Replacing Animals in Research: Humane Charity Seal of Approval

Aperçu:

Animal experiments are every bit as hard on animals as you may have imagined. Before an experiment even begins, animals have already undergone the stresses of being loaded and shipped, often over very long distances. Most are confined in cramped cages, deprived of movement and the normal social interactions that are essential to their psychological well being. Virtually all are killed, often after undergoing painful procedures. Even 'routine' manipulations - forced feedings, blood draws, and physical restraint - are extremely stressful. In the typical laboratory environment, there is no such thing as a humane experiment. Animal protection laws do not cover most of the millions of animals used in Canadian laboratories and provide only paltry protections for the remainder. Aside from these humane concerns, however, there are other problems with animal experiments, which explain why good quality research does not involve animals at all and why replacing animal experiments with better methods makes research more effective. The Council on Humane Giving administers "The Humane Charity Seal of Approval": this is the public's assurance that their generous donations to medical charities will only be directed toward non-animal research or direct-to-patient services. Our AD-AV Society of BC needs to mount a major advertising campaign in promotion of The Humane Seal. The goal is to raise public awareness about the sufferings endured by the animals in laboratories and the innovative, human-based methods that are available; we also need to encourage medical research charities here in Canada never to fund animal experimentation. Jane Goodall's words remind us that we can choose to honour life in all its shapes and sizes: Foreword to "Sacred Cows and Golden Geese" by Drs. Ray and Jean Greek by Jane Goodall, PhD For years I have been criticizing the ethics of using animals on the grounds of their proven sentience and sapience. For nearly forty years I have had the privilege of working with and learning from our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees. As we have gradually discovered how like us they are (or we like them), the line that was once seen as so sharp between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom has increasingly blurred. Chimpanzees have vivid personalities, a complex social life, humanlike cognitive abilities, and emotions similar to ours. They are capable of compassion, they can show true altruism, and they have a sense of humor. Not surprisingly, they are also physiologically very like humans as well. That is why these closest relatives of ours have been - and still are - used as "models" in the study of human diseases. With no regard for their human-like behavior, hundreds have been condemned to life imprisonment (up to sixty years) in five-foot by five-foot laboratory cages. And the only reason this is tolerated by anyone is because we have been told, repeatedly told, that only by testing drugs and vaccines on these human-like bodies can we find ways of alleviating human suffering. For the same reason, we tolerate the shocking abuse of many other sentient beings. If anyone other than white-coated scientists treated monkeys, dogs, cats, rabbits, pigs, and so forth as they do behind the locked doors of the animal lab, he or she would be prosecuted for cruelty. But, say the animal experimenters, it is for the good of humans. If animal experimentation were stopped, we are told, so too would human medical progress. How else could we learn about the nature of human diseases, find new cures and vaccines, perfect new medical technologies? This is the argument that is repeated, again and again, by the animal experimenters. However, what if it can be shown that the use of animals, in very many instances, provides misleading results? How often are potentially healing drugs withheld from humans because they harm animals? By contrast, how often are drugs that do not harm animals used on humans with disastrous results? We dedicate vast amounts of research energy and research dollars to inflicting human-like diseases on animals and seeking ways to treat them. Scientists use the data this generates to write papers in order to get new grants. What is less generally realized, unless one carefully follows the scientific journals, is how seldom these animal "breakthroughs" are useful in curing the "real" diseases in their human form." ______________________________ Thanks to Dr. Goodall and 1000's of forward-looking scientists throughout the world, we have learned that real, innovative science does not require the use of animals. The biological differences between species, each with its own set of enzyme systems, hormone systems, and other complex mechanisms that may differ from those of others, mean that the human-based approach is essential toward curing human diseases. Pease help us to make all Canadians realize it.