WhyIsAnimalTestingInjuriousToHumanHealth?

Many Hands Network joins like-minded, compassionate people who want to help heal our global home. If you are concerned about the state of our world, check out the Many Hand Network pages regularly to stay informed on human rights, animal welfare and environmental issues, and add your voice and effort to those who would make our planet a safer, peaceful and more just world, and home, to all species.

To contact

Great Mystery Publishing

Why is animal testing (vivisection) injurious to human health?

'I looked through the window when just (dog) 4055 remained. Normally he is very stoic and calm, but today I saw him barking frantically and dancing all around his cage in the empty room.
When he saw me looking at him, his barking became hysterical and I had to walk away. I could not even go in to give him one last reassuring word. I was his last chance in those final moments before death and there was nothing I could do to help him'.
(From the diary of Michelle Rokke, undercover worker at HLS) You can download Michelle Rokke's diary of her time inside Huntingdon’s animal testing laboratory: click here

More than thirty-two animals die in laboratories each second worldwide; in the UK, one every four seconds.

`Biomedical research does not need animals. It is foolish and even dangerous to follow this traditional way. The difference between man and animal is so great that it usually leads us into error’.

Professor Luigi Sprovieri, paper presented at Symposium on Thoracic Surgery, Sorreno, February 1980.

`Vivisection is the Inquisition—the Hell—of Science. All the cruelty which the human—or rather the inhuman—heart is capable of inflicting, is in this one word. Below this there is no depth. This word lies like a coiled serpent at the bottom of the abyss…

I know that good for the human race can never be accomplished by torture’.

Robert Green Ingersoll

Excerpt from Medical Journal

Article by Dr Vernon Coleman `Betrayal of Trust’.

Companies invariably report having performed experiments on pregnant animals but then often go on to admit ... 'the relevance of these studies to human beings is not known'.

It is difficult to avoid asking the question: 'Why do the studies, if the relevance is not known?' A huge number of drug companies seem to be doing animal tests without knowing their relevance to human patients.

On other occasions drug companies report that animal experiments have shown that their drugs cause problems (in animal test subjects) - but that human experience suggests that the drug is entirely safe so the animal experiments can be safely ignored!

In some examples drug companies seem uncertain about the significance of the animal experiments which have been done. If the relevance of the animal experiments is not known or the experiments cannot be relied upon then why on earth does anyone do them?

For more information on animal testing check out this site: www.vivisection-absurd.org.uk.

Does animal testing help human medicine?

33 facts to consider

(1) Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals.

(2) According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree only '5%-25% of the time'.
(3) 95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.
(4) At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in laboratory animals. They are allowed because it is admitted the animal tests are not relevant.
(5) Procter & Gamble used an artificial musk despite it failing the animal tests, i.e., causing tumours in mice. They said the animal test results were 'of little relevance for humans'.
(6) When asked if they agreed that animal experiments can be misleading 'because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans', 88% of doctors agreed.
(7) Rats are only 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.

8) Rodents, which are often used in cancer research, never get carcinomas - the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (e.g lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: this logically rules out a comparison between the two.
(9) Up to 90% of animal test results are discarded as they are inapplicable to humans.
(10) The results from animal experiments can be altered by factors such as diet and bedding. Bedding has been identified as giving cancer rates of over 90% and almost nil in the same strain of mice at different locations.
(11) Sex differences among laboratory animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.
(12) 9% of anaesthetised animals, intended to recover, die.
(13) An estimated 83% of substances are metabolised by rats in a different way to humans.
(14) Attempts to sue the manufacturers of the drug Surgam failed due to the testimony of medical experts that: 'data from animals could not be extrapolated safely to patients'.
(15) According to animal tests, lemon juice is a deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulin are safe.
(16) Genetically modified animals are not models for human illness. The mdx mouse is supposed to represent muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate without treatment.
(17) 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which are passed as being safe in animal tests, according to a study in Germany.
(18) 61% of birth defects are caused by drugs passed safe in animal tests, according to the same study. Defect rates are 200 times post war levels.
(19) One in six patients in hospital are there because of a drug treatment they have taken.
(20) In America, 100,000 deaths a year are attributed to medical treatment. In one year 1.5 million people were hospitalised by medical treatment.
(21) A World Health Organisation study showed children were 14 times more likely to develop measles if they had been vaccinated.
(22) 40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.
(23) Over 200,000 medicines have been released, most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organisation, only 240 are 'essential'.
(24) A German doctors' congress concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.
(25) The lifesaving operation for ectopic pregnancies was delayed 40 years due to erroneous results obtained through vivisection.
(26) According to the Royal Commission into vivisection (1912), 'The discovery of anaesthetics owes nothing to experiments on animals'. The great Dr Hadwen noted that 'had animal experiments been relied upon...humanity would have been robbed of this great blessing of anaesthesia'. The vivisector Halsey described the discovery of Fluroxene as 'one of the most dramatic examples of misleading evidence from animal data'.
(27) Aspirin fails animal tests, as does digitalis (a heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. All of these drugs would have been banned if vivisection were heeded.
(28) In the court case when the manufacturers of Thalidomide were being tried, they were acquitted after numerous experts agreed that animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.
(29) Animal testing resulted in a 200 year delay on the introduction of blood transfusions and a ninety year delay on corneal transplants.
(30) Despite many Nobel prizes being awarded to vivisectors, only 45% agree that animal experiments are crucial.
(31) Over 450 research methods are currently available which could more efficiently replace animal experimentation.
(32) At least thirty-three animals die in laboratories each second worldwide; in the UK, one every four seconds.
(33) The Director of Research Defence Society, (which exists to defend vivisection) was asked if medical progress could have been achieved without animal use. His written reply was 'I am sure it could be'.

A detailed list of references for this article can be located here.

List compiled by V.I.N., P O Box 223, Camberley, Surrey, GU16 5ZU.

Email: vivisectionkills@hotmail.com

The following OPEN LETTER was originally printed in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday, April 28, 1991.

Physicians, Scientists, and other Health Professionals reject ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION

(We represent thousands of concerned health professionals who oppose animal experimentation - vivisection. We'd like you to know why.)

False Promises, False Claims

The biomedical research industry's claim that our health and survival depend on vivisection is patently false. Animal experiments fail to address the true causes of human disease. Our illnesses are a result of numerous factors - lifestyle, environmental toxins, genetics, poverty, etc. - which cannot be recreated in animals. In fact, information derived from animals is misleading and often dangerous when applied to humans.

Historically, clinical practice with astute deductive reasoning has resulted in the major health improvement. The discovery of penicillin and digitalis, the development of x-rays, the microscope, and hygienic principles of infection control, are just a few of the examples that owe nothing to animal experimentation. To justify its consumption of public health resources, the vivisection industry credits itself with important developments, but in reality:

- The practice of open heart surgery was delayed by at least ten years by misleading dog experiments.

- `Work on (polio) prevention was delayed by an

erroneous conception of the nature of the human disease based on misleading experimental models of the disease in monkeys.' - Dr Albert Sabin

- Scientific studies have shown that modern improvements in longevity are due not to animal-tested medicines, but to better sanitation, nutrition, and other living conditions.

No Miracle Cures

People and animals alike suffer from the futility of vivisection:

- Heart disease is still the number one cause of death. Yet recent human patient studies prove that it is preventable and reversible through lifestyle changes, including diet.

- Animal research has failed to stem a four-fold increase in birth defects over the last forty years. Easter Seals now funds only non-animal studies.

- While three animals die every second in U.S. laboratories, one in three Americans can expect to contract cancer in their lifetimes.

`It is impossible to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion in regard to cancer in man by experimenting on animals.' - Robert Bell, M.D., Vice President, International Cancer Research Society.

Vivisection Squanders Scarce Health Care Dollars

The U.S. spends $600 billion per year (12% of the U.S. GNP) on illness treatment - more than any other country in the world. Yet our health care system is in a shambles.

The U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate than 22 other developed nations. Tens of millions of Americans have no access to health care. Trauma, mental health and drug rehabilitation centres are closing for lack of funds. Efforts to rid the environment of disease-causing toxins are severely underfunded.

Vivisection is Unspeakably Cruel

Behind the locked doors of thousands of institutions, atrocities are inflicted on frightened animal subjects. They have no rights, no voice or representation, and no way of escape. Breeding farms, public pounds, and stolen pet dealers provide an endless supply of innocent victims. For example, millions of animals a year die painfully for useless products testing just to provide liability protection for manufacturers.

`I can find no evidence that the Draize Test, LD-50 test, or any other tests using animals to support the `safety' of chemicals and cosmetics have any relevance to the human species...' - Donald C. Doll, M.D., Columbia, MO

Vivisection is Big Business

Biomedical `research' is a vast, lucrative industry, supported each year by $15 billion in taxes and charity...while killing 65 to 100 million animals. Animal experimenters guard a privileged status with an enormous financial network of charities, and control the Federal agencies for health science funding. This multi-billion dollar industry is self-perpetuating, self-monitoring and self-congratulating. Meanwhile our health care system is self-destructing.

`The real choice is not between dogs and children, it is between good science and bad science; between methods that directly relate to humans and those that do not.' - Robert Sharpe, Ph. D., The Cruel Deception, 1988.

`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.' - Dr Charles Mayo, Founder Mayo Clinic New York Daily News, March 13, 1961.

All our energies and resources must be committed to productive endeavours such as preventative medicine and research methodologies which related directly to human beings including ethical human-based research, human tissue testing, and population studies (epidemiology). It is time to embrace ways of living and learning that are self-sustaining, non-polluting, and respectful of all life. Only then will our health-care goals be realized.

Signed:

Kenneth P. Stoller, M.D., Pediatrics • J. Leichtberg, M.D. • Kathleen Waddell, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist • Paula Kislak, D.V.M. • Sam Snyder, Ph.D., M.P.H. • Jonathan Lemler, D.C. • Kathy Macleary, Ph.D. •

Lorin Lindner, Ph.D., M.P.H. • L.J. Marx, M.D., Psychiatry • Susan Sterwart, R.N. • Elliot Katz, D.V.M. • Richard S. Benedon, M.D., F.A.C.E.P., Emergency Medicine • Julie Fernee, R.N. • Donald E. Doyle, M.D., F.A.C.S., Otolaryngology & Facial Plastic Surgery • Joan Priestley, M.D., General Medicine • Cheryl Anne Reller, R.N. • A. Yvonne Miles, M.S.N., C.C.R.N. • Joseph Nielands, Ph.D., Biochemistry • Harry J. Silver, M.D. • Les Stewart, D.D.S. • Charles Kuell, Ph.D., Family Counseling • Richard S. Blinstrub, M.D., Dermatology • Nedim C. Buyukmihei, V.M.D. • Michael Klaper, M.D., General Medicine.

`A day will come when the world will look upon today's vivisection in the name of science the way we look today upon witch hunts in the name of religion.'

- Henry J. Bigelow formerly Professor of Physiology Harvard University.

`I cannot think of a single major breakthrough that was produced as a result of an animal experiment. I wonder how many more million animals have to be sacrificed before we abandon the useless and barbaric practice of animal experimentation.'

- Dr Vernon Coleman, Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine.

****************

`The idea, as I understand it, is that fundamental truths are revealed in laboratory experimentation on lower animals and are then applied to the problems of the sick patient. Having been myself trained as a physiologist, I feel in a way competent to assess such a claim. It is plain nonsense.'

- Sir George Pickering, Regius Professor of Medicine, Oxford University.

****************

`Experiments on animals are not a fitting way to research or heal human ailments. The results of animal experiments do not enable any sure conclusions to be drawn with regard to human beings. Due to diverse organic and psychological differences between humans and animals, knowledge obtained from animals can be not only worthless, but also misleading and harmful for humans.'

-Doctors Against Animal Experiments Association, West Germany.

************

`It has been demonstrated that results from animal experiments are in no way applicable to human beings. There is a natural law connected with metabolism (the aggregate of all physical and chemical processes constantly taking place in living organisms), according to which a biochemical reaction that has been established for one species is valid only for that particular species and not for others. Oftentime two closely related species like the rat and mouse may react in a completely different way.'

- Dr Gianni Tamino, Department of Biology,

University of Padua.

`Any tests on animals can only demonstrate that a drug is harmless for the particular species on which the drug is tried, it doesn't mean it is harmless also to man. And vice versa. This rule has no exceptions.'

Hans Ruesch - “Slaughter of the Innocent”

************

`One can conduct experiments with many other methods which offer three advantages: scientific reliability; time saving (results obtainable with laboratory animals in six months can be obtained in two weeks with `in vitro' cells); lower costs. Then why does one continue experimenting with animals? This is to be explained first of all with mental and cultural backwardness. And further, because old fashioned laws prescribe animals experiments in order to obtain permission for the sale of medicines. The present law must be abolished. Animal experimentation is fallacious, useless, expensive and furthermore cruel.'

- Dr Gianni Tamino, Department of Biology, University of Padua.

*************

`I was absolutely convinced of the scientific validity of vivisection; a conviction that had been forced on me during my university studies and has conditioned me for many years thereafter. So I now define myself `a criminal victim'. I was the victim of a stupidity that had been imposed on me. At a certain moment of my life...I realized its uselessness. Actually, one doesn't have to be a genius to understand that vivisection is an aberration, a foolish practice which leads medicine astray. And this in turn means causing millions of human victims. Let's keep in mind that we all are victims of toxic drugs, of wrong medical notions and illusions.’

- Peitro Croce MD, Member of the College of American Pathologists.