Skip to Main Content

“Alarming” Animal Tests

Written by PETA | August 8, 2007

The folks in our Regulatory Testing Division are pretty smart, I must say. They spend their entire lives neck deep in scientific papers that would squash the brains of most normal people, so to say that they’re a pretty serious lot is like saying Barry Bonds is kind of good at baseball. So imagine my surprise when I found out about their latest little stunt. Granted, it’s hard to make anything containing words like toxicogenomics and bioinformatics even the least bit fun, but I think they pulled it off here.

Wake_Up_ICCVAM.JPG

Yesterday, PETA sent these little alarm clocks to members of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods—the folks charged with helping streamline the validation and use of modern non-animal testing methods—to remind them that an animal dies every two seconds of every day in a US government mandated toxicity test, and to push them to do their job by helping to implement—not block—alternatives to animal testing.

Check out the letter they sent with the clocks here.

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • Utterly.against.animal.testing says:

    Animal testing is a discusting thing. i am 13 and i bloody know that animal testing is torture. this is animal abuse yet the scientific labs are not fined or closed down. i mean WTF the law id bloddy contradictiong itself. I am still in school and the thing that opened my eye about animal testing was an artical i was creating for my magazine. it is due tomorrow but reading just two websites about this issue made me cry. i was literaly bawling my eyes out. if you want to stop animal testing send me and email on jayleeishotmail.com and i will add it to my petition.

  • rojo says:

    maya absoluetly agree many animal tests are unnecessary and often pointless. Not all. I’d like to think drugs were checked on animals prior to human ingestion though. Not stupid tests like for shampoo irritation etc. Thanks Michele for you constructive comments. As it happens I do read the things I’m shown. You should view the science not the interpretation. Sorry everyone I’ve been away and couldn’t respond earlier.

  • Michele says:

    Don’t bother replying to rojo about the benefits of nonanimal methods of testing nor about the problems inherent in animal testing. He has been given numerous explanations over the past several months with links to scientific journal articles and actual facts from the scientific community. He clearly does not care to believe the facts so anything that anyone says to him will be ignored. Fortunately there are many others who are receptive to hearing about the problems with animal testing. And Hugo Mike is right you are crazy but in a good way! Seriously though your posts are very thought provoking. I hope you are able to educate the unenlightened with your comments that is if they take the time to really think about what you are saying.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    You’re a crazy man Hugo but a good crazy

  • hugo pottisch says:

    Genius! Let me guess it is a timebomb only the explosives are not inside the clock? It is high time to press some “agencies” for an official response to the outlined NAS strategy. Especially the EPA but also the WWF maybe they can do something useful and educate REACH about the NAS strategy?! The only thing that i am missing from the NAS paper is the need for better data collectionanalysis among humans and their lifestyle and consumption habits. The argument is implied but also underrepresented and underestimated? The arguments for more direct human testing low dosages and invitro and testtube options etc. are far better represented than the simple argument that we have yet to take full advantage of all the data that hundreds of millions ill people in our society could potentially produce every day FREE of charge. I understand that the paper is focusing on toxicity testing at present but there should be no scientific shame to use real life data rather than laboratory one? But that is another longish story.. Here a teaser Doctor What do you eat? Patient overweight type IIIII diabetic Oh.. only healthy things. Like wholeweed bread and cereals although they do not taste that great and organic lean meats and lots of salads. But I do not mention all the caf late insulin injection at Starbucks its just coffee the butterfat insulin candy in between because I do hide myself when consuming that and if nobody sees it it does not happen I also do not mention that I do NOT eat a lot of the healthy stuff because I do eat this in front of others and I do not like eating in front of others…. oh and the occasional Pizza slice with pepperoni and cheese but only once or twice a week.. Doctor Hmm could be a genetic predisposition? Any family who has weight problems? Patient Yes all of them! Doctor Hmm we have recently identified two molecules in mice known as GATA2 and GATA3 which appear to regulate the process by which fat cells are created. I think that in your family these molecules might be overproducing. We are currently working on a treatment and already have some great results in mice.. but I suggest you start exercising more.. That means drive to gym and then sit on a machine there for hours feeling rally bad compared to all the other healthy people around you knowing that you can never be like that. Afterwards you can reward yourself with a treat. That will help you until we have a magic pill! My backhand sucks on the tennis court so I take my son and lock him up on the toilette and force him to practice swings. What a great scientist I am I get satisfaction knowing full well that by doing so I could potentially gain more insights than by doing nothing at all. Those few and expensive insights would be out of context to me in the real world but who cares at least I do not get my feet dirty and can cash in nicely claiming I want to help improve the humans condition …

  • Jody says:

    Animal testing is only used for the humans benefit but what do the animals get from it? nothung but pain and terror. If every disease or illness etc. was cured i bet animals would still be tested on for the relief of the serial killers mind ‘ or vivisectionist’

  • Maya says:

    Bullydawg yes I smoked for 6 years a few were chain smoking and clove smoking years so I have tons of advice. All vegan. I don’t want to take up space here my email is keryfelinezen.com if you want to email me. Oh but I will mention that treatment for lung cancer is cruelly tested on cats because their lungs are considered similar to ours. There’s a good launching point. email me though. Rojo as a vet tech I say you are absolutely right the vet world has benefited from animal testing. But I would say we can test drugs on animals in a humane way many drugs have been “tested” by treating people’s pets for certain ailments then tried on people. This way vets prescribe it to cats and dogs to help them with their ailments instead of using lab animals. Also thousands of experiments are extremely unnecessary. Like sleep deprivation studies in cats and electrocuting rats for social psychology experiments. Outrageous. There are ways to use animal which eliminate lab animals and use computer models instead. They are more accurate and completely humane. The govt should be looking into them. Peace!

  • BullyDawg says:

    This is probably not the right forum PETA you REALLY need to start a message board! but I need some advice. I want to quit smoking I’ve tried many times before but without success. I want to try this new drug Chantix but of course I have no idea if it was tested on animals or not. Does anyone know? And if it was do you know any good vegan quitsmoking remedies? ‘Cause I’m tired of giving the tobacco companies who also test on animals my hardearned money! WHY did I start in the first place?

  • Aleasha says:

    Every two seconds!?! That is sick and wrong. What is the matter with this world?

  • Ariel says:

    Hi Ana! Thank goodness you took only two Vioxx! Ya know I get a kick out of the med ads that brag about how wonderful their new meds are BUT then they say not to take them and consult your physician if you have high blood pressure heart problems kidney or liver problems… this that or any other medical condition…OR if you breathe air! Yet none are safe because they take their toll on another part of the body then the cycle continues of having to take another med for that condition. But what really irks me about the newer meds that no doubt are tested on animals ridiculously are those sex enhancers! And yes the actual test is actually when humans take meds not animals. Yep the docs like to push the new meds because they get $$$$ and MAJOR perks from the med companies…so every new med is the best thing since sliced bread! I’m glad though that acupuncture is now coming to the forefront. Had it done myself years ago tried and true. Yes Ana Mike and Robyn we’re all in agreement here.

  • Ana says:

    Ariel and Mike Thanks for your intelligent comments once again. Remember the safety and efficacy of Vioxx??? Due to a severe injury to my shoulder and agonizing pain suffered for months my MD prescribed Vioxx to me telling me it was the best med on the market. Fortunately for me I only took 2 pills because I would rather put up with pain than resort to drugs on a daily basis. Vioxx the safe med can cause heart attacks…duh….now taken off the markets. But weren’t animals tortured and killed to prove its safety? It is all about $$$$$ money and not science or even common sense. There are even too many differences between men and women to extrapolate data to use for both sexes. Leave sentient beings alone and practice real scientific inquiry while doing no harm.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Rojo this has been discussed before. Animal testing offers no guarantee of safety in humans. “Although some adverse drug reactions ADR are not very serious others cause the death hospitalization or serious injury of more than 2 million people in the United States each year including more than 100000 fatalities. In fact adverse drug reactions are one of the leading causes of death in the United States.” Lazarou J Pomeranz BH Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients A metaanalysis of prospective studies. Journal of the American Medical Association Apr 15 1998 279 1200 1205.” These are drugs that have ALL passed animal testing with flying colors. And to quote from PETA’s own site “Some drugs that have been approved through animal tests can cause serious and unexpected side effects for humans. A 2002 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that in the last 25 years more than 50 FDAapproved drugs had to be taken off the market or relabeled because they caused adverse reactions. In 2000 alone the prescription drugs removed from the market were the popular heartburn drug Propulsid removed because it caused fatal heart rhythm abnormalities the diabetes drug Rezulin removed after causing liver failure and the irritablebowelsyndrome treatment Lotronex removed for causing fatal constipation and colitis. According to the studys lead author Millions of patients are exposed to potentially unsafe drugs each year. ” Research should be centered on the differences individual humans can have to specific drugs not on interspecies differences based on their unique genetic makeup. Then maybe we might have predictably safe drugs. Veterinary science can glean knowledge more directly and efficiently by studying the species it purports to help.

  • robyn says:

    There are natural cures to any ailments. If people would look into it. Stop eating meat and other animal products most likely stop getting fat and myocardial infarctions and diabetes and acne and strokes and cancer and do I really have to go on. What a lot of people fail to realise is that the “medicine” that doctors give probably tested on animals that gave no side effects to that animal has given a human myocardial infarctions strokes blood clots or other problems that led to another disease in turn getting another “medicine” to cure that disease that was probably tested on animal that didn’t cause any harm to that animal…see where I’m going? So…there are so many alternative products out there not tested on animals containing no animal parts urine or other that work better and WITH your system.

  • Ariel says:

    ROJO you really really need and should do a LOT of research before you give your comments. 1.Humans and animals do not have the same physiologies as well as each person has their own unique DNA. 2.Experimenting on animals began in ancient times because that was the only method available. This is the year 2007 A.D. and it’s obvious that mankind has not progressed in that aspect from ancient times. 3. Presentday labs particularly pharmaceutical companies experiment on animals because there is a legal clause that allows them to say that by experimenting on animals their drugs are safely marketable. Meanwhile at the same time the pharm. co’s. only use that excuse to get their drugs out on the market faster ahead of their competitors for the sake of $$$$$$$$$…and that is not “prudent.” Therefore the testing is inaccurate and that is one particular reason why there has been so many drug recalls as well as unfortunate victims of the drugs. Therefore VERY much to the contrary humanity has NOT benefited or gained knowledge from animal testing. 4. Our tax dollars as well as our consumer dollars go towards those useless inaccurate tests while the animaltesting companies are raking in the money to keep the head honchos in luxury. 5. Modern ACCURATE nonanimal testing methods are slowly but surely starting to be used by companies who realize the importance of accuracy. Question as the socalled “scientists” do with their animal experimentation what do think the outcome is when they put poison in animals’ eyes or pour toxins down their throats just to see if it’s harmful? Sounds like a nobrainer doesn’t it? Well guess what that’s what they do and the public is unknowingly paying them to do it.

  • monet says:

    i really do not understand how some people can be so harmful to something that is defencles in the world. it drives me nuts even wondering what drives people to do such things THERE IS NO REANSON. hello how can they not see that. i dont know being an animl lover i guess i cant really think of how those people think. its not posable. and i know im not going to change the world but if i dont try then how will it happen rihght? i dont know i just really dont understand. i guess it makes sence to them.

  • rojo says:

    “You would think that a cure for any ailment could be brought in any Supermarket” One of the steps to getting a product to market and ensuring it is as safe to the public as possible is through testing on other mammals. While it is not definative it is a prudent safety mechanism. Mike vetenary science has benefited by the knowledge gained from animal testing and human medicine. What is your point?

  • Ana says:

    Mike Quinoa Good point….

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    The Veterinary Association has decided it’s time for a change and are going to start experimenting on humans to find cures for disease in cats and dogs . Makes about as much sense as the other way around.

  • keith says:

    Your mind does have to boggle sometimes. With all these living creatures sacrificed for our supposed benefit and wellbeing. You would think that a cure for any ailment could be brought in any Supermarket. Or is it easy pickings for experimenters to not bother with change and just keep torturing defenceless creatures. for mega bucks incomes.