Too think that dogs used for experments in the UK must be given the same welfare as any other service dog !

[PupsAndKittens]

Ok, so unpopular opption but if ;as a final result; dogs have to be tested on, then they MUST have the same welfare rights as any other dog in the country.

For example, these puppies are never taken for walk and they are fed the bare minimum. Any other service dog and that would be highly illegal.

Labatories don’t even attempt to rehome after the experiment, and go for the easy option of euthanasia. The police wouldn’t be allowed to do the same to a sniffer dog ( without proof that it’s for the best interest of the dog)

If the dog was cut open for surgery ( example it had cancer!) The vets wouldn’t then suggest immediately after it was euthanised ( again, unless anything went wrong and that it would give the dog no quality of life)

If a madman went to a dog park and shot all the puppies, they could’ve get up to a decade in prison.

unpopular opinion, But unfortunately drugs have to be tested on something (although I personally think it should be murderers and rapists!). However that doesn’t mean that the dogs used should be treated as second-class citizens, especially as they do just as an important job then those that work in services such as police, fire and disabilities.

What needs to happen, is two main priorities:

1. Puppies up until their experiment, must be given a decent quality of life, just like any other puppy in any other service. This includes regular food and regular walks.

1. After there operation, all dogs must be attempted to be rehomed. Sorry but if every other dog is entitled to a fresh start, including strays, why should those that have suffered the most not be.

I know they do a lot already, but I think animal shelters particularly Battersea could do a bit more ( i’m not undermining the brilliant work that place does already ). Even if they offered to take half a bunch that would be something.

I just want to know what people feel about this. What I am really asking is how much welfare They should have prior and after their experiment. Or are they born second class citizens And not entitled to normal laws, because they are born to die. And before anyone attempts to rip me to pieces, I am both vegetarian (mostly vegan) and cruelty free with my cosmetics!

( PS sorry for two post in two days, however I have just read an article on this and it’s made me really angry at the hypocrisy of it all) [ sad]

Username
why test on dogs or mice.
I am only a thick ex farm worker, but genetically humans have more in common with monkeys/primates. I and my family aren't like a mouse or a dog, so why test on them.
The idea of high levels of control, aye, heard it all before, that's what the DEFRA said about animal feed production before removing 2 expensive stages in late 1970's. It was great, highly monitored, then mid 1980's and we suddenly had BSE, and believe me that was heart breaking. I have spent numerous nights sat up with highly distressed 650kg Friesian cattle, waiting for the vet to take bloods and then wait for the results before shooting the animal, because it had BSE and great holes in it's brain.
Disaster for Uk farming, especially dairy units, would also appear to be a human time bomb with vCJD.

The idea that the government (and its inspectors) knows what goes on is highly funnily, usually the government is in the back pocket of big business and only puts on a show for the general public.
The idea that farm animals are less well treated is offensive, we live and breath with them, often 24/7/365 days a year.( I wonder if you have ever been on a modern farm), British regulations are higher then anywhere in world. But you claim they are regularly treated poorly, so what stops animal experiments being the same?
Like I said any one who thinks regulation works just remember BSE, not the idea of farmers, but big business and scientists, who even in the middle of the crisis denied there was a problem or their part in it.

I wouldn't take anything on face value.

Username241,

that's a crap argument, I can disapprove of animal testing and want it fazed out, and still use medicines. The government and comestics said all that before, no one now would dream of testing a new shampoo on rabbits or lipstick on a dog, thanks to Bodyshop.

I wonder how much of the millions, or should that be billions the government and companies like RB, BASF, SmithKlein etc spent on animal testing is put to looking at better and more humane methods.

I bet it will be £0
Because lets face it animal welfare comes at the bottom of all multi national companies, where profit and shareholder returns come first.
You only have to look at the refusal of drug companies to take lower prices from the NHS, to see profit is all that matters.
you might care in your lab, but the government minister, company CEO gives not a second thought.

That's the truth, and the rest is PR guff, and window dressing to hoodwink the public to think we are better.
If you all where so concerned about animal welfare, you be researching animal free testing methods, BUT NO that never happens.
No money in that.

that's a crap argument, I can disapprove of animal testing and want it fazed out, and still use medicines.

Like it or not, that still makes you a hypocrite.

@2BoysandaCairn

What planet are you living on.

You do realise that our domesticated pets require medicines/ procedures as well as humans which have required and still require the testing of lab animals to ensure they are safe for domesticated animals?

I had to watch my beloved little cat of 9 months DIE due to wet FIV because currently there is no cure no vaccine or proper testing for it.

If a kitten is bred for the soul purpose of trying to cure or create a vaccine for this fucking awful cat disease then that's OK with me.

Why? Because those animals bred for such purposes will not be allowed to suffer and will be cared for by highly trained technicians for the whole of their lives.

Unlike some pet kittens tapped inside a box and left in a wheeley bin and discarded, or left to become feral or drowned, used as bait for dog fights etc because we humans can be heartless wankers.

You do realise that you cannot perform correct analysis and testing on unhealthy animals?

You do realise that the cost of ensuring high welfare standards for lab animals may push the cost up?

You do realise that not ALL medicines are produced in the UK and that a majority are designed and produced in other countries, such as the USA where they are pushing up prices and not the fault of the labs?

So you are happy for lab animals being fazed out? So should they use your pets instead to create new vaccines/ cures of diseases that affect our pets or diseases that can wipe out an entire population of livestock, thus resulting in those people in 3rd world countries potentially starving too death?

Also are you happy for actual living human beings (including babies) to be used in drug trials/ experimentation and be bred with certain genetic flaws (such a cystic fibrous) so they can experiment on those babies to create a drug or genetic manipulator so that little Timmy with CF can extend his life without complications or new little Timmys may be born without CF?

If you are SO against animal testing then I suggest you stop accepting ANY conventional medicines and medical intervention for you and your family.

Maybe some healing crystals and essentials oils might help when your appendix bursts?

@2BoysandaCairn

As an ex farm worker, the vaccines/ medicines used on the livestock on the farm you worked on were created due to animal experimentation on specifically bred livestock animals to enable those vaccines/ medicines be created.

or do you think they are taken from milking magic vaccine fairies?

And regards "animal free testing methods".. how exactly? A petri dish of cells cannot tell you how a stent in the main artery of a heart can work? A dish of cells cannot tell you fast a disease such as rabies travels through the whole body and into the brain. A dish of cells cannot tell you what happens to an entire body when infected with a fatal disease which you are trying to find a cure of to save thousands of lives (animal or human)

And if we could just use cells, where would these cells originate from?

You can't just use any cell willy nilly.

As most vaccines are produced using SPF chicken eggs or SPF chicken embryos should that be stopped as well? I mean, who gives a fuck about vaccinating children from horrifying diseases if it means some chickens can be born? oh wait, they wouldn't be born as SPF eggs and embryos are specifically bred for this purpose..

unfortunately drugs have to be tested on something (although I personally think it should be murderers and rapists!). However that doesn’t mean that the dogs used should be treated as second-class citizens

I'm afraid you lost me right there; I've no more sympathy for killers and rapists than anyone else, but if you'll prioritise the rights of animals over human beings to the point of preferring the latter to be used for experiments theres really no hope

Oh, and a small hint: you told us in the very first post that you're a "mostly-vegan vegetarian" ... there's really no need to keep on and on repeating it

Also I wish ppl would stop saying "we should use prisoners" etc.

We can't because:

a) it's ILLEGAL!

b) we would be going back to being just like the Nazis during WWII where they experimented on other people who they thought were lesser beings than themselves.

c) a lot of lab animals are bred to be specifically pathogen free to ensure the testing is done on a completely "neutral" starting point.

d) We humans are a factory of yucky things that could mean an entire experiment/ drug test is destroyed or deemed useless because the person had an underlying illness or once had smoked a joint or the experiment meant they needed to be infected with a fatal disease (see A and B above)

If you are SO against animal testing then I suggest you stop accepting ANY conventional medicines and medical intervention for you and your family

Frankly I suspect there's very little chance of that. So many "campaigners" are happy to blow a gale over the cute and fluffy, but let there be any risk to themselves and the story soon changes

Just like one I used to know, with every glib phrase on the tip of her tongue from "nazi-like researchers" onwards. Until her mum got parkinsons that is, when it all went a bit quiet - even when it was pointed out that the effects on animals being tested with parkinsons drugs were especially unpleasant

Badcat666 and littlefairywren
Why the personal hatred.
I am a hypocrite, so be it.
I will never meet you or do anything to hurt you, so go away.
At 21, we went to a place which upset 30 hardened farmers, I came to the conclusion after that to personally disapprove of animal testing, this only came up again last week, when my wife and BIL(who both did same trip) said to relative that they to disapproved of animal testing.
All 3 of us said in an ideal world it shouldn't happen, but it does and we would all like to see the UK lead the world in finding another solution. Just like climate change and human slavery.

If that makes all 3 of us bogey men to you, I suggest you grow up.
We did a visit, which was PR stunt to get farmers to back their campaign to expand their business, it failed.
Maybe you should wonder why it failed, because when they tried to expand a couple of years ago, it once again was declined my our council.

I don't need to defend myself to you, if that's how you all treat people who have different views to you Mrs May is correct, reasoned debate in the UK is dead.
We are 3 normal people, you are bloody scientist's, surely you can use science to prove us wrong. But no you just shut down debate.
I am off, you won't change our views and I won't change yours, after all your the scientists so have to be correct.

@2BoysandaCairn

Firstly, I'm not a "bloody scientist" even if you count my grade B Biology GSCE I got in the 80s.

I'm an boring old fart of an office worker who can read up and research things and not just rely on a view point "because I went somewhere when I was 21" or clickbait articles on the web or Facebook.

So jog on for being so bloody narrow minded. (But thank you for thinking I'm cleverer than I actually am! quite chuffed at that!)

Debate doesn't mean I suddenly have to agree with you, or you with me, that's not how debates work.

I offered some solutions to your "phase out animal testing" but you didn't come back with any response or viable alternatives I could go and research and look up. You just seem pissed off I don't agree with you.

Plus you don't seem to understand that animal testing doesn't just mean testing cosmetics on fluffy bunnies.

Plus the BSE outbreak has nothing to do with lab animals and being able to re-home those ex lab dogs.

So sorry you don't like what I posted but again debate doesn't mean you post once demanding everyone should agree with you and then get pissy because people post back with advice/ data/ views that relate to the topic at hand which don't agree with yours.

We are 3 normal people, you are bloody scientist's, surely you can use science to prove us wrong. But no you just shut down debate

what the actual feck are you smoking? Crack? Is it Crack you're smoking because this sentence makes no sense.

What are the evil scientists needing to use science on to "prove us wrong"? Or are the "scientists" meant to read your mind to find out what it is that you want them all to "prove" to you?

Also you are shutting down any debate because you do not like that fact people are offering a different view point on animal testing from an opinion you formed when you were 21.

Yeah pretty much what Badcat666 said. I'm not a scientist but I do have an A in GCSE science if that counts. I'm not trying to change your mind. Just to point out how ridiculous it is to vehemently condemn animal testing but then be happy to disregard all those morals when you need drugs.

I used to be like you. We had a talk at school many moons ago about medical animal testing and I made similar points to you through this thread. The teacher set us a piece of work to go away, research and write an essay from the opposite viewpoint to our own. Well when you sit down and read about the lack of viable alternative to animal testing and the great long list of treatments available to save lives as a result of animal testing, it does open your eyes somewhat. I think I also had to grow up enough to realise that a human life is worth more than a mouse. I haven't done or said anything to shut down debate by the way. Not my fault if you can't back up your point of view.

Actually you are both wrong.
I couldn't care less in the real life, I have raised cash for PSP association after my mum died of the disease, I hope some went to Newcastle to fund research, if that means using animals, because that's the law, so be it.
I donated my 20 year old younger brother's organs when he died in 1989, first person ever to offer the organs before been asked, I have carried a donor card since I was 16. I went on a least 50 radio phone in shows to promote the work of Jimmy's transplant unit and to encourage donation.
I have in the past cared for dying stock. I would rather be one of our pets or cows, then see the way my mother was treated in here final 18 months of life, she wanted to die, but couldn't speak,( side effect of PSP) so for 18 months she would every 2 weeks pull her stomach peg out, to try and die, every time the care home and NHS put it back in, even in her last days when I refused further treatment, the doctors want to give her experimentally treatment.
We as a family firmly believe in euthanasia and think we keep people alive way to much.
I have researched thank you the issue thank you.
Did you know William Russell and Rex Burch in 1959 wrote a book called The principles of Humane Experimental Techniques calling reduction and replacement of animal testing.
The US, even in law requires the testers to look for alternatives to animal testing.
Peta, cruelty free international, Humane Society of America all have research on the issue.
There is studies in the Scandinavian countries looking in to it.
You might disagree with all the above, but I have looked into it.
Did you know that most of the drugs used on pets and farm animals aren't specifically designed and researched for them, but just variants on human products, because it's too expensive to test animal only drugs. (so ok to test on animals, but not for animals)
Yes we where asked to do same homework, in a bog standard comp about animal testing, in the pre internet days, when all books, teaching aids and text books where written by the animal experiment groups.

Like I said I don't want to ban animal testing tomorrow, but I think we should be looking for alternatives, of course you disagree. But then if we all had your outlook, I and our boys would either have been climbing chimneys or going down mines at 10, and farming fields and go to Iceland on trawlers at 12.

We move on.
Hope that helps, I have researched and found 2 sides of a story, and believe there can be a different way.

Sorry if that upsets you or makes you think I am an idiot

Joys of doing 12 hour nights, for last 4 days, so i will defend myself on last time.
The OP thread was about dogs bred and used for animal testing, I have been to a similar place as in the Sun report.
That's why I posted on this thread.
I wonder if the likes of Badcat666 or Littlefairywren have ever been in one.
I told you it made grow adults cry, 2 where physically sick.

If after that, I not allowed to believe that we should try for alternatives, I would have to be either inhumane or a monster.
I am sorry if that offends people, but I can never forget that visit, neither can most of us.
Yes people say it got better, but it was awful. I also unfortunately also saw a test centre for testing shampoos on rabbits, I bet Bodyshop was glad.
I have also worked in and visited battery hen factories, I left and only buy free range eggs. Actually we don't now, because we have 14 rescue chickens.
if after that i am still a hypocrite so be it, but unlike many on here I have actually stood in the experiments and it made us feel dirty.
We still today all cringe if forced to remember those visits.

The US, even in law requires the testers to look for alternatives to animal testing.
Same in the UK. Every project licence application must contain a detailed 3RS section- it's very near the start of the PPL. Prizes are available for 3Rs work.
Have a look at the NC3Rs website- their international award frequently gets won by UK researchers.

Did you know that most of the drugs used on pets and farm animals aren't specifically designed and researched for them, but just variants on human products, because it's too expensive to test animal only drugs.
(so ok to test on animals, but not for animals)

There's some truth in this; the human market for antibiotics, anticancer drugs etc will always be much bigger than the veterinary market. Still, to obtain a licence for veterinary use a drug must go through the appropriate trials (and in the UK under the cascade system, once licensed must by law be used for that indication, in preference to a cheaper human generic of the same or similiar molecule).

Many vaccines are developed primarily or solely for animal use. I am a lifelong member of the Moredun Foundation which does a lot of work in this area, to improve the health and welfare of farm animals.

An academic institution local to me does research directed at farm animals (epidemiology and control of Johne's disease, developing vaccines for liver fluke etc) as well as a lot of excellent research for human drugs. Having research targeted at the human and animal market performed in the same establishment provides for interesting cross fertilisation of ideas.

I'm not upset by your posts. I'm also not sure what most of your last 2 has to do with this thread. No I haven't been in an animal testing facility. But I was really interested to read the contribution above by an animal technician who works in one of these places to read about what they're like these days.

There are hardly any animal experiments done in UK now. What small numbers that are left are rodents.

Mostly if it’s absolutely essential it’s done off shore Which is a shame really as some standards are not as high as uk.