests against key customers will be held this Sunday afternoon. An action alert with specific times and details about meeting location will be posted later today.

Win Animal Rights wishes to take this opportunity to thank all of you who have in any way supported the campaign to stop the killing at Huntingdon Life Sciences. Every action, every protest, every letter and every phone call contributed to the results that are now clearly exposed by these recent SEC filings.

Huntingdon Life Sciences is once again on it's knees. It is time to put this dying monster of a company out of it's (and our) misery. LET'S KICK THEM TO HELL BEFORE THEY CAN GET UP AGAIN!!!

To find out what you can do to help, contact WAR at:
centcom@war- online.org
Visit the WAR Calendar for future events: http://calendar.yahoo.com/winanimalrights
Visit the WAR MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/winanimalrights
Visit WAR on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Win-Animal-Rights/25169195791

For more info contact Win Animal Rights at: winanimalrights@optonline.net
Call: 646.267.9934 or visit the WAR website at: http://war-online.org
W.A.R. (WIN ANIMAL RIGHTS) is an independent non-profit organization not affiliated or associated with SHAC, SHAC USA or any other group or organization and does not conduct or incite any illegal activity. The above information is not meant to incite or request any illegal actions or illegal activities of any kind. If you have any questions about the legality of any act, we encourage everyone receiving this (or the) action alert(s) to check your local laws and ordinances before proceeding to do anything.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Replace Animal Testing in Europe!Sign the Petition!


More than 12 million animals are used in experiments in European laboratories annually. The legislation regulating these experiments is over 20 years old and is being revised. We need your support for our call for progressive measures to protect animals and for a commitment to replace animal experiments with modern, reliable scientific methods.

This is your first opportunity in over 20 years to influence the protection of laboratory animals across Europe. Please sign and circulate to your family and friends!

The petition will be presented to the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament, and the European Commission.

Choose your country below... and sign the petition now!

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Animal experimentation rising as Government scrutiny decreases

Animal experimentation rising as Government scrutiny decreases
Two leading MEPs have criticised the sharp rise in animal experiments in
the UK announced by the Home Office yesterday. The number of animal
experiments increased by 454,000 (14%) to 3.7 million experiments - the
highest level in over 20 years.
Labour MEP David Martin and Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MEP have
been quick to join the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) in
condemnation of the shocking rise.
The further revelation that, in 2008, the Home Office granted 16% more
project licences to experiment on animals indicates that another
significant rise in animal experimentation is taking place in
laboratories right now.
The shock rise coincides with news that the Government has implemented
the fast tracking of animal use licences. The Government's report
revealed a decrease in the number of inspections of animal laboratories
and the number of inspectors.
The NAVS is concerned that the Home Office is dismantling certain
controls at the very time Europe is reviewing new rules for animal
experimentation and attempting to put replacement of animal use with
advanced techniques at the heart of the revision of the Directive on
animal experiments, which is currently before the Council of Ministers.
Caroline Lucas MEP: "The Home Office figures throw new light on the
Government's shocking failure to address the continued use of animals in
experiments - despite increasing evidence that animal tests often fail
to reliably predict human reactions, and that newer non-animal methods
can offer greater accuracy and safety assurance."
"The UK Government must take urgent action to reverse the trend
highlighted in these latest figures and work towards replacing animal
experiments with viable non-animal alternatives. We need Europe to
establish a world-leading Centre of Excellence in non-animal research to
speed up the development of new techniques, moving away from the era of
animal research and bringing a new era of modern science without animal
suffering."
David Martin MEP: "Quite frankly I am shocked by these figures. We have
just gone through a European Parliament election where one of the
biggest issues in my mail bag was animal welfare and the reduction and
abolition of testing, especially on primates. This is a moral issue.
People want these experiments to end. This is an area where the UK
should be leading Europe not increasing experiments. We now have
alternatives to animal testing and they should be the way forward."
Jan Creamer, Chief Executive NAVS: "The shocking truth revealed this
week is there are more animal experiments with less scrutiny. The Home
Office appears to have been modifying the authorisation process and
reducing controls, including laboratory inspections, at precisely the
time Europe is considering new rules on animal experiments. It had been
hoped the UK would press to increase animal protection here and across
Europe. Instead before this process is even concluded there are
indicators that certain protection is already being dismantled in the
UK."
What's happening in UK labs - what the figures tell us

3.7 million experiments were performed on animals in 2008.
Examples of animals used:

Primates: 4,598
Dogs: 6,105
Cats: 360
Mice: 2.4 million
Rats: 355,370
Rabbits: 17,060
Guinea pigs: 29,293
Horses: 9,365
Examples of how the animals are used:
Genetic modification: 1.3 million animals were genetically modified
(37%), a rise of 186,000; mainly mice but with a huge increase in
genetically modified fish, where numbers doubled.
Household product testing: After being at zero (or 1) for some years,
there was a rise to 132 experiments on mice - especially disturbing
since this coincides with the implementation of replacement tests for
cosmetics across Europe.
Toxicology: 484,000 experiments were carried out for toxicology.
141,000 of these were not required by legislative requirements (29%) so
did not have to be performed.
Academic research: The vast majority of animal experimentation now
takes place in academic institutions with universities accounting for
44% or 1.6 million experiments. Commercial establishments, such as
pharmaceutical companies, account for 36% or 1.3 million experiments.
Fundamental (or basic) research with no immediate application to humans
or animals accounted for 1.2 million experiments.

NOTES FOR EDITORS

For further information, photos, video of animals in laboratories,
contact:
Angie Greenaway
Switchboard Tel: 020 7630 3340
Mobile: 07785 552548
Email: pr@ad-international.org
See the NAVS/ADI technical briefing on competitiveness of European
science and industry at
http://www.savetheprimates.org/briefs/download-our-technical-briefs

The National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), founded in 1875, is the
world's leading NGO campaigning for the use of animals in research to be
replaced by advanced scientific methods.
www.navs.org.uk
Through its department, the Lord Dowding Fund, since 1974 the NAVS has
funded scientists conducting non-animal scientific and medical research,
including cancer, Parkinson's, and more. http://www.ldf.org.uk/research/


Animal Defenders International (ADI): A partner group with NAVS:
With offices in London, San Francisco and Bogota, Animal Defenders
International (ADI) campaigns to protect animals in entertainment,
replacement of animals in experiments; worldwide traffic in endangered
species; vegetarianism; factory farming; pollution and conservation.
ADI also rescues animals in distress worldwide. Our evidence has led to
campaigns and legislative action all over the world to protect them.
http://www.ad-international.org/
ADI PR Desk
Animal Defenders International
Millbank Tower
Millbank
LONDON, SW1P 4QP, UK
tel. +44 (0)20 7630 3340
fax. +44 (0)20 7828 2179
http://www.ad-international.org/


http://www.ad-international.org/

-----------------------------------------------
www.YouTube.com/AnimalDefenders

www.CafePress.com/AnimalDefenders


Nearly 3.7m experiments were performed on animals last year - 2008,

Drug safety testing drives steep rise in animal experiments in UK
Animal rights campaigners round on government as expansion in biomedical research triggers 'biggest increase' in medical tests

A marmoset used in animal research climbs up the bars of its cage at a testing centre. Photograph: Graeme Robertson

The number of medical experiments involving animals has shown its largest rise since modern records began, the latest government figures reveal.

Nearly 3.7m experiments were performed on animals last year, a rise of 454,000 or 14% on the previous year, the Home Office said. The increase marks the greatest leap in animal use in medical research since 1986, when the government introduced new auditing procedures.

The growth in animal experiments reflects an expansion in biomedical research in Britain and is driven by advances in genetics and the development of new drugs that must be tested rigorously in monkeys before they are allowed to be given to humans. The experiments range from small procedures such as taking blood and tissue samples to invasive brain surgery and inducing incurable diseases such as Parkinson's and cancer. Substantial numbers of animals are used to test the safety of new drugs before they are allowed to be used in human trials.

Animal rights campaigners deplored the latest rise, which coincides with the 50th anniversary of landmark proposals to find alternatives to animals in medical research.

Judy MacArthur Clark, chief inspector of the Home Office animals scientific procedures inspectorate, said the rise reflected an increase in "ethically justified research" in Britain. "If the research is ethically justified and has funding, it's not our role to say you can't do it, we've used too many mice this year," she said.

More experiments on rodents and fish account for the vast majority of the rise and make up 97% of all experiments on animals. Of 197,000 more experiments on mice last year, most involve breeding genetically modified rodents to help scientists understand the role of individual genes in development and disease.

The figures reveal large falls in experiments on rats, domestic fowl, guinea pigs, rabbits and beagles, which together decreased by more than 40,000.

Britain has a longstanding policy that bans the use of great apes such as chimpanzees and gorillas in medical research, but the use of macaques and marmosets rose by more than 600 experiments, up 16%. This masks a reduction of more than half in experiments on marmosets and other new world primates, but the use of old world macaques in 1,000 more experiments, a 33% rise. Macaques have similar immune systems and physiology to humans and are increasingly being used to test advanced antibody-based drugs that target diseases with far more precision than older drugs.

Testing in monkeys has become more extensive after the disastrous clinical trial of an antibody drug at Northwick Park hospital in north London in 2006. The drug, which had been tested in primates, triggered a catastrophic immune reaction in the six trial participants which led to widespread organ failure.

Home Office inspectors investigated 45 cases where scientists had infringed their licences to do animal research. The most minor cases involved poor record keeping and retaining animals after licences had expired. Of the more serious cases, the worst occurred when mice in one study unexpectedly developed gangrene in their legs, causing greater suffering than the licence permitted. Two researchers involved in the study surrendered their licence before the inspectors' investigation was completed.

The figures were met with dismay by animal rights campaigners who rounded on the government and called for a concerted effort to reduce the number of animals used in medical research.

"With the scientific expertise this country has to offer we should have seen far greater progress to replace animals with more advanced techniques," said Dr Sebastien Farnaud of the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research. The organisation called on political parties to agree to a "roadmap to replacement" to drive the use of animals in research down.

The animal rights group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), said it was "profoundly disappointed" at the statistics and called on the government to be open about the fate of every animal used in experiments. "We have seen increases year on year in contradiction to public sentiment, but the numbers in this year's statistics are shocking by any standards," a spokesperson said.

The science minister, Lord Drayson, defended the figures and said the government was committed to reducing the use of animals in research where possible. "Britain has a high reputation for its standards of regulating research which uses animals. This work, described in today's report from the Home Office, is critical to the development of new medicines and increasing the level of understanding of diseases," he said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/jul/21/science-animal-medical-experiments