Animal Testing (Animal Welfare in general)

Member Name: Kayleigh2

Product:	Animal Welfare in general
Date:	06/04/06 (1550 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: SEE REVIEW

Disadvantages: SEE REVIEW

Are drugs really safe for humans after animal testing?

Do you really believe it when researchers tell you laboratory animals dont suffer?

The NAVS (National Vivisection Society) says that the scientific evidence shows that millions of animals suffer and die in laboratories all over the world - in unreliable, unethical, and unneccessary experiments.

Can the rests be trusted?
The recent case of test drug TGN1412 which left two men critically ill on life support shows just how misleading animal test data can be. The drug had been given to monkeys in doses 500 times stronger than the human volunteers received without ill effect, but turned a fit and healthy young man into what was described as the 'elephant man'. The manufacturer said the drug had been extensively tested in rabbits and monkeys with no adverse effects.

Drug failure in human trials after animal tests are not uncommon. Around a 1/3 of drugs fail in the first human trials.

It seems that the fundamental problem of animal based research is that each species reacts differently to substances. For example, Penicillin is a useful antibiotic for people, but kills guineapigs. Tamoxifen is a designed contraceptive which works in rats but has the opposite effect on women and is now used for treating cancer, even though it caused cancer in the rats. Aspirin causes birth defects in cats, but not humans. Cancer drugs can be used in humans for long periods, yet can kill a dog in a few days.

Animal test results can delay medical progress (the introduction of blood transfusions was delayed over 200 years because of misleading animal data; the introduction of corneal transplants were delayed by 90 years. Many drugs have been passed off as safe by testing on animals, but later harmed or killed people.

Breast Implants in Rabbits
A breast implant device was inserted under rabbits skin, with eight implant sites per animal. No clinical signs of toxicity were found, but one rabbit had large scratches on its back, another had bruising, and some implant wounds on a 1/3 remained open. The post mortem found chronic inflammation and some haemorrhaging. Some implants had moved and could not be found. These animals suffered terribly and died needlessly.

Monkeys in drug tests
Monkeys were used to test an asthma drug. They endured the following symptoms: liquid feaces, redness of the face, lips, feer, and hands, swollen penises and scrota, a loss of body tone, body tremors, hunched appearance, low heart rate and abdominal and umbilical hernias. Government officials rate such experiments as moderate. The type of monkey used has been described as the most misleading laboratory animal model for the study of toxic effects on the human heart.

Whats the alternative?
Despite what those who support animal experiments may tell you, most medical and scientific research in this country does not involve animals, and we can have better science and medicine without using animals. In fact, some scientists have now conceded that the TGN1412 disaster could have been averted if the kind of alternatives suggested (microdosing) had been used. For example, the use of Accelerator Mass Spectometry equipment allows accurate analysis of the effects of tiny quantities f a drug. Ultra low, safe, doses can be given to volunteers. However, this has been discussed and it was discovered that only one of these systems was in use in the UK.

Progress without animal tests
There are many examples of significant medical advances without animals such as :
Drugs - beta blockers for blood pressure; digitalis for heart failure, morphine as a painkiller, nitrite drugs for angina, quinine for malaria etc.
Surgery - Removal of appendix, bladder stones, cataracts, ovaries (tumours).
The study of people, their environment and lifestyle showed the link between smoking and cancer, and the causes of heart disease.

Rats choke on paint
Rats were stuffed in tubes and forced to breathe paint. Within three hours, half the animals had already choked to death so the test had to be stopped. The survivors were somatose. The test was intended to be non-lethal. A painful and inconclusive test for yet another tin of paint. No-one is allowed to know what went wrong.

Are animal tests strictly regulated?
Sadly it had been found that the guidelines for the care of laboratory animals are routinely ignored, with little or no penalty. Hopefully the animal welfare Bill which is going to raise standards of care for many animals in the UK will exclude the use of laboratory animals. Details of animal experiments are excluded from the Freedom of Information Act.

Do lab animals suffer?
Laboratory animals suffer terribly at every stage of their lives. Most live in overcrowded, factory-farm type conditions. Experiment licenses permit the infliction of pain, suffering and harm..

ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS - UNRELIABLE, UNETHICAL, UNNECCESARY

If this article has offended you, then i apoligise, if this article sparked emotion, then think what you can do to stop this happening. I care and i distribute leaflets, send a small donation and try and make others aware. You can do the same.

Summary: NO ANIMAL TESTING