Animal rights protesters should take a long hard look at their activities - they use terror against people who are working legally. Yes, animal experiments are an emotive issue, but SHAC is no better than anti-abortion protesters in the US. It is merely dogma and hatred, not a rational protest. Animal experiments simply cannot just be replaced by tissue culture or human trials, they fill an important gap - if a drug appears to work on cell cultures, then moving straight to humans might appear safe, but what if it has unforeseen side-effects, even lethal effects? The legislation on animal testing needs to be more stringent. The conditions of animals needs to be better - they should never be water deprived, they should never be killed unanaesthitised, they should not have sensory deprivation, they should be kept in sanitary conditions. But baseball attacks upon people and the adoption of other tactics of terrorism are simply wrong.

last poster GET A LIFE and beware pillock your sad life means nothing,,,,

The 'leave hls alone' post has valid comments.

Whilst i think there has been serious flaws in the way HLS operated and the fact that individual employees there behaved disgracefully to the animals, that doesnt detract from the value animal expermentation provides to medical advances.

The laws need to be tightened up to prevent ill treatment of animals and callous disregard for their wellfare.
And the sanctions for those violating the laws need to be more stringent and act as a realistic deterant.

However, what is not deniable is that animal experimentation is often vital in tested new medications and treatments for fighting human disease.

I back the use of animal experimentation in clinical medical trials 100%.

Thou the welfare of such animals is something the government needs to address.

Stop swallowing the pharmaceutical companies' bullshit about animal testing being vital to developing drugs. It is merely a way of getting drugs of dubious safety to market quicker so that they can make bigger profits, which is why about 20% of people in hospital are there because of adverse reactions to drugs that animal tests DID NOT PREDICT. Get an education before you get an opinion.

By the way, Anonymous, the bosses of companies that destroy the environment/profit from weapons of mass destruction/commit human rights abuses are acting "legally", according to our government. They're acting "legally" when they lay off half they're workforce at the same time as picking up their multi-million bonuses, they were acting "legally" when they made landmines, and they'll be acting "legally" when they fuck over every man, woman and child on this planet.
So be a good little law abiding citizen, shove your head up your own ass and get on with your pointless little life...

"
last poster GET A LIFE and beware pillock your sad life means nothing,,,,
"

For me, this sums up why I avoid the animal-rights lobby like the plague - they're totally up their own arses.

Avenger, or whatever your name is, why don't you fuck off?

Huntingdon Life Sciences test all kinds of chemicals on animals for profit. The are not trying to help humans, only make money. They have been exposed five times in the past for cruelty and incompetence. They have been filmed falsifying test results. They have had a conviction of animal cruelty. They are holding up medical progess, not forwarding it.

I find your support of medical experiments a little odd. I presume that you have researched this topic, and have seen the thousands of drugs that have gone on to injure or kill humans after being tested on animals, and the drugs whose development have been held up for many years due to misleading results from animal experiments. I obviously can not mention the drugs that have been rejected after harming animal but may have cured many human diseases, as we may never know of these. This is why many doctors and scientists would like to see an end of animal experiments.

As for the moral issue - even IF animal experiments will help us to cure illness faster, does this mean that they are ethical? The animals suffer tremendously during these experiments, for example from from overcrowding, boredom, fright, isolation, intentional abuse, and from the results of the experiments. They suffer just as we do, yet we think that it is acceptable to make them suffer where it would not be acceptable to make humans suffer. "But they're not as intelligent as we are!" is a common defence, but neither are mentally handicapped humans. Would it be acceptable to subject a human with the intelligence of a monkey to painful experiments in the hope of curing diseases faster? If not, then it is not acceptable to subject a monkey to them. If so, then we should ban animal experiments and use the mentally handicapped instead, as using humans in experiments will produce cures far far faster than animals would.

As for improving the lives of lab animals - unfortunately, it seems that this is not going to happen. Time and time again scientific institutions have been exposed for cruelty. See  http://www.shac.net/MISC/covanceundercover/covanceindex.html for a recent investigation. Protection laws are minimal, and they are not enforced. Jobs with lab animals unfortunately tend to attract sadistic people rather than animal lovers. And many scientists are completely opposed to improving the animals' welfare, as this would be more costly and "if the animals have room to exercise and play then some will exercise more that others, so our results will not be accurate".

I personally do not think that there is anything wrong with killing animals (or humans for that matter) painlessly if they have had a happy life. And as a utilitarian, I would support vivisection if I thought that it prevented more suffering than it caused. But the vivisection industry is not trying to help people, it is trying to make money. If we stopped pouring money into experimenting on animals and gave it to those who are staving instead, then we would save many more lives than a cure for cancer would.

Anonymous,

You seem to need reminding that not all animal protestors are violent, aggressive militants who employ terrorist tactics to make their point. Most of the animal rights movement protest in non-violent ways ranging from not buying products made by companies with dubious vivesection histories and policies, to petitions and peaceful demonstrations.

Perhaps you should get your facts straight before commenting on something you clearly know nothing about.