Thank you for your interesting post on concerns regarding the treatment of animals in laboratories.

Animal experimenters may want to do a reality check before whining over demonstrations conducted outside their homes and slogans scrawled in chalk on sidewalks in their neighborhoods: it is the experimenters who are producing a body count, to the tune of over 100 million animals every year in the U.S. alone.

Animals in labs endure lives of deprivation, isolation, stress, trauma and depression even before they are used in any experiment. While regulations governing treatment of animals in laboratories represent minimal standards of care and only a tiny fraction of the tens of millions of animals killed in U.S. laboratories every year are even covered, a 2005 federal audit concluded that experimenters are failing to extend even these basic considerations to animals in their care. Sick animals go without veterinary care, animals used in invasive surgeries do not receive sufficient pain relief, and extremely sick animals are denied humane euthanasia. Nearly a third of oversight committees are failing to ensure that experimenters have looked for alternatives to painful procedures on animals, as they’re required to do.

It is a particularly tragic day for California taxpayers when the UC system responds to public outcry over the suffering of animals by proposing to curtail free speech and to limit access to records on animal use. It would be more useful for UC to deal with the problems within its laboratories.

UC officials need to stop pushing for legislation that curtails freedom of speech and information and focus instead on fixing the mess created by the arrogance and carelessness of its animal experimenters. To learn more, please visit stopanimaltests.com. For free stickers and information on what you can do to help, visit peta2.com.

Alka Chandna, Ph.D.
Laboratory Oversight Specialist
Laboratory Investigations Department
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)

I agree with the previous comment. These "researchers" are torturing animals. In one case the research was funded by Philip Morris, which doesn't care about human health. Please read more about this issue than what is presented in that AP story.

40,000 animals are currently caged and being exploited for the most esoteric, non-applicable, and downright frivolous research at UC-Berkeley. Check out the Stop Cal Vivisection website, the "meet the vivisectors" section has more information on the research protocols:
www.pixelexdesign.com/stopcalvivisection

Your article claims:

"At UCLA, one of the country's biggest research facilities, protesters have set a university van on fire, attempted to set off a firebomb in a professor's car, and flooded another professor's home with a garden hose."

If everything you allege actually happened how you do explain that there are no arrests and convictions for any of these alleged incidences? – very shoddy reporting.

Peter Muller,
Chair,
Equal Justice Alliance

The Animal Welfare Act does NOT protect these innocent animals from any type of invasive procedure, no matter how horrific. "Scientists" are allowed to do whatever they want, in whatever manner they choose to these animals, who are often sliced and diced with no anesthesia - only restraint. This is typical. Many former employees of labs have infinite horror stories to tell, and terminate their positions because they are so disturbed by the heinous abuse - which most of these sadistic torturers actually enjoy. There are videos on YouTube of undercover investigations depicting laughing while torturing animals and the worst abuses you can imagine.

Imagine this: You live in a tiny, barren cage, alone with nothing to do, no one to be with, living in your own filth and the only time you get out is for a torture session. You get no pain relief and no veterinary care. You get to die a slow and lingering death, or on the table.

There are dozens of alternative tests available that do not involve the routine torture of animals, and that actually yeild ACCURATE results in humans, unlike animal experiments. (The UK uses them, but hey, they aren't a multimillion dollar a year profit for corporations and universities). Would you go to a veterinarian if you were ill or needed surgery? Would you take your dog or cat to your internist? What is the difference? The difference is that rats, dogs, cats et al are NOT little people and the tests done are miserable failures. They harm and impede medical progress.

Power to anyone who fights to stop this atrocity. We are surely the most barbaric of species.

If the FBI had any intelligence within their organization, they would realize that their "terrorism" campaign against animal rights activists only forces activists to go underground i.e. the Animal Liberation Front. No amount of protesting, pleading, letter writing, phone calls or emails is even acknowledged. What do they expect? Some people in this world have compassion - AND brains. Some people don't simply buy everything the media shoves down our throats like "every medical success relied upon animal experiments". Every medical FAILURE was a result of animal experiments. Do people actually think that drugs aren't tested on people after the animal tests are completed? What about all the deadly side effects of medicines? Is that success? Medical error and drug reactions are one of the main causes of death right next to heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer. I don't call that progress. The new alternatives are inexpensive, accurate and quick - not years of the decades old tests that are known failures. Splenda killed over 12,000 animals of every species they experimented on. Where is it now? On the shelves. Vioxx tested safe in lab animals. It killed over 60,000 people. There are new drug recalls every week because they're deadly. Have you ever actually LISTENED to the laundry list of horrid side effects on every new drug advertised on television? We need to wake up and put the health of PEOPLE before the profits and grants for animal research.

Corporations are the new government. Wow, now I feel safe.

please--no offense, but if your kid has diabetes would you give him or her insulin?
why aren't you guys on the fly labs, how about the fish or the yeast or the nematodes?
\you guys are the worst kind of hipocracy

A lot of us have seen the horrible films and photographs of lab animals undergoing procedures that look - well, horrible. But what the animal rights activists don't understand is that most of those images are 20, 30, 50 - even 60 years old. Many were taken in other countries. Even the few that are relatively modern and American in origin don't show that the animals recieve pain medication during invasive procedures. But most of the activists wouldn't care, even if they did know the facts - they don't want animals used for research (or anything else, including companionship), period. The fact that they are willing to use violence to force their minority views on the majority makes them terrorists, pure and simple.

What film have you seen that is 60 years old? I am not aware of these films. Perhaps you could send a link to them. The films we have are not decades old, and the employees themselves have said and do say these are not "isolated incidents"; on the contrary they are DAILY occurences. Don't be a sheep, use your head.

They do, however, perform the same old tests they have for the last several decades, time after time. I mean, how many time do you have to test cleaners on the eyes of animals? (The Draize Test). How many times do you have to hook up a funnel to inundate a puppy's lungs with concentrated cigarette smoke to find that it is addictive, and damages organs. How about instead of spending the BILLIONS of dollars in useless animal testing, we put that money into health care and education? Other countries do it and are more successful overall in preventing that which is killing our population, and draining us dry in medical costs, which means we can't afford insurance. Could our government get any more stupid? Oh that's right, it isn't stupidity as much as it is greed. The FDA is NOT your friend. Check into it.

As far as insulin, in case you are not aware, insulin of today is not porcine insulin, nor any other animal insulin. Unfortunately, the FDA requires testing on ALL medications. You call us hypocrites, but no offense? I supposed you say you love animals. Everybody does. But, you no doubt eat them, supporting the most abusive treatment of all; factory farming. But hey, the only animals that count are dogs and cats, right? Now who's the hypocrite?

The witch that runs PETA is against use of animals for medical and drug development. Or she was until SHE needed the results from that process. But that was an EXCEPTION. Ain't she special.

Wanna talk hypocrites!

Boy this article struck a nerve of the animal rightists who are now trying to justify their crazy views by so many of their comments on this article. But alas, the more they speak, the more normal people realize how truly crazy they all are! They don't want any animal use at all including companion animals or food animals. And PETA kills 97% of all companion animals they take in saying they will try and find these poor animals a new home - talk about hypocrites!

Animal Welfare or Animal Rights?
Here are some of the differences:

As animal welfare advocates. . .

• We seek to improve the treatment and well-being of animals.

• We support the humane treatment of animals that ensures comfort and freedom from unnecessary pain and suffering.

• We believe we have the right to "own" animals -- they are our property.

• We believe animal owners should provide loving care for the lifetime of their animals.

As animal rights activists. . .

• They seek to end the use and ownership of animals, including the keeping of pets.

• They believe that any use of an animal is exploitation so, not only must we stop using animals for food and clothing, but pet ownership must be outlawed as well.

• They want to obtain legal rights for animals as they believe that animals and humans are equal.

• They use false and unsubstantiated allegations of animal abuse to raise funds, attract media attention and bring supporters into the movement. (The Inhumane Crusade, Daniel T. Oliver)
www.naiaonline.org

7 Things You Didn't Know About PeTA

1. PeTA has stated repeatedly that their goal is "total animal liberation." This means no pets, no meat, no milk, no zoos, no circuses, no fishing, no hunting, no farming, no leather, and no animal testing for lifesaving medicines.
2. PeTA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals.
3. PeTA funds the misnamed Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine an animal-rights organization that presents itself as an unbiased source for nutritional information and has links to violent animal-rights groups called SHAC and ALF.
4. PeTA has used their contributors tax-exempt donations to fund the North American Earth Liberation front and the Animal Liberation Front, FBI-certified domestic terrorist groups responsible for fire bombs and death threats.
5. PeTA regularly targets kids as early as elementary school with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda. They are totally opposed to traditional farming methods.
6. PeTA spends less than one percent of its $13 million budget actually caring for animals. PeTA kills animals.
7. PeTA has repeatedly attacked groups like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, for conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases.
source: www.consumerfreedom.com

7 Things You Didn’t Know About H$U$
(The Humane Society of the United States)

1. H$U$ does not operate or have direct control over any animal shelter. Buried deep within H$U$'s website is a disclaimer noting that the group "is not affiliated with, nor is it a parent organization for, local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal care and control agencies.” When H$U$ merged with the Fund for Animals they acquired some animal sanctuaries but those are usually full when someone tries to send an animal there - unless the animal comes with a big check.

2. Since its inception, H$U$ has tried to limit the choices of American consumers, opposing dog breeding, conventional livestock and poultry farming, rodeos, circuses, horse racing, marine aquariums, fur trapping and medical research.

3. H$U$ raises enough money to help finance animal shelters in every single state, with money to spare, yet it doesn't operate a single one anywhere. Instead, H$U$ spends millions on programs that seek to economically cripple meat and dairy producers; eliminate the use of animals in biomedical research labs; phase out pet breeding, zoos, and circus animal acts; and demonize hunters as crazed lunatics. H$U$ spends $2 million each year on travel expenses alone, just keeping its multi-national agenda going.

4. While most local animal shelters are under-funded and unsung, H$U$ has accumulated $113 million in assets and built a recognizable brand by capitalizing on the confusion its very name provokes.

5. The current president of H$U$, Wayne Pacelle, is a former officer of PeTA.

6. H$U$ is currently under investigation by the Attorney General of Louisiana in regards to the disposition of Katrina funds. H$U$ has been under investigation by the FBI for their links to domestic terrorist organizations such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). One of their current officers, John P. Goodwin is a former member of ALF and a convicted felon for acts of terrorism related to animals.

7. H$U$ consistently jumps on the bandwagon of any animal issue to raise funds even if they are NOT directly involved. Most recently they used the Michael Vick case as a major fund raiser, even though H$U$ had nothing to do with the investigation or care of the Vick dogs.


Sources:
www.consumerfreedom.com
www.pet-law.com
www.naiaonline.org

@ Anonymous:

Because the criminals do not want to be caught?

Use of animals(mostly mice/rats)in research is not done without oversight and guidelines as to care and use. Research is necessary. The use of animals in research is necessary and critical to saving lives of people as well as other animals. Much of the research done benefits animals as well as people. I haven't seen any animal rights hypocrits in PETA, HSUS or ALF turn down life saving procedures which were developed with animal tests. Research is necessary and well regulated. My support goes to the reseachers, and my thanks.

I wasn't aware that PETA opposed companion animals? They have a whole blog and website which deal heavily with how to properly and lovingly care for companion animals. What an amazingly unfounded statement, CCF guy.

People always defend the practice of using animals in laboratories, but few among them research the documented rate of abuse of animals in laboratories -- as posted by the federal government. To say that these animals are treated fairly, given care and respect, etc. is simply to buy into what you're told by public relations staff representing the industry.

Did you know that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture reports the number of documented illegal acts in laboratories yearly? These personnel failures directly affect how animals live (and slowly die) in laboratories. The report is available online thanks to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request here: http://www.all-creatures.org/saen/res-usda-aphis-viosum2006.pdf .

Note that the over 20,000 violations affecting over 453,000 animals only accounts for what USDA inspectors notice and in no way addresses what is going on for the several hundred days each year that no inspectors visit these labs. Animals ARE tortured in labs, whether maliciously or through simple error, and there is no excuse for this.

animals need thier rights. They should not be abused in any way. But unlike PETA I beleive that we need to provide them with a kind and loving home. Yes, I own my little ones. I am also their mommy. I think research can be done without the use of animals. That is pure abuse. The people that make a living this way should be in jail. It is just the abuse of animals.

Unfortunately research relies on the use of animals (indeed if there are alternatives then they must legally be used instead of animals). Where do you think the vaccines that ensure the health of your child come from? Meningitis Vaccine, Polio Vaccine, TB Vaccine ..... all through animal research.
Tom Holder
www.speakingofresearch.org

PETA's out in full force. ASK PETA about Pete Singer, the 2nd founder of the current animal rights movement. I hear PETA backs Peter's views of human with animal sex. Or ask Peta about the first founder of the animal rights: a German, the year 1933. THE WHOLE WORLD CALLED HIM EVIL BUT PETA CALLS HIM A HERO.

You guys are morons.