A Legal Challenge to Animal Research

Animal rights law courses may threaten the use of animals in medical research.
...
Over half of US law schools now have animal law courses, including
many in universities with medical and research programs that utilize
animals protected by federal welfare laws. Courses that promote
standards for humane animal care and welfare are unlikely to provoke
conflict, but programs championing animal rights or “liberation” set
up adversarial potential on campuses and pose a serious risk to the
future of animal research. The use of the law instead of violence and
threats, however, should be acknowledged as a forward step.
...
The future may see an attempt to recognize Aristotle’s three
categories: things, animals, and persons. Animals may not ultimately
enjoy the rights of persons, but the law may become increasingly
specific about our obligation to care for them. If, on the other hand,
“personhood” for animals is achieved, this status is likely to be in
conflict with animal research.

Failure to address developments in the education of law students is
likely to have a long-ranging impact on the ability to develop new
treatments needed for human and animal well-being.

P. Michael Conn is Director of Research Advocacy at Oregon Health and
Sciences University and Oregon National Primate Research Center.

--
full story:
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/56167/

Staff maim lab mice with ballpoints

Thousands of animals being used to test a wrinkle-erasing rival to Botox are facing cruel and agonising experiments at a Home Office-approved laboratory, an undercover investigation has found.

Secret footage of the tests on Dysport, a drug used to erase frown lines in cosmetic surgery clinics, shows laboratory staff accidentally breaking the backs of mice when trying to kill them with ballpoint pens. The pens were then used to fill out their death records.

The film, obtained using a hidden camera inside Wickham Laboratories, a long-established facility in Hampshire that tests drugs for pharmaceutical companies, also shows rabbits being incompetently injected with other drugs.

Staff are filmed botching injections and swearing at struggling rabbits, which are immobilised in “stocks” for up to eight hours in experiments that test whether drugs cause fevers.

Many of the rabbit tests, although licensed by the government, are not required under international pharmaceutical testing standards. The Home Office itself boasts about how these tests can be replaced by “a new technique using human blood cells instead of rabbits”.

The footage, shot by an investigator from the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, has led the government to launch an inquiry. A Home Office spokesman said: “We take these allegations seriously and are taking urgent steps to look into them further. We authorise animal research only when it can be justified.

“We expect and require the highest standards, and will thoroughly examine any evidence that suggests these standards are not being met.”

The filming, compiled over a period of eight months, included a sequence in which a member of staff made a number of attempts to inject a rabbit.

She is recorded calling the animal “a little shit” and “a disgrace”. She warned the rabbit that it could end up with “ear-rings” — a reference to punctures in its ear from failed attempts at injections. Another member of staff is recorded remarking that blood is coming out of the rabbit’s ear.

William Cartmell, the official vet charged with overseeing the welfare of the animals used for testing at Wickham, is also a founder and a big shareholder in the company.

Last night he denied that this represented a potential conflict of interest and said he was “a professional”.

Lab records seen by the BUAV investigator show that Cartmell’s weekly inspections sometimes took 15 minutes, with one visit in March this year lasting only eight minutes. He argued this was adequate to check that the animals were being treated well and not suffering.

“The health status of the animals is at such a high level that the length of time involved is more than adequate,” he said. “The animals are under constant care unlike pet animals and farm animals.”

Dysport, which is made from botulinum toxin, is licensed in Britain for medical use to treat conditions such as involuntary eye muscle contractions, facial twitches and muscle spasms.

However, it is also used legitimately “off-label” as an alternative to Botox for cosmetic treatments to eliminate frown lines and wrinkles.

Each batch has to be tested by law to ensure that it is safe and of the correct potency. Lab records seen by the investigator show that 41,088 mice were used in Dysport tests at Wickham between January and June this year.

The method used — lethal dose 50 (LD50) — is classed as a “very severe” test by the government. Mice are injected with the toxin. They suffer progressive paralysis and the film shows them lurching from side to side as they become unable to walk properly. Some appear to suffer severe breathing difficulties before dying.

Government regulations require suffering animals to be put out of their misery. Wickham Laboratories’ records indicate that far more mice died during the tests than were killed humanely.

Official guidelines allow mice to have their necks broken to ensure a quick death, and pens are often used to do this. But film shot at Wickham shows that some were left writhing after their backs were mistakenly broken by staff.

Alternatives to the LD50 test have been developed and are being used at other laboratories in Britain.

The official government laboratory, the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, uses non-lethal methods to test Dysport. Ten years ago it developed a test of the toxin using a test tube. It also uses a far less severe test on mice that does not kill them.

The BUAV, which has eight months of footage from Wickham, said the treatment of many animals was “appalling”.

Sarah Kite, BUAV’s special projects director, said: “The fact that extremely sick mice end up in the hands of incompetent staff, to have their backs broken and suffer such an agonising death is totally sickening.

“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.”

The revelations about the testing at Wickham have shocked dermatologists who use Dysport. Nick Lowe, who is known as Dr Botox and has conducted research into the toxin, said he was surprised that the LD50 test was still being used.

Lowe, whose clients at his London clinic include Anne Robinson, the television presenter, said he was “appalled” to hear that animals were being allowed to suffer in tests on the drug.

“I would like to know that all the drugs I prescribe for patients are evaluated in ethical ways. With my own range of skin-care products we do absolutely no animal testing. I am not in favour of that type of testing at all. I want the highest ethical standards,” he said.

Full Article and Video:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6898099.ece

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