Skip to Main Content

Eli Lilly Funds Chinese Torture

Written by PETA | April 22, 2008

Just so I can complete the perfect trifecta of posts about quirky demonstrations today (see the shower girls and the DC dinosaur in case you missed them), here’s one that involves six businesspeople in one small cage. The purpose of this protest—which took place outside drugmaker Eli Lilly’s annual shareholder meeting yesterday—was to let the company’s shareholders know about its decision to outsource animal experiments to China and other countries where animal protection laws are virtually non-existent.

As a wise man once said, “A man’s crimes against nature aren’t any less disgusting when he pays the Chinese to do them for him.” OK, fine, a wise man didn’t once say that. But he should have. ’Cuz it’s true.

Eli_Lilly_Shareholder_protest_2.jpg

Eli_Lilly_Shareholder_protest_3.jpg

Eli_Lilly_Shareholder_protest_4.jpg

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.

  • Maureen says:

    Dear Kurt K,I certainly know how an animal feels when they flinch or cry in pain and certainly you cannot suggest animals do not feel pain!!!! I would rather have human testing it is more reliabe. If a death row inmate wants to sign up so be it. at least they know what they are signing up for, animals however do not have a choice. When you see them crouch in the back of their cages and cry in pain they do know what is about to happen to them for they suffer every day in confinement and experimentation. In China they use inmates to see if a samuri sword is sharp enough for combat and those inmates did not sign UP FOR THAT. You make no SENSE

  • Bob G says:

    I wonder how many earthquakes it will take before China ceases cruelty to animals and to people.

  • Kurt K says:

    Antigone Again you always compare human life to animals! Countless millions of human lives have been saved do to animal research. I would be willing to bet there have been a few animal rights people in there somewhere. Secondly I know it seems logical in your mind to test on deathrow inmates. However prisoners still have civil rights from cruel and unusual punishment. Furthermore they are going to pay for their crimes in due time. I don’t want to talk about orpahns I think you were kidding? I don’t understand how you can assume that animals understand value in life? How do you know? How does anybody know what an animal is thinking? The truth is we don’t! Animals are driven two basic needs food and procreation and thats about it!

  • sarah allen says:

    i myself is against all animal testing but my family are only against it for cosmetics.but am i a hippocrate as i take pills for mood disorder.but without them i dread to think where i’d bemaybe dead through suicideso in a way i thank the company for saving my life ans sanity.

  • Antigone1000 says:

    Kurt K YOU would not give YOUR life to save the human race why should an animal??? If we want to test prior to distribution of a drug why not test on death row inmatesthe tests would be a better predictor of effectiveness in humans due to the similarity of subject and those people are going to die anyway as they have lost the privilege of living due to their OWN actions. Orwhy not test on the homeless or orphans that no one cares about?? Wellthe answer is NOT because it would be ineffective because it would be far more effective than animal testing. The answer is because it is MORALLY wrong to trade one life for another based on the value a third party attributes to that life. We all recognize that humans have a value in their own lives regardless of any value placed on them by others. Likewise animals have that same value in their own lives. The fact that humans fail to recognize it does not negate it. It still exists and humans are committing a grave moral injustice by their treatment of the animal nations with whom we SHARE this planet. We do not OWN this planet.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Hi Liz You’ve made some very good comments. If you really want the lowdown on vivisection please check out http://www.curedisease.com or read “Sacred Cows and Golden Geese” by the Doctors Greek as mentioned by Michele earlier. That book and website taught me a lot and as usual money is a key factor in our unwillingness to stop exploiting animals. Your last question is a very good one and the book and site answer much better than I can.

  • lizc says:

    hello MikeQ.. another thought occurred to me.. since I’m still on this subject.. yes.. your point is right re. testing on animals as substitute beings for humans would not and is not 100 unfallable and as accurate because genetically and predisposition etc. etc we and animals are different in many ways .. another thought to bear in mind.. is the medication administered to sickly animals ie. from a vet I take it or believe is obviously very different or is a totally different drug as used say drugs administered by a doctor to a human patient for the same ailment.. that probably just about sums it up pretty much.. it’s just a guess but I’m pretty much sure.. drugs administered to an ailment of eg. a cat with a wheezing cough and the drug to a human with same ailment are NOT the same!! I dont’ believe they are the same .. any vets out there that could verify this for me? if I am correct. then why is this so?.. and IF this is case .. why are they testing drugs on animals where it is acknowledged their bodies react to drugs differently as to say humans would.. ?

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Hi Liz The point I was making is that animal tests are not predictive for humans and are a waste of research dollars and time. Animals are not little humans and they do not respond as humans do. The fact of the matter is even different people can respond differently to a given drug. A mouse may be similar to us in genetic makeup but it differs from us in gene regulation. Like the mouse humans have a gene for a tail ours of course is turned off. As mentioned in the PETA Files before the US panel ICCVAM charged with developing alternatives to animal testing has come up with 4 while in Europe a similar panel has approved 34 alternatives to animal tests and has another 170 in its pipeline. You seem to believe that animal tests the “necessary evil” will ensure safety for humansthe exact opposite is the reality. “According to the Food and Drug Administration 92 percent of all drugs that pass preclinical testing on animals fail in human clinical trials. Of the eight percent that receive FDA approval half are later withdrawn from the market or have significant side effects that were not identified during animal experimentation.” Animal tests cannot and should not be trusted to ensure human safety.

  • Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals says:

    Annalena so right you are. One life is better than none. Would it not be wonderful if we could make life stand still except for the activists? We would be a very busy group of people rescuing as many animals as we could. Peace for all animals!

  • lizc says:

    in response to MQ..do I ‘support’ vivisection?.. ie. do I support all the suffering of animals in the name of medical science for humans?… of course I don’t want animals to be tortured suffer and die in labs.. but it is a reality of which I had pointed out.. humans will always push forward and endeavour to find new ‘discoveries’ or cures.. and alas they will use ‘living creatures’ to test their theories out on.. in this case small mammal animals even canines.. it’s a difficult and bitter pill to swallow.. it is not like saying.. well as soon as they have found a cure for say ‘diabetes’.. that will be the end of ‘vivi’.. it will be relentless.. that is what is so disheartening and I wanted to point it out.. if they are starting to use other alternate means to test out their theories without animals .. well I will the the first at the front and all for it.. humans or these scientist or vivisectors are adamant to forge ahead and test and test and experiment and experiment for a plethora of all sorts of ailments and illnesses humans have or will acquire later in life.. and horrendous as it is.. they will use a ‘substitute’ living creature.. ie. animals in years to come I hope to see the fur trade well and truly dead.. all blood sports banned .. better improved standards in factory farming on a global scale.. and hopefully somehow they will find other menas to test out their theories and testsexperiments without using animals.. I don’t know how this will be possible.. but as with phasing out vivisection re. the cosmetics industry I hope so likewise it will be also possible re. the medicalscience front.. is there light at the end of the tunnel?

  • Annalena says:

    Judith What a lovely man. That would be so horrific. At least he was able to save that precious little dog!

  • Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals says:

    I remember about 4 or 5 years ago many Animal Activist’s received an email from a lovely gentleman who had a group of activist friends in China that had helped him to enter a research lab lab coat and all. The people there thought he was a researcher visiting. What he described was more than most humans could stomach myself included. One good thing did come out of his visit he was able to walk out after using the elevator with a small dog under his jacket. But the worst part was leaving all of the animals behind. Not a good place for any animal to be. Peace!

  • Kaycee Reader says:

    I love the creative ways they protest. Just wonderful

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Liz If you put humans before animals then why do you support vivisection? For example arthritis drug Vioxx withdrawn from the global market in September 2004 appeared to be safe and even beneficial to the heart in animals and passed all animal safety and efficacy tests. The latest estimates for the number of adverse reactions due to Vioxx worldwide are 320000 heart attacks and strokes up to 140000 of them fatal. The successful nonhuman animal tests were not predictive for the human animal with the result of untold suffering and deaths. One of the plaintiffs in the myriad lawsuits against Merck is citing specifically the erroneous and sometimes lethal nature of animal testing. There are many nonanimal testing methodologies that give far better predictive accuracy of possible sideeffects in humans. If humans come first you should be promoting these.

  • liz says:

    in a totally utterly ‘fair world’.. everybody including every living creature.. lived their lives as is.. and when their ‘tiem was up’ for what ever reason.. then “time is up”.. vivisection is primarily for conducting experiments with the sole intention and goal of finding medication or drugs to prolongue lives or if not.. to cure human diseases irrespective of whichever or whatever disease humans may be afflicted wiht.. for this reason millions of lab animals lives are ‘sacrificed’ or used for and towards this endeavour.. this is by far a most ‘UNfair’ world.. but this is the way things go.. humans always before the animals . once a cure has been found for eg. xy or z.. then they will turn their attention to something else.. it’s heartbreaking to think of the lab animals.. suffice to say I’m glad lab testing for cosmetics in the EU will be banned from 2012 I think.. that at least is one small but v. significant step for reducing or doing away with animals in lab testing..

  • lynda downie says:

    A great demonstration. The thought of animal testing to be done in China makes me shudder for the poor defenseless animals. Talk about going from the frying pan into the fire!

  • Eddy Loomans says:

    May I point out to some of the pro vivisectionists among you that we simply do not know how far medical science would have evolved without animal testing. Animal testing provides specific species related information about a certain product used in that experiment. Animal tests are in no way conclusive otherwise all primary medical tests on humans would be 100 succesfull as they are only tested on humans once proven succesfull in animals! Medical science could have evolved much faster without animal experiments because more funds would have been made available to develop nonanimal alternatives! I do agree that testing will be needed but approximately 93 of all animal test can currently be avoided and the last 7 of these experiments have to be strictly!!!!! regulated in order to prevent any suffering. In the meantime considerable funds have to be made available to abolish all animal experiments regardless the end purpose!

  • rjj says:

    Why on earth would they be outsourcing this especially to a country with a history of animal tortue and abusive and barbaric practices… Has the world completely gone mad…..

  • Daryl says:

    Kurt I think you’re missing the issue. The point is that there ARE alternatives to testing on animals. They are just not taken advantage of because murdering animals is cheaper.

  • Michele says:

    Kurt go to http://www.curedisease.com or read “Sacred Cows and Golden Geese” regarding animal testing. You will see that animal testing does NOT help humans it HARMS them and it has caused delays in treatments discovered by nonanimal testing methods and those delays ultimately resulted in more deaths to humans.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Kurt Medical testing on animals is not predictive of possible sideeffects 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.” All the drugs above that caused such carnage and human suffering passed animal tests with flying colors. Drugs that may have worked effectively with humans have most likely been abandoned because of negative animal test results. There are nonanimal tests that are very conclusive as far as possible sideeffects in humans but because of the KefauverHarris Act drug companies are reluctant to abandon the legal shield of inconclusive animal testing and humans suffer as a result.

  • Kurt K says:

    Jessie To potentially save the life of thousands if not millions of people in the world I think medical testing on animals is legitimate. Though it may be ugly but it is necessary! At some point in all of you lives you will be faced with having to use the products that have resulted from animal testing! To save your life or perhaps a loved ones life what will you do? Face it some of the most important vacines and cures came from using animals! If you say why don’t we use humans instead of animals then it just comes down to morals!

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Kurt Eli Lilly suppressed prerelease test information about how their drug Prozac caused suicidal tendencies in peopletheir hands are far from lilywhite sorry. And yes all breakthroughs in medicine are evil sarcasm.

  • Lotus says:

    That is what I hope to become and to be thought of. A animal activist willing to take risks for the animals. I have never been so ashamed of my country.

  • Daryl says:

    Who is the lovely young lady in the middle on the bottom row Jack? Please pass on my offer of marriage to her as soon as is convenient to you! D

  • Jessie says:

    If breakthroughs in medicine require that we harshly and disgustingly abuse animals then yes they are a bad company! It is disgusting that people will be so selfish and not see that animals are NOT ours to do such things to. Like the poor monkeys which are subjected to smoke inhalation or rats. Why not do studies on people who are stupid enough to still smoke? Let them die off instead of innocent animals. Thanks to the protestors who are making a stand. You are wonderful individuals and very brave souls.

  • Brandon F says:

    I have been a vegetarian since age 8 and I strongly support any aniaml rights movment out there. These people are brave and they have my 100 respect.

  • Kurt K says:

    Eli Lilly is a bad company now? I always thought they did good things for all of us! I guess all the break throughs in meicine are evil?

  • Carla says:

    Thanks Annalena for the info… It never ceases to amaze me how cruel of a world we live in. I don’t know about you but the only way to eliminate this kind of suffering is to eradicate the ones who are conducting these senseless barbaric “practices” be sure to wear masks you never know what those HUMANS are carrying!! And to Eli Lilly… Good one for passing the blood soaked money over to another country thanks for picking the worst of the worst… may you rot in HELL!!

  • keith says:

    Even Ms.Newkirk admitted in her question answer programme some weeks ago. she can never see an end to animal experimentation. I fear all that is possibly remaining is to try and stem this disgrace. But sadly $’s talk. and you’ll always going to find some country who willingly will perform horrendous experiments on living creatures. Less humankind self destruct at some future time. and allow the animal kingdom free reign to determine their own pecking order.

  • Maya, C.V.T. says:

    Bless those wonderful protestors. They are among the few who know a fraction of what tortured animals in cages have to live like.

  • Deanna says:

    does anyone know how i can get on board the activism boat? i want to make things Happen. peace d

  • SERENA says:

    GREAT JOB…KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! WE NEED MORE PEOPLE OUT THERE TO SPEAK FOR THE ANIMALS….GOD BLESS YOU ALL!

  • Annalena says:

    httpprofile.myspace.comindex.cfm?fuseactionuser.viewprofilefriendid194737688 Please check out the myspace link for info on chinese brutality.I warn you though that the images are truly sickening and heartbreaking. They will never leave my head.

  • Annalena says:

    Chinese cat and dog markets in China are some of the most disgusting things I have ever seen. I had a breakdown the other day watching themchinese workers strangle cats and then take a shepherd mix out to be shot he was wagging his tail gently as he he was led out.I had a nightmare about chinese animal torture the other week. Not to mention the bear gall bladder trade from Canada to China that is still alive.

  • yunef says:

    by all means trade commerce.. finance.. service industry.. move to China.. anything anythign.. but anything to do with animals.. we already know their track record re. animals is abominably abysmal.. I’m still wringing my hands at the deplorable bear bile trade that’s still going on there.. see http://www.animalsasia.org and waiting for the day this horrendously cruel trade is finally stopped.. and hopefully most bears if not all freed big wishful thinking considering there’s circa around 7000 caged up with raw open wounds to extract the bile not to mentoin the horrendous fur farms over there.. not forgetting the dogs and cats.. is this an intentionally tactical move so that these hideous experiments in vivisection ‘over there’ will not be so closely monitored or they can have hellish ‘free reign’ to do what they want to do over there? I truly truly dread to think.. what is this world coming to?? .

  • Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals says:

    Jack You are right it is true. These beautiful activists are as wonderful as they come. Compassionate and brave a rare quality in so many. Peace!

Connect With PETA

Subscribe