Mr. Hatch, Mr. Wright,Mr. Stanford,
I am responding to Mr. Wright's email and I have the opinion that
President Hatch should be made aware of the content of this response. I
also believe that Mr. Stanford should be involved in this discussion
since it directly refers to his research.
Mr. Wright, regarding your response, apparently you find it easier to
engage in personal attacks than to deal with facts. However, I would
like to (again) point out the facts of the situation, as stated in Mr.
Stanford's publications, which are listed below.
These publications make it clear that this research project involves
several things. First, this experimentation confines non-human primates
(rhesus monkeys), to restraint chairs. The only way in which this could
not be factual is if Mr. Stanford has authored fraudulent statements
regarding the procedures used in his research. I do not accuse him of
making fraudulent statements regarding the procedures used in his
research. Therefore, these primates are confined to restraint chairs.
This cannot be disputed.
Additionally, these publications state that devices (restraining
bars) are surgically attached to the skulls of the rhesus monkeys used
in this research. Again, the only way in which this could not be factual
is if Mr. Stanford has authored fraudulent statements regarding the
procedures used in his research. I do not accuse Mr. Stanford of
dishonesty regarding the attachment of restraining bars to the heads of
primates used in his protocol. Therefore, this cannot be disputed.
Also, these publications state that the primates perform for a
water/juice reward. From reading the actual grant applications or
research protocols of others utilizing primates in this way, it is clear
that in order for these liquids to be an effective reward, access to
water or other liquids is often severely limited. I cannot, at this time
say exactly what these procedures are at Wake Forest. However, so that I
can be totally accurate as to the duration of this potential lack of
access to water, I have filed a FOIA request with the National
Institutes of Health to obtain documents relevant to Mr. Stanford's
research. I am sure that you will be notified of this request in the
very near future. Once these documents are available we can discuss
access to water more fully.
For the present, the use of primate restraint chairs and restraining
bars in Mr. Stanford's research cannot be disputed. These are the facts
as reported by Mr. Stanford himself. These facts are what I wish to
address.
The statements of veterinarians and other experts regarding animal
experimentation have been forwarded to you in an effort to demonstrate
that the use of these devices is causative of substantial pain and/or
distress in rhesus monkeys, and that the use of these devices should
constitute experimentation that must be reported on USDA's Annual Report
for Research Facility form 7023 in column E, which is designed to list
animals used in experimentation involving unrelieved pain and/or
distress. Mr. Stanford's procedures involve the utilization of fully
awake primates who are severely confined. There is no mention of pain
relievers in his publications, other than for the immediate
post-operative period. Therefore these primates are aware of the severe
restraint, they feel what is happening, and experience pain and/or
distress.
I originally contacted Mr. Hatch in an attempt to initiate a
discussion of these procedures from the point of view of considerations
for the pain and suffering of the primates used in this experimentation,
as well as accurate reporting, so that Wake Forest could avoid potential
violations of federal law.
I would still prefer to initiate dialogue on this matter in a civil
manner, so that we can come to a resolution that will be appropriate. In
order that we can conduct this process I would like to suggest that we
refrain from dismissing statements as misinformation, which are clearly
accurate. I would also like to suggest that we stick to the facts.
The facts are that this experimentation uses primate restraint chairs
and restraining bars which are bolted into the heads of rhesus monkeys.
This can only be denied by using dishonesty. These are the only claims
that I have made regarding Mr. Stanford's experimentation, other than
the issue of water consumption which will be more fully addressed once I
have Mr. Stanford's protocol in hand.
Therefore, I would again like to ask for a meeting to discuss these
issues, including the elimination of these painful procedures, and a
tour of Wake Forest's animal experimentation laboratories so that I can
have the opportunity to assess the condition of the animals within your
facilities.
Refusal of these requests can only be understood as unwillingness to
engage in open dialogue based on the need to hide the reality of this
experimentation from the public.
By voluntarily agreeing to the elimination of the use of restraint
chairs, the bolting of devices to the skulls of non-human primates, and
water deprivation Wake Forest University has the opportunity to step
into the forefront of eliminating what are clearly inhumane practices
from the laboratory. Refusal to take this step will designate Wake
Forest as clinging to out-dated practices that have been labeled
'unethical' by credentialed experts.
I will look forward to hearing from Wake Forest within the next five
business days to arrange the meetings and tours as requested.
Sincerely,
Michael A. Budkie, A.H.T.,
Executive Director, SAEN
See also : Wake Forest University,
Winston-Salem, NC
