Monday, October 13, 2008

HEADTOHEAD : Laura Broxson argues that vivisection is cruel, unnecessary and rooted in a refusal to see animals as our equals, while Veronica Campbell says a ban would end scientific advances in medicine and deprive patients of treatments for incurable conditions

YES

VIVISECTION IS the live experimentation on, and dissection of, animals. Thousands of animals such as mice, rats, guinea pigs, cats, dogs, rabbits and pigs, to name but a few, are killed this way in Ireland every year - in laboratories such as those in Trinity College Dublin.

The secrecy that surrounds these animal experiments indicates that the atrocities involved would be unacceptable to most people.

Some colleges claim that they only experiment on animals who are under anaesthetic. This can be an extremely misleading statement, as by this, a lot of researchers are actually referring to a process called "pithing".

Pithing is a procedure used to immobilise an animal, by inserting a needle up through the base of the skull (from the back) and then wiggling the needle around, scrambling the brain, and severing the spine. This allows for live dissection, and the observation of the animal's living physiology (as the animal is still actually alive). The animal may be unable to move, but who can say whether or not it is actually brain dead, and not just brain damaged, when forced to endure the experiment? If the scientists and students who conduct tests in Trinity College truly believe in what they are doing, and have no ethical qualms about it, we would challenge them to set up live webcams in their laboratories, so that anyone may tune in and watch what they are doing, at any given time.

Vivisection is not essential to medical progress. Animals do not need to suffer in order to find cures for human diseases. The fundamental flaw of animal-based research is referred to as "species difference".

This means that animal tests are basically unreliable as a way to predict effects in humans. Not only that, but as we have seen many times, positive results in animal studies can prove disastrous when applied to humans. In fact, animal research has been shown time and again to hold back medical progress for people.

Here are just a few examples: arthritis painkiller Vioxx, which was withdrawn in 2004, caused over 140,000 strokes and heart attacks (almost 60,000 fatal), even though it appeared safe when tested on animals.

In the 1980s, thousands of people were given HIV-contaminated blood, which was deemed safe as it did not affect chimpanzees (chimpanzees are essentially immune to HIV).

Blood transfusions were delayed by 200 years and corneal transplants delayed by 90 years as a result of animal studies.

Twenty-two drugs to treat spinal cord damage were developed on animals - all failed when applied to humans.

The notoriously dangerous drugs thalidomide and diethylstilbestrol (DES) were tested on animals and released for human use. Tens of thousands suffered and/or died as a result.

In 2006, TGN1412, a new drug for leukaemia, cancer, multiple sclerosis and arthritis, caused disastrous side effects in the first human volunteers - even though it had passed tests on monkeys who were given doses 500 times greater than those given to the volunteers.

Rats and mice are the animals primarily used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer which affects membranes (eg lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: the two cannot be compared.

Even a former director of Huntingdon Life Sciences (which is one of Europe's largest animal testing facilities) admitted that animal tests only correctly predict effects in humans between 5 and 25 per cent of the time. Compare that to the fact that human cell culture tests have proven to be 80 per cent accurate.

Today there is a wealth of sophisticated techniques available for use that offer a cruelty-free, reliable alternative to animal testing, including computer modelling, tissue cultures, epidemiological studies and clinical studies. DNA chips provide further valuable information. They allow researchers to see who will respond to a drug, who will not respond, and who may be harmed by it.

But more important than any scientific argument is the fact that there is absolutely no moral or ethical justification whatsoever in testing on animals - regardless of any benefit to humans it may result in.

If humans were the ones being experimented on against their will, would you agree with it? Of course not! So what makes people feel that it is acceptable to use animals in this way? Is it a trait inherent in humans, to take advantage of beings whom they deem "lesser"? To exploit the vulnerable, profit from suffering, or to deny a fellow species of this planet their fundamental right to life, to freedom? Animals are living, breathing, feeling, sentient beings who deserve to be treated as equals - and it's time people started to realise this.

We are calling upon the people of this country to help us stop the crimes inflicted against animals every day in Trinity College. Demand justice - demand a complete ban on vivisection in Ireland.

• Laura Broxson is an activist with the National Animal Rights Association


NO

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH is driven by the necessity to develop therapies for diseases that are currently incurable. The translation of new therapies from the laboratory into the clinic only arises following years of rigorously conducted research involving an array of experimental approaches, including computer modelling of drug-protein interactions, the investigation of cell function in a Petri dish and animal experimentation. The final stages in the development of a new drug or therapeutic strategy involves studies on healthy humans and eventually a clinical trial.

In Ireland, animals used by researchers, which are predominately rats and mice, are housed in designated high specification units and are monitored closely by a veterinarian and qualified animal care staff. Researchers can only commence a study involving animals if they provide adequate scientific and ethical justification for the use of animals, the choice of species and minimum numbers of animals being used in the study. Those criteria are subject to repeated scrutiny by international panels of experts, funding agencies, scientific journals and universities.

Yes, alternatives to animal experiments exist and those approaches can provide information of value and are always considered by researchers in the first instance. For example, they can inform how a new drug may influence the function of a particular cell type. However, the very nature of those in vitro experiments, usually performed in cultured cells grown on a Petri dish, only provides a small piece of the physiological jigsaw that forms the intact body. No emergent property of a complex living system (eg high blood pressure) can be studied exclusively in a dish and the consequence of disease and the efficacy of experimental therapies on a whole organism must be considered before any advances can translate into improvements in patient care.

A ban on animal experiments would halt advances in medicine and would deprive patients and their families of a treatment for many medical conditions that are incurable and surgical conditions that are inoperable.

<snip>

• Prof Veronica Campbell is Head of Physiology at the School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin

© 2008 The Irish Times

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times


Should vivisection be banned? - The Irish Times - Mon, Oct 13, 2008

Yes it needs to be banned ASAP, it is sick and one of the worse forms of animal cruelty.
I am still disturbed by a video I watched yesterday of it .

I want to help as much as possible to get it banned worldwide also believe that anyone who still does it will go to prison.

yes. im already doing loads for it and i wont stop until it has gone!!!!!

its evil and cruel and comletly stupid. when i wash my hair with shampoo i want to wash it with people shampoo not rabbit shampoo!!!! i also dont want millions of animals to have died just for a bit of pain relief or even my life. why is my life worth more then anothers??? its not, so why is it worth more then the billions of animals that die suffering world wide every year for the sake of mediine that rarely works anyways!!!

isnt this what criminals should be for, they moan about overcrowding prisons s they let rapists and murders out when they could be used for medical testing. theres loads of criminals wasting away using tax payers money, we should make them useful, the results would be much more accurate!!!

grrrrr

__________________
Purge the world of animal testing - go cruelty free


For all your cruelty free products please visit www.purgetheworld.co.uk

My sentiments exactly, that's why research labs like Huntingdon Life Sciences in the UK and in New Jersery U.S. should be closed down by any means possible. The SHAC 7 went to prison for their stand against HLS and it's investors, how many more will it take? I have seen far too many pictures of cats being cut apart (See my Post titled "The Cat") to put up with it anymore.
We have to do something about it, but what? We have to make vivisection illegal, that's where protests, petitions, letters to members of the Gov't. etc. come in. That and maybe a few DoS attacks against the web site might help. Oh, btw, I have the info somewhere, but I need it again, the complete address for HLS in in the UK. If someone could email it to me. or maybe in a PM it would be appreciated; it's time to start writing letters.

Steve

__________________

Puppy Mills breed misery, boycott pet stores that sell puppies. Adopt! Don't Shop

I disagree. I love animals to bits but there is and always will be a natural order. I am not wanting to cause an argument. Just putting my point across. My brother and other family members might not be here today if it weren't for medical techniques discovered and improved using animal testing and
vivisection.

I totally agree that there is no need to torture animals....in terms of make-up and other cosmetics...as they are luxuries, not needs. But where life or death of a human is concerned I see things differently.

I imagine there are many people on here who will say that it should be banned...yet they are taking medication only available due to animal testing etc.

__________________

Felix
Wish You Were Here

I totaly agree and well said.

__________________


ONY

http://ony-me.piczo.com

http://www.save-me.org.uk


Some People Are Like Slinkies - Not Really Good For Anything But They Bring A Smile To Your Face When Pushed Down The Stairs.

FEEL FREE TO ADD ME TO FACEBOOK BUT PLEASE STATE PF USERNAME:

Facebook

i think it should be banned even for medical research because its outdated & unreliable & there are now other alternatives so using animals is cruel because its unesessary

BUAV state using animals in experiments for medical purposes is deeply flawed and old fashioned and an impedient to real medical progress, such procedures are fundamentaly compromised by the phsyical differences between Human beings and other species of animal.



These are the findings of Dr Jarrod Bailey, Scientific Director, Europeans for Medical Progress.(MEP are NOT an animal rights organisation, they are an organisation based on HUMAN ethics & believe that animal experiments do not serve the best interests of the public & compromise Human safety!)........

He said that claims about the effectiveness of animal experiments are meaningless without supporting evidence from scientific literature. He took 'The Associate Parliamentary group for Animal Welfare' through numerous examples of medical research being hindered or
delayed by animal experiments including the case of Antibiotics being shelved for 10 years due to an adverse reaction in rabbits.

He stated that medical progress advances 'despite' of and not because of animal use and stated that research must remain in a Human context.

He quoted many instances of dangerously ineffective & misleading animal research from Primate based Aids research into Multiple sclerosis to stroke research, incluing the recently withdrawn arthritis drug Vioxx which had cardioprotective effects in animals but caused as many as 140,000 fatal heart attacks & strokes in Humans.

He said that 82% of GP's are concerned that animal Data can be misleading when applied to Humans & that animal experiments have Never been formally evaluated and the Home Office has no plans to do so.

__________________
"If the wolf is to survive, the wolf haters must be outnumbered. They must be outshouted, out financed, and out voted. Their narrow and biased attitude must be outweighed by an attitude based on an understanding of natural processes."
L David Mech

We have doomed the Wolf not for what it is, but for what we have deliberately and mistakenly perceived it to be..the mythologized epitome of a savage, ruthless killer..which is, in reality no more than a reflexed images of ourself." -Farley Mowat

Blimming well said

__________________

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/sto...f-live-animals

Please see the above link, it is very distressing ,it is not good to be seen near young people as it is very disturbing. This is stuff of nightmares and it goes on, there is NO excuse for this sort of thing and needs to be banned now.

People who say that they wouldnt have been here if it wasnt animal experiments, havent you thought that animals will have died for your recovery?

There are no excuses in this day and age to have to experiment on animals,NO excuse.

If you were dying would you refuse the medication? I know I wouldn't!

__________________