Home Page
|
Stop Animal
Exploitation NOW!
Media Coverage
Animal lab regulations violated, according to national watchdog Animal lab tests are usually performed with the intent of
experimenting and researching. But when testing involves electric shock,
animal testing becomes cruel and unusual, said Michael Budkie, executive
director of the Ohio-based watchdog organization Stop Animal
Exploitation NOW!. Budkie, who has been actively involved in animal rights, said
electric shock is only one of the methods that a recent United States
Department of Agriculture Animal Welfare Enforcement Report lists.
Moreover, the report only lists 50 of the approximately 4000 animals
experimented on in California as experiencing any pain, while SAEN has
discovered about 50 more projects using several animals in each one, he
said. "When is electric shock not painful?" Budkie said. "You can't try to
pretend that it's all right. It's amazing how we humans are so fraught
with errors that we hide painful abuse and even the existence of
thousands of animals from each other." Budkie said the USDA report was so flawed that its statistics were
also wrong. "When you look at the report, you see that Wake Forest [University]
used 740 primates in testing for 2005," Budkie said. "In actuality, Wake
Forest uses about 1318 primates. That's a big difference when it comes
to deceptive lying and reporting." Budkie said labs at UCLA, Stanford University and UC Davis are
violators of animal rights. "These are supposed to be renowned reputable schools that give off
pride and dignity," Budkie said. "Experiments that subject animals to
electric shock or hunger aren't usually counted as causing pain." California National Primate Research Center research services manager
Jennifer Short said the CNPRC has strict regulatory procedures that they
must follow. In 2006, CNPRC used monkeys in its research and breeding.
"We give the monkeys the best care possible," Short said. "Our staff
is committed to following a human touch, giving a positive workspace and
paying the attention to our monkeys that we give to our people." Short said CNPRC was voted as a "model of excellence" when the
Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care
International evaluated the center about a year ago. The praise doesn't mean the center hasn't received its critics, Short
said. "Concerning national statistics, they don't always reflect what a
particular lab does," she said. "I'm not saying that one lab abuses
animals or that another doesn't. We get critics who express their
concern about humane handling of the monkeys." But the USDA regulates all research facilities and sets standards of
animal care and research, she said. UC Davis alumnus and animal rights activist Pete Hernandez said
alternative tests that do not use animals can be implemented. These in
vitro, or test-tube alternatives, involve cell, tissue and organ
systems. In vitro research costs one-tenth of animal testing, even
though it can't replicate animal's whole cell makeup, he said. But the fact that it's not the same thing means something to many
people, Hernandez said. "You could rely on natural ingredients for cosmetic manufacturing or
avoid testing ingredients that are not known to be safe," he said. "But
there's always the possibility of doing things the 'easy' way, testing
on animals with stuff that's potentially harmful. Because it's out
there, people have the option. It will take a lot of willpower and
mobility to convince the world that animals have rights and deserve a
place outside lab testing."
http://media.www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2007/12/04/CityNews/Animal.Lab.Regulations.Violated.According.To.National.Watchdog-3130174.shtml
|
