24 Apr 2006

World Lab Animal Week 24 - 30 April 2006

This might appear off topic, but from a health point of view, are pharmaceuticals safe to take because they have been tested on animals ? Evidence has proved that they are not. From a moral point of view, is it right to cage, torture and eventually kill millions of laboratory animals ?

"Animal tests don't work," says the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) as they launch World Lab Animal Week, 24 - 30 April 2006, in the wake of the recent TGN1412 drug trials, "because they are unreliable, unnecessary and unethical. This week is about awareness that lab animal research is both cruel, and bad science."

Every year, around 100 million animals suffer and die in the world's laboratories. Founded by the NAVS and recognised by the United Nations, World Lab Animal Day falls on April 24th.

All over the world people will be calling for the use of non-animal research techniques instead. For more details, log on to The National Anti-Vivisection Society U.K.(NAVS)

The National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), founded in 1875, was the world's first group to campaign for the abolition of cruel and futile experiments on animals. Through its sister organisation, the Lord Dowding Fund, the group promotes non-animal research by awarding grants in excess of GBP3 million.

Other Useful Links USA

A very interesting article can be found at The Ecologist website, a portion of which I am including here.

Animal testing: science or fiction?
MPs, medical professionals and scientists unite in demanding a thorough evaluation of the utility of vivisection by Kathy Archibald

Most of us know that cancer, heart disease and stroke are the leading causes of death in the West. But many people would be surprised by the next biggest killer: side effects of prescription medicines. Adverse drug reactions kill more than 10,000 people a year in the UK (and more than 100,000 in the US), costing the NHS alone £466m per year.

The pharmaceutical establishment constantly reassures us that all drugs are tested for safety and efficacy on animals before they can be administered to humans. When challenged about the ethics of vivisection, their defence typically goes like this: ‘Which do you think is more important: your child’s life or a rat’s?’ Given this choice most people would thankfully sacrifice the rat.

But what if you were told that the current animal testing procedures are seriously flawed? Consider the following evidence:

Arthritis drug Vioxx, withdrawn from the global market in September 2004, appeared to be safe and even beneficial to the heart in animals, but caused as many as 140,000 heart attacks and strokes in the US alone. The associate safety director of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) described it as the ‘single greatest drug-safety catastrophe in the history of the world’.

To read the full article go to and read the facts for yourself.

"I abhor vivisection. It should at least be curbed. Better it should be abolished. I know of no achievement through vivisection, no scientific discovery that could not have been obtained without such barbarism and cruelty. The whole thing is evil." — Charles Mayo, MD, founder of the Mayo Clinic

"The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse... We have cured mice of cancer for decades -- and it simply didn't work in humans." — Dr. Richard Klausner, Director of the National Cancer Institute

No comments: