- 19-17 kwietnia 2003 - Światowy Tydzień Zwierząt Laboratoryjnych.
Vivisekcja. Co to jest?
Ze strony The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV): http://www.buav.org/f_aboutbuav.html
WHAT IS VIVISECTION?
Vivisection literally means the 'cutting up' of living animals, but has now become more generally used as the term for all experiments on living animals (in vivo) as many animal experiments, such as toxicity tests, will not involve surgical procedures. Non-animal research techniques (in vitro) include such things as cell cultures, computer modelling or artificial systems. Animal experiments cause immense pain and suffering, with over 60% of all procedures in the UK performed without any anaesthetic whatsoever. The animals involved will either die as a result of the experiment or be deliberately killed afterwards, often for post mortem examination. In the laboratory an animal may be poisoned; deprived of food, water or sleep; applied with skin and eye irritants; subjected to psychological stress; deliberately infected with disease; brain damaged; paralysed; surgically mutilated; irradiated; burned; gassed; force fed and electrocuted. The list reads like a catalogue of torture methods.
How many animals are used?
BACK TO TOP
Beagle behind bars
What species are used for experiments?
BACK TO TOP
WHERE DO LABORATORY ANIMALS COME FROM?
Although some research establishments have their own breeding facilities, the majority of all research animals in the UK are 'purpose bred' by commercial companies that specialise in supplying animals for vivisection. The research industry often tries to defend its treatment of animals by emphasising that they are 'purpose bred' as if this means they are somehow different from other animals. The breeders' catalogues talk about the animals they sell as 'products', boasting fast delivery and easy dispatch of orders, as though these living, breathing animals are no more than laboratory equipment. The truth of course is that a laboratory animal has exactly the same capacity to suffer physically and psychologically as a pet animal.
Many primates used in vivisection around the world, such as macaques and baboons, are trapped in the wild or captive bred in terrible conditions in countries such as Mauritius, Barbados, Indonesia, the Philippines and China. They are then transported thousands of miles to be sold to laboratories in Europe, the United States and the rest of the world. These primates can endure such terrible conditions and stress on their long journeys that many do not reach their destination alive. A BUAV investigation in 1992 revealed that as many as 80% of wild-caught monkeys never reached the laboratory, whether being killed as 'unsuitable' or dying from disease, infection and stress as a result of capture and transportation. The international trade in primates for research only serves to exacerbate the already huge threat to these often increasingly rare species from habitat destruction and the bushmeat trade.
BACK TO TOP
Thousands of animals die annually in UK military experiments
TYPES OF EXPERIMENTS
Animals are used in many different types of experiments to test a wide variety of products. Researchers around the world use animals during the development and manufacture of almost anything from household products, cosmetics and toiletries and food additives to pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals, agrochemicals, pet foods, medical devices and tobacco and alcohol products. Military experiments subject animals to the effects of poisonous gas, decompression sickness, blast wounds, burns and radiation as they assess new and existing weapons and surgical techniques 'in the field'.
In fact, almost all of the products used and consumed by humans every day around the world, even water, will have been tested on animals at some point in time. Take a look around your home - the cosmetics and toiletries you apply to your body; the household cleaning products in your kitchen; the toothpaste in your bathroom; the colourings and additives in the food in your fridge; the tablets in your medicine cabinet; the paint on your walls; the varnish on your furniture; the petrol in your car; the weed killer in your garden shed; even the dyes in the clothes you are wearing - all of these and more will have been tested on animals.
Animal experiments fall under 4 main categories
BACK TO TOP
Naturally inquisitive animals, these rats are kept
in sterile, barren laboratory conditions
The BUAV opposes all animal experiments on ethical and scientific grounds.
Vivisection is unethical
The BUAV believes that all animals have the right
to a life free from deliberate harm, pain, suffering and torment. Like
humans, all animals are capable of feeling physical pain, and to varying
degrees they too can experience fear, boredom, depression and psychological
distress. Exposing animals to deliberate and systematic physical and emotional
harm in a laboratory, for whatever reason, is morally unjustifiable. The
Protection of Animals Act (1911) protects domestic animals in the UK from
abuse and cruel treatment. Under the 1911 Act it is an offence to "ill-treat,
torture, terrify any animal ... or, by wantonly or unreasonably doing
or omitting to do an act, cause any unnecessary suffering to an animal...";
to "wilfully, without any reasonable cause or excuse, administer
... any poisonous or injurious drug or substance to any animal...";
or to subject "any animal to any operation which is performed without
due care and humanity." Experiments performed on living animals however,
are specifically excluded from the provisions of the 1911 Act, and are
instead licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 as
likely to cause animals "pain, suffering or lasting harm." So
whilst you or I would, quite rightly, be punished for deliberately poisoning,
burning, blinding or electrocuting our family pet, researchers can simply
apply for a Home Office license to do any of these things perfectly legally.
This presents a completely indefensible legal anomaly. A dog, rabbit or
hamster in the laboratory is exactly the same as the dog, rabbit or hamster
that you love as your family pet. They have the same capacity to suffer.
So if deliberately harming them in the home is a punishable offence, how
can deliberately harming them in the laboratory be justifiable?
Simply because we have the ability to use and abuse animals, doesn't mean we have the right to do so. One argument often used by pro-vivisectionists to justify animal experiments is that humans are 'superior' to other animals. Just like other forms of prejudice such as racism, this speciesist argument implies that because we consider ourselves to be superior, the rights, suffering or death of those we consider to be inferior (in this case other sentient creatures) is somehow less significant or valid than our own. The BUAV believes that this is a very selfish approach to life. As human beings we have the unique ability to understand that other animals suffer unnecessarily as a result of our actions, and to change our behaviour accordingly so as to avoid the suffering of others. As an individual you have a choice to strive for the type of society you really want. Do you want a truly compassionate society that accepts its moral responsibility to look after other animals and avoid causing them deliberate suffering? Or do you want a selfish society where the oppression of those who cannot speak for themselves is deemed acceptable and where mankind's self-appointed superiority justifies animal cruelty? It's your choice. What type of society do you want to live in?
Vivisection is a flawed science
The fact is that animal experiments tell us about animals, not about people. The results of animal studies can never guarantee the safety or efficacy of human medicines or other products because of the fundamental differences between the species. Different species can have completely contradictory responses to a range of substances; on average there is only a 5-25% correlation between harmful drug effects in humans and the results of animal experiments. For example, Aspirin is used as a relatively safe and effective painkiller for humans but can be fatal to cats; Penicillin is a widely used antibiotic in humans and yet it can kill both cats and guinea pigs; Arsenic is very dangerous for humans but does not present the same level of threat to rats, mice or sheep; insulin, a drug used safely by people with diabetes, can produce terrible deformities in mice, rabbits and chickens. Even something as mundane as chocolate, which is consumed in large quantities by humans worldwide, can be extremely toxic in dogs. The danger of relying on animal studies is illustrated by the long list of animal tested drugs that are withdrawn from sale or restricted in their use as a result of unexpected side effects in human patients. In April 2000 a study published by US watchdog group Public Citizen reported that an estimated 100,000 Americans die every year from adverse drug reactions.
Case Study 1
Case Study 2
Case Study 3
Case Study 4
Case Study 5
Case Study 6
Case Study 7
Case Study 8
Other high profile drug withdrawals include: Benoxaprofen in 1982; Domperidone in 1986; Nomifensine in 1986; Terodiline in 1991; Mumps Vaccine in 1992.
Increasingly people are coming to realise that animal based research is, at best, 'flip a coin' science that cannot accurately predict human responses and is failing to find cures for human diseases. Anti-vivisectionists are not anti-human in their defence of animals. Nor are they opposed to medical progress. The BUAV wants to see real advancement in the treatment of painful and debilitating human diseases, but we believe that the route to these advances depends on developing and using research techniques that do not involve animals. In fact, by relying on animal based data we are actually holding back the potential of medical science. Our experiments should be based on cutting-edge, biologically relevant non-animal techniques of the 21st Century, and not on the antiquated assumption that test results from one species can be safely applied to another.
Ending animal experiments would not harm human health, rather it would free up valuable resources that could be used to develop non-animal research techniques. Government, regulatory bodies and industry must work together to rethink our scientific endeavour, and to invest in retraining scientists and re-equipping laboratories to use the high-tech in vitro research techniques that will enable us to develop life-saving drugs and safe consumer products for thefuture - progress with compassion and health with humanity.
Linki do stron organizacji walczących z wiwisekcja:
Jak również książka Dr Tony Page'a "HOLOKAUST - wiwisekcja dzisiaj" (wyd. "Viva!POL", 2001).
główna | kim
jest królik? | zanim
kupisz... | zdrowie
dieta | opieka
prawa zwierząt | wydarzenia | GALERIA | Mapa Króliczych Zmysłów | o stronie | linki i literatura | książka Gości
mapa strony | piszą o nas... | pomoc sąsiedzka | webmaster
Anna Marczewska www.uszata.com