The use of animal-testing on products for humans is ineffective, wasteful and downright cruel. There are alternatives: Advocacy For Animals
A foreign company is planning to set up an animal-testing laboratory in Melaka. Please help stop this project by letting your voice and vote be heard.
The Petition: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/StopPlansForAnimalTestingMalaysia
===========================================================================
The Star Two 28/06/2010 Suffering in silence
Millions of animals are being poisoned, burned, infected and dissected in the course of research.
Story by S.S. YOGA
yoga@thestar.com.my
Photo courtesy of BUAV and PETA
Every year, an estimated 115 million animals are used for research and experiments in the name of science. Some of the animals commonly used in test include dogs, cats, rodents (rats, mice, guinea pigs and hamsters),rabbits, fruit flies, fish, birds, frogs and non-human primates such as the common Macaque, baboons, squirrel monkeys and marmosets.
Supporters argue that progress in modern medicine depended on animal testing, while animal rights activists vehemently question its legitimacy.
Closer home, we have our share of proponents who feel it is justified to use animals to serve our our needs. Malacca chief minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam was quoted as saying that God created animals to be used by humans, and animals needed to be sacrificed in order to find vaccines and cures for diseases.
The state's proposed plans to set up an animal testing laboratory for its cancer and diabetic research centre in Rembia, Alor Gajah, created a public uproar.
Meanwhile, an animal lab in Seberang Perai, Penang has come under the scrunity of the Penang State Government. Progenix Research Sdn Bhd, which runs the animal testing laboratory in Bukit Mertajam, said in its website that it is an independent contract research organisation offering toxicology services.
The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV), and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), an international animal rights group, take us through a typical scenario. BUAV, the prime mover against animal testing in Britain, also gives accreditation for products not tested on animals.
According to BUAV veterinary advisor Dr Nedim Buyukmihci, there is no one situation that is representative, as it depends on what is being tested.
"If the lab was testing for toxicity of botulinum toxin (botox), one would find mice suffering from paralysis and respiratory distress. Unable to reach for food or water, they eventually die from suffocation."
"On the other, if the lab was testing the effects of a nerve poison such as soman, you would see monkeys in cages suffering from the extremely painful affects of this poison."says Dr Buyukmihci, who is speaking from his experience a sprincipal investigator for several large National Institute of Health-funded projects involving animals in the United States.
Dr Buyukmihci is now against using animals in research which harms them.
The species that is used, says Dr Buyukmihci, is dependent on the drug or situation being tested. In general, every drug is tested on at least one rodent species, a large mammal species such as dog, and in a non-human primate species.
The duration of the experiment varies. Fir tests on acute toxicity (the LD50 test), groups of animals are given different doses of the drug and allowed to suffer the side effects. Lehal doses are administered to determine which dose will kill half the animals. The test may last several days to see how many of the animals in each group die.
" The test to see if cancer is caused by a perticular drug, may go on for months or years, depending on the species used." explains Dr Buyukmihci via e-mail.
Almost brain-dead : This monkey in a lab in Utah, the United States, had holes bored into his head, titanium pins drilled inti his skull, electrodes implanted in his brain, and a metal device attached to his head so he could be restrained during experiments.
Den of SufferingPETA laboratory investigations vice-president Kathy Guillermo paints a gruesome picture of unspeakable suffering inside some animal testing facilities: scenes of animals being forced to inhale toxic fumes, have holes drilled into their skulls, have their skin burnt and their spinal cords crushed.
Target : This cat, also in Utah lab, had a hole bored into his skull and electrodes implanted in his brain.
"Tiny mice grow tumours as large as their bodies, kittens are blinded, and rats made to suffer seizures. Experimenters force-feed pesticides to dogs and rub corrosive chemicals onto rabbits skin," reveals Guillermo in an email interview.
"In some experiments, animals are traumatised at en early age, and then allowed to grow for years to observe the effects of the early trauma in late life."
"You ssee thousands of animals confined in cages, socially isolated. Many of these animals exhibit symptoms of severe psychological trauma," points out Guillermo, who has been with PETA for 21 years.
As Dr Buyukmihci notes, the effects on the animals are main-fold : ulcers on the stomach or intestinal tract, bleeding from various orifices, muscle cramps, paralysis resulting in the inability to reach for food or water, internal bleeding, pneumonia which makes breathing difficult, and organ damage.
BUAV communications and special projects director Sarah Kite has gone undercover at many of these animal testing facilities. She saw toxicity tests being administered to rats, mice and dogs.
"For the dogs, this could entail anything from dripping substances into their eyes twice a day, lacing their food with fungicides or insecticides, force-feeding of chemicals, drugs and household products in the form of gelatine capsules or via plastic tubes inserted into their stomach," she details via email.
Dogs were strapped in harness for up to eight hours a day, and chemicals pumped into their blood-stream to test for skin toxicity.
"I have witnessed beagles being pinned between the technician's legs, their jaws forced open and toxic capsules pushed down their throats. The highly distressed dogs would often struggle to escape, and retch and regurgitate after the ordeal was cover."
Kite saw that many of the dogswere shaking visibly. She often found blood, vomit and signs of diarrhoea on the cage floors.
Among the test they underwent were a gastro-intestinal toxicity test for an anti-arthritic drug already on the market; a repeated 30-day dermal toxicity test for a psoriasis skin cream which was applied on the dog's shaved backs which bore open, weeping sores; and an acute oral toxicity test for 13 weeks for a component of polypropylene food wrap ( the dogs were force-fed gelatin capsules ).
Rabbits held in stocks for testing.
NO RELIEF
At an international contract testing laboratory in Gemany, BUAV uncovered macaque monkeys being subjected to a distressing routine of blood sampling, forced oral dosing og chemicals and long periods restrained in "primate chairs" for the slow intravenous drip of chemical coctails.
At another contract testing lab in Britain, BUAV found rabbits being used in pyrogen tests ( a pyrogen is a fever-inducing agent ).As part of the test, they are immobilised in stocks for several hours.
"The test substance is injected into an ear vein, sometimes resulting in damage to the ears. A temperature probe was inserted 7.5cm deep into the rectum and left for hours," details Kite.
Some of the rabbits were killed at the end of the test, but others were returned to their cages to be reused.
For toxicology tests, BUAV's Dr Buyukmihci says no anaesthetics or pain relievers are given because it is believed that they would interfere with the results.
PETA's Guillermo notes that the prevailing ethics at all vivisection laboratories is that science always comes before the welfare of the animals.
She says that some tests require "death as an endpoint," that is, they wait for the animals to die a slow, painful death. Other animals are killed intentionally so that their tissues can be harvested and their bodies examined.
According to Dr Buyukmihci, animals that do not die from the effects of the tests will be killed.
"If the animals become very sick, they may be killed before the end of the test but only if it does not interfere with the results," says Dr Buyukmihci.
Guillermo further explains that animals are often afflicted with an illness to observe the effects of the disease on their body. "After the experimenters have obtained the data they need, the animal will be euthanised."
The animals are generally supplied to the labs by companies that breed them onsite for this purpose. Many primates are imported from the wild, often from wildlife dealers in Asia. And then the pain and suffering starts.
There is an article on "Viable alternatives to animal-testing" published on The Star on 29/06/2010 (Tuesday) .......................
Additional article.....
Regulations Required
In Malaysia, there are currently no laws to regulate the treatment and use of animals in labs. There is the Wildlife Protection Act 1972 which requires anyone using animals that fall under its purview to obtain permits fro the Wildlife and National Parks Department.
There is also the Animal Act 20006 which empowers the Veterinary Service sDepartment to act against animal abuse. But the penalties are insignificant: a fine of RM200 and/or imprisonment for a term of six months. The animals involved may be seized by the officers of the department.
According to the Bitish Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV), there is a European directive governing the use of animals in experiments, which is currently being revised. BUAV communications and special projects director, Sarah Kite says they are disappointed with nthe review of an outdated piece of legislation.
The European Union (EU) bans animal testing for cosmetic purposes within the EU. It also has a partial marketing ban on the sale of cosmetics which have been tested on animals.
Kite says a full marketing ban is due to come into affect in 2013.
She notes though that the British legislation is considered the strictest in the world. In Britain, experiments are governed by the Animals (Scientific Procedures ) Act 1986 which is implemented by the Home Office (HO), a government department.
An animal experiments requires three different licences: A licence for the laboratory to carry out animal experiments; a licence for a oerson overseeing the experiment, with details of the number and species of animals to be used and details of the experiment;a personal licence for every researcher involved in the experiment.
"Before licensing an experiment, the HO is suppose to weigh a number of issues, including a cost/benefit test. this assesses the welfare cost to the animal against the preceived benefit of the experiment," explains Kite.
There are a number of government inspectors who inspect the laboratories. There is also a code of practice which specifies how animals in laboratories should be housed and cared for.
In 1997, the Britain Government banned the use of animals for testing cosmetics, developing offensive weapons, and for alcohol and tobacco products.
There is also a ban on the use of Great Apes.
The British Government decided that it would be unethical to use such animals for research purpose due to their cognitive and behavioural characteristic and qualities.
The British Government recently pledged to end the use animals to test household products such as floor cleaners, air fresheners, and the like.
In the United States, notes Kite, under the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act and Guide For The Care And Use Of Laboratory Animals published by the National Academy of Sciences, any procedure can be performed on an animal if it can be successfully argued that it is scientifically justified.
The coalition against the proposed animal testing lab in Malacca comprises the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) Selangor, BUAV and the European Coalition To End Animal Experiments.
The animal-testing facility is a joint venture between the Indian company Vivo Bio Tech and the Malacca state government-owned Melaka Biotech. The coalition speculates that the lab is based in Malaysia because of our non-existent laws concerning the use of animals, as opposed to the stringent laws in India.
In India, The Prevention of Cruelty To Animals Act 1960 imposes a small fine and/or imprisonment of up to three months. It also empowers the department concerned to set up a committee to monitor the use of animals for experimentation.
There is also the Breeding Of And Experiments On Animals (Control and Supervision) Rules, 1998, which stipulates that animal-testing is allowed only if they are no alternatives available. It also provides rules on how the animals are to be housed and treated, and contravention of its rules could result in the closing down of the facility.
Kite says that Malaysia should follow the example of India, the EU and the United States, and enact laws that require standards for animal care in the laboratory; that mandate pain relief and veterinary care; that require review by an animal ethics committee; that mandate the use of available alternatives to animals; and that dedicates money towards the development of non-animal test method.
