Anti vivisection petition

Person_one

Froglet wrote: »

If testing HAS to be done(and for the most part i hate experiments on animals to the point i donate every month to the NAVS)then it should be carried out on mice and rats only,and with the maximum pain relief possible.The way the animals are kept is appalling to many sentient creatures,apes in particular suffer terrible stress being caged up just because they ARE wild.

There are many alternatives and this is what we should be supporting

http://www.ldf.org.uk/research/

How some of the researchers sleep at night knowing how much pain they have inflicted is beyond me.

Maybe thinking about the lives they're trying to save helps them sleep?

If you have a look at this link that I posted earlier, you can see that the vast majority of testing is done on rodents, but sometimes that isn't enough to be safe and dogs and monkeys are needed.

http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/the-animals/types-of-animals

Dimey

Thanks Bruciebonus. Signed up.

Person One, I'm sad to see you are so actively in favour of vivisection/ animal testing carte blanche. That's an extreme stance.

I would have thought a more enlightened view in this day and age would be that testing involving animals and humans should be confined only to those necessary medical experiments where all other alternatives have been exhausted. And those very rare occasions should be regulated, licenced and inspected.

When EU governments see that their electorate do not want animals to suffer (especially for human vanity) the governments will have a mandate to put pressure on scientists to find alternative methods. Many alternatives are already available and being used in some sectors. See the site Froglet supplied.

In future years the practice will hopefully die out altogether. Alternative technologies will make it redundant not just from the humane/ decency perspective but because technology is more reliable, consistent and cost effective. Future generations will probably view what goes on now, as barbaric.

Progress has already been made to some extent so with the support of civilised peoples, Europe should be able to clean our act up and provide alternatives for the rest of the world to follow.

HappyMJ

Dimey wrote: »

Thanks Bruciebonus. Signed up.

Person One, I'm sad to see you are so actively in favour of vivisection/ animal testing carte blanche. That's an extreme stance.

I would have thought a more enlightened view in this day and age would be that testing involving animals and humans should be confined only to those necessary medical experiments where all other alternatives have been exhausted. And those very rare occasions should be regulated, licenced and inspected.

When EU governments see that their electorate do not want animals to suffer (especially for human vanity) the governments will have a mandate to put pressure on scientists to find alternative methods. Many alternatives are already available and being used in some sectors. See the site Froglet supplied.

In future years the practice will hopefully die out altogether. Alternative technologies will make it redundant not just from the humane/ decency perspective but because technology is more reliable, consistent and cost effective. Future generations will probably view what goes on now, as barbaric.

Progress has already been made to some extent so with the support of civilised peoples, Europe should be able to clean our act up and provide alternatives for the rest of the world to follow.

Hang on just a sec. Person_One made it clear that testing cosmetics on animals is already banned in the UK. ... and those very rare circumstances where animals are used for medical research it is already highly regulated.

I would like it to continue in the UK where regulation can be used to make sure that the animals are treated with the best care possible. If this research has to be exported to another country we will have zero control over it at all....such as China...where testing of cosmetics on animals is still required by law...although strong pressure such as this campaign is forcing them to change.

Person_one

Dimey wrote: »

I would have thought a more enlightened view in this day and age would be that testing involving animals and humans should be confined only to those necessary medical experiments where all other alternatives have been exhausted. And those very rare occasions should be regulated, licenced and inspected.

Um...

http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk

gettingready

Testing on cosmetics may be banned but not on ingridients that often tested overseas to make people believe that all is lovely and no testing is done in Uk - but testing IS done, abroad, on the products sold in UK

Dimey

Don't forget this petition is not just UK, its EU and not all EU countries have decent regulations yet.

I accept the point about not wanting to push unscrupulous testers to China. But if viable alternative test methods are made available then organisations won't need to move to China; if all they are doing is genuinely testing for manufacture.

Person_one

This petition seems to be asking for a complete stop though.

I'd happily sign a petition that just wanted to improve standards!

GeckoGirl1985

Dimey wrote: »

I would have thought a more enlightened view in this day and age would be that testing involving animals and humans should be confined only to those necessary medical experiments where all other alternatives have been exhausted. And those very rare occasions should be regulated, licenced and inspected.

They are;

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/14/pdfs/ukpga_19860014_en.pdf

Dimey

GeckoGirl1985 wrote: »

They are;

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/14/pdfs/ukpga_19860014_en.pdf

Thanks but that legislation is UK only.

Those wanting a ban or controlled regulation could try to get the rest of Europe to adopt the same regulations as the UK (or Germany or France - which ever country has the most humane and practical rules) until even better ones come along for all.

Conversely, those wanting vivisection/animal testing without regulation will be expecting current UK legislation to be scrapped.

Person_one

Dimey wrote: »

Conversely, those wanting vivisection/animal testing without regulation will be expecting current UK legislation to be scrapped.

I'm pretty sure they don't actually exist...