Laboratory hell & high water

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 2005:

“As rising floodwaters swamped New Orleans, Louisiana’s chief
epidemiologist enlisted state police on a mission to break into a
high-security government lab and destroy any dangerous germs before
they could escape or fall into the wrong hands,” Paul Elias and
Alicia Chang of Associated Press reported.
“Armed with bolt cutters and bleach, Dr. Raoult Ratard’s
team entered the state’s so-called hot lab, and killed all the
living samples.” Elias and Chang revealed no details about the
species identity of the “living samples” at that lab, but noted that
“Louisiana State University lost 8,000 lab animals, including mice,
rats, dogs and monkeys. Many drowned. Others died without food and
water, and the rest were euthanized,” according to LSU Health
Sciences Center School of Medicine dean Larry Hollier.
Researcher Paul K. Whelton, M.D. confirmed the deaths in an
interview with Laurie Barclay of Medscape.
But some animals were apparently missed. Rescuers recovered “a
couple of chinchillas and 16 dogs” from the LSU medical center, said
Matthew Davis of the BBC.

Read more

UW seeks to block opening of antivivisection museum

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2005:

MADISON–The Primate Freedom Project and Alliance for Animals
on July 4, 2005 announced plans to create a National Primate
Research Exhibition Hall in a complex of dilapidated buildings
presently used as a bicycle warehouse, located between the Wisconsin
National Primate Research Center and the Harry H. Harlow Primate
Psychology Building.
Owned by the University of Wiscon-sin, the two primate labs
have housed some of the most infamous experiments ever.
Harlow from 1930 to 1970 drove generations of baby macaques
mad there, plunging them into stainless steel “pits of despair,”
subjecting them to deliberately cruel robotic “mothers,” and
allowing mothers driven insane by his experiments to abuse and kill
them.
Primate Freedom founder Rick Bogle likened the proposed
National Primate Research Center to “having the Holocaust Memorial at
the gates of Auschwitz in 1944.” He had a nine-month purchase option
on the site, he said, which he hoped would be time enough to raise
the $675,000 purchase price of the warehouse site, assessed at only
$150,000 for tax purposes.
But there was a catch.

Read more

BOOKS: One Small Step: America’s First Primates in Space

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 2005:

One Small Step: America’s First Primates in Space
by David Cassidy & Patrick Hughes
Penguin Group (375 Hudson Street, New York, NY 10014), 2005.
135 pages, paperback plus DVD documentary. $19.95.

One Small Step presents the history of
the early U.S. space program, focusing on the
“chimponauts,” who preceded humans into orbit.
Then-U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower had one
question, according to David Cassidy and Patrick
Hughes: “If I put humans in space, are they
going to die? Will their hearts stop beating?
Will their blood stop flowing? Or will they be
so sick that they just can’t do anything?”
Video documentarian Cassidy’s
investigation, turned into a book by Hughes,
reveals not only how many animals were sacrificed
in the cause of space exploration, but also how
carefully their suffering was concealed from the
public. Chimpanzees grimacing in agony were
depicted by the Air Force-compliant media as
“smiling with enjoyment.”

Read more

BOOKS: Animals: Why They Must Not Be Brutalized

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 2005:

Animals: Why They Must Not Be Brutalized
by J.B. Suconik
Nuark Publishing (30 Amberwood Parkway, Ashland, OH 44805),
2002. 160 pages, hard cover. $28.00

Suconik’s book is basically a moral treatise against the
arguments commonly used to support vivisection. Give us the whole
balance sheet, he implores vivisection apologists, not just an item
from the profit and loss account. Then we can accurately determine
the legitimacy of the whole enterprise.
Don’t just argue, for example, that without biomedical
research on animals we can forget about a cure for AIDS. Tell us how
much it will cost, how many animals will be used, how cruel are the
procedures and what are the alternatives.
Sure, if you spend millions tormenting animals for years you
are bound to learn something, sooner or later. But if better ways
exist, then the millions spent on vivisection will have been
wastefully employed.

Read more

British lab review findings

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 2005:

LONDON–A two-year review of British animal experiments by
the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, released on May 25, 2005,
concluded that proprietary concerns and anxiety about physical
security inhibit the exchange of findings which could reduce animal
use.
British labs used 2.8 million animals in 2004, up from recent
years, but half the numbers used in the 1970s, according to Home
Office figures.
The Nuffield Council criticized the Home Office for
insufficiently determining how many animals are killed, how many die
in care, and how much suffering they endure.
The Nuffield report was compiled by a panel of 18 animal
advocates, ethicists, and scientists from both academia and private
industry. It followed a 2002 House of Lords select committee report
and a 2003 report by the Animal Procedures Committee, an advisory
body created by the Scientific Procedures Act of 1986.

Airlines will not fly lab animals

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 2005:

LONDON–Outsourcing animal research to nations where it
remains lightly regulated and non-controversial may accelerate with
the May 2005 decisions of British Airways, Air Mauritius, and Air
China to stop carrying animals who may be used in laboratories.
“I can confirm that Air China does not fly any laboratory
animals into the U.K. Our European offices also do not carry
primates and other animals destined for vivisection. There are now
no Air China flights worldwide carrying live animals for this
purpose,” said Lorna Allen, Air China marketing manager for Britain
and Ireland, in an e-mail posted at the Stop Huntingdon Animal
Cruelty web site.
Like other such policy decisions by national airways, the
Air China policy tends to encourage building labs and doing
experiments where the animals are, instead of moving animals to
existing labs which are often due for upgrade or replacement anyway.
As biotech work already draws heavily on personnel recruited
from Asia, the British Department of Trade & Industry is becoming
anxious about losing both breaking-edge research and routine animal
testing to Asian nations.

Read more

Covance lab monkey care exposed again

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 2005:

NORFOLK–PETA research and investigations chief Mary Beth
Sweetland told news media on May 17, 2005 that undercover
investigator Lisa Leitten between April 26, 2004 and March 11, 2005
“secretly videotaped repeated violations of the federal Animal
Welfare Act,” at a Covance Research Products laboratory in Vienna,
Virginia.
Alleged violations, Sweetland said, included “punching,
choking, and taunting injured monkeys; recycling sick monkeys into
new experiments; failing to administer veterinary care to severely
wounded monkeys; failing to euthanize monkeys who were in extreme
distress; and failing to properly oversee lab workers,” who
allegedly “tore monkeys from their cages and violently shoved them
into restraint tubes.”
Sweetland said Leitten’s undercover video also showed Covance
staff “performing painful and stressful procedures in full view of
other animals, monkeys with chronic rectal prolapses resulting from
constant stress and diarrhea,” monkeys suffering from “daily bloody
noses” as result of harsh intubation, and “monkey self-mutilation
resulting from failure to provide psychological enrichment and
socialization.”

Read more

University of Nevada fined

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 2005:

RENO–Substantiating complaints filed by University of Nevada
at Reno associate professor Hussein S. Hussein, the USDA Animal &
Plant Health Inspection Service in May 2005 cited the university for
46 violations of the federal Animal Welfare Act allegedly committed
between May 25, 2004 and March 21, 2005.
The university agreed to pay fines totaling $11,400 to avoid
going to court.
“The violations included repeatedly leaving 10 research pigs
without adequate water between May and September and improperly
housing the same pigs, frequent poor sanitation of animal care
facilities, lack of veterinary care, improper oversight of research
activities, failing to investigate complaints of animal neglect and
poor record keeping, and failing to properly train university farm
employees,” wrote Frank X. Mullen Jr. of the Reno Gazette-Journal.
Mullen made the case public in a December 2004 three-part
investigative series, after the university pursued disciplinary
action against Hussein. A faculty panel in April 2005 held that the
charges against Hussein were without merit.

Charges against University of Nevada laboratory whistleblower dropped

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 2005:

RENO–University of Nevada at Reno president John Lilley on
April 29 informed animal nutrition professor Hussein S. Hussein by
letter that Lilley has accepted the recommendations of a hearing
officer and three-member university panel that misconduct charges
filed against Hussein should be dropped, university spokesperson
Jane Tors announced on May 2.
“After a seven-hour evidentiary hearing on April 19, the
panel and former Carson City District Judge Michael E. Fondi found
the charges groundless,” reported Scott Sonner of Associated Press.
“Lilley said in the April 29 letter to Hussein that he was
accepting their recommendations even though he still believes Hussein
acted inappropriately” in seeking veterinary help during May and June
2004 for 10 boars that he found inexplicably placed in the same barn
as his own research animals,” said Sonner.
Hussein testified that the boars “were copiously foaming at
the mouth, including one who broke out of a pen and chased two of
his graduate students, and he thought they might be rabid or have
other diseases,” wrote Frank X. Mullen Jr. of the Reno
Gazette-Journal.

Read more

1 9 10 11 12 13 39