Skip to Main Content

New Ads Show Cruel Reality of Vivisection

Written by PETA | April 20, 2011

Just in time for World Week for Animals in Laboratories, PETA has unveiled a new nationwide ad campaign: “If you call it ‘medical research,’ you can get away with murder.” What happens in laboratories—including burning, poisoning, crippling, and blinding animals—would be considered criminal cruelty if it occurred elsewhere. But no experiment—no matter how painful—is prohibited by law. Publicly funded universities work hard to keep their cruel animal experiments a secret: Experimenters know that if people found out that their money was being used to torment and kill animals in crude, painful, and deadly tests, they wouldn’t stand for it.  

PETA’s ads, which show graphic, heartbreaking photos from our undercover investigations inside university laboratories, are up on billboards, taxis, and bus shelters and in university newspapers in Boston and in North Carolina’s Research Triangle Park. The ads will be appearing in other U.S. cities in the coming weeks.

While PETA is grabbing the public’s attention, you can help grab the attention of your representatives in Congress by asking that they divert public money away from experiments on animals in favor of humane, relevant, and lifesaving non-animal research.


Commenting is closed.
  • interzone says:

    @Dr Sam. Diabetes is caused by the western diet of white bread, white sugar, and saturated animal fat; don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out, but apparently causation remains a fact beyond most doctors. I wouldn’t be alive without medical research, but i don’t have a problem with that. If a way to save me could have been found without hurting a single animal, fine, OTW i am ok with leaving the planet, because my life, although intrinsically sacred, like all life, isn’t worth more than the pain inflicted upon millions of animals in scientific research.

  • JUNE GREGORD says:

    they should go throught the experiments first. see how quickly they would discontinue these horrorendunce experiments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Hana Bakemono says:

    You know, thinking about it… why not do medical research on humans? They did it before! Years ago, for the benefit of an army, they studied bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, and bone transplantation from one person to another. They also experimented with head injuries, ways to cure malaria, and discovering means to prevent and treat hypothermia. It was this huge group of people who decided this was the right thing to do. They were told by their leader, who was an animal lover and a vegetarian, that they should all change their ways for what they thought was for the best, that everything they knew was a lie, targeted children so they can spread the word with their rebellious and spontaneous ways, and even showed people videos and pictures of evil people who were doing things that made it look what they were doing were horrible, murderous and disgusting people that broke their rules. Sound familiar? The leader was Hitler… the group was Nazis. Well… ain’t that a coincidence.

  • vimc says:

    To all the people who think that animal research is a perfectly fine thing to do, and feel that without it we will have no medical breakthroughs, I ask…would you volunteer? Should we not be testing these experiments on beings that have a say?

  • Emma says:

    I completely agree with PETA here, for once. To those asking if I would rather the tests be done on humans, my answer is most definitely. Humans have the capability of giving permission to the researchers to mutilate them and possibly kill them. An animal has no say, yet they can still feel fear and pain and it is cruel to inflict such miseries upon them.

  • Dr. Sam says:

    I very much hope that no one from PETA uses any medications that were discovered by testing on animals. Hopefully none of you have diabetes…

  • Actual Scientist says:

    The ignorance of people who oppose the use of animals in research is appalling. For starters, vivisection has an actual definition. You use it as a loaded term since it conjures up the image of wantonly cutting into an animal. In reality, that would be against IACUC guidelines. You’d have to use anesthesia on any vertebrate. Animal research is heavily regulated and very expensive. If a researcher can get away with not using animals, he won’t bother. When you have to lie as your premise, you don’t have an actual argument.

  • Anonymous says:

    These animals are bred for this kind of “cruelty.” It’s the animal, or lack of production. Or I suppose we could let, say, Japan, do it and buy more of their products. Or I suppose we could let people die because of lack of research, or we could accidentally kill people, too, because of lack of research. I suppose it’s an argument in moral priorities. I just value my kin and the research of US more than a few lives that people wouldn’t be able to take up, anyway. They’d all go to a humane or adoption society and die.

  • IdeaRevolutions says:

    You can call it murder if you’re PETA and destroy 97% of animals you take in, purchasing huge walk-in freezers to store their bodies until you can take care of them. Hypocrites.

  • Scofod says:

    People know that these animals are specifically bred for the research right? Like you would use model organisms that have no other purpose. People don’t go out into the wild and catch animals to test on. We need to test on animals, we cannot risk using untested drugs on humans.

  • Bry says:

    People push this aside because they think that all of this testing is for medical betterment. Although, the majority of this brutality is so you can have a label on your shampoo that tells you to rinse your eyes out because it might cause irritation. It’s just soap.  

  • fajas colombianas says:

    Im fine with this idea. As long as its for science, who knows, by taking a life, they might discover new cures or even immortality.

  • Holly says:

    PETA, I do not always agree with you or your methods, but this is certainly one of the times when I do. Please bring your advertisements to Baltimore. I would be so happy to drive down I-695 and see such a message and know that thousands of people are seeing it every day, even if only a dozen really think about it. It’s better than nothing.

  • Rajesh says:

    Nive info thanks

  • Thorn Aarland says:

    Other good ways of getting away with murder are calling it “liberation” or “abortion”. Cheers.

  • Jay says:

    The argument against animal testing on the grounds that it has not produced a cure for cancer is mind numbingly misinformed. The amount of scientific progress created by animal testing is extremely significant. With out animals researchers can not gather information about how living things work. Information that helps everyone people and animals alike. With out this knowledge scientists would not understand ecosystems in order to protect them. Take research into spinal cord regeneration for instance. The field is full of examples where animal research lead to huge medical breakthroughs.

  • geroe says:

    Without animal testing you can throw all of your medical breakthroughs out the window, unless you think testing on people is a better option.

  • Xavier Cobblepot says:

    I personally dont find anything wrong with it. In science there must always be a subject so as to go further in that science, sometimes that subject is subjuected to…uncomfortable treatments, but those are the casualties of progress. I think Peta is overreacting on this one.

  • Shaynie Aero says:

    ShadowVegan made a petty and mean comment.I mean, if u want 2 stop animal experiments u have 2 b able 2 find out who 2 contact!PETA does the most amazing missions 4 animals.Animal rights would b impossible without PETA!We should b supportive of it,and their efforts 2 stop this torture of animals…

  • Mediattack! says:

    Shadow Vegan is too extreme and it sounds slightly chauvinist. It’s obvious that change can happen with or or without animal extremism. Noone wants animal extremist punks. Its the wrong way of being effective and it leads to all out revolutionary war. It’s so unpatriotic and unAmerican to tell animal groups how to behave or conduct business unless you have a real solution. You don’t. Noone likes Jesus Christ anymore so take your Vegan Chauvinist Jesus elsewhere.

  • libguest says:

    @Pandaheather: I certainly hope that I will never be in the situations you describe, but I hope just as much that even if I were, I would not change my opinion about what in my opinion are basic human rights. The whole point of human rights is that no matter who you are, what you do or what others think of you they cannot be taken away from you. The idea of experimenting on prisoners is apalling and anybody who advocates such a thing has in my opinion misunderstood something very basic. What argument could possibly logically allow for causing pain and suffering to human prisoners, but not to animals capable of suffering? Don’t we lose our credibility in arguing against causing suffering if we allow what can amount to torture to be done to a prisoner and then ask that a mouse or a monkey should be spared the same treatment? @anonymous vet: The bear question is in my opinion not logical – a bear will of course kill and eat other animals, but 1)it does not have a choice, while humans have a choice 2)the way humans use animals for food production is mostly absurd and cruel, while an individual bear kill might be violent, but is certainly not comparable in scope andin weirdness of thinking with the mechanised slaughter of hundreds of thousands of animals factory-farmed under ridiculously bad conditions. Humans do such weird stuff. Have you ever read about how foie gras is produced? Isn’t that one of the sickest things possible? A bear killing its prey is no match on any level for that. I therefore think the comparison is not valid. As for the animal experimentation: I am a biologist myself and have had some contact with animal testing during my studies and via friends and colleagues who chose to go into branches of biology that heavily rely on animal testing. I believe that a lot of experimentation that I know is done is totally unnecessary, does not contribute at all to our understanding of diseases and causes suffering to the animals that are used. I urge you to seriously try to find a logically sound argument for why it is ok to use animals capable of suffering for research. Let me know if you have found one.

  • Anonymous Vet says:

    i am going into college to be a veterinarian, and animal research is there because it is considered inhumane to test on humans, even on prisoners, or we practically become animals ourselves. it is made out that research on the animals is cruel, but they are put through little pain at all. the experiments are NOT evil, they are for cures for animals and humans alike. PLUS, i found evidence PETA kill animals that they can’t find adoptive homes for! for a group that doesn’t wanna kill animals they sure dont make much sense when i see peta has done it! also, a question for you: bears eat other animals, is it cruel that they do it? if you answered no, then why is it cruel for humans to do it when they were also built for eating meat?

  • PandaHeather says:

    @libguest: If you had, God forbid, one of you parents, sisters, brothers or children tortured and then finally killed by a violent person, you would not only change your mind on the death penalty but you would think it OK to do medical tests on these people as well.

  • Joanna Krzywon says:

    People should stop animat testing now! Testing animals have true name – MURDERED! Stop murdered animals!!!

  • Matt Porter says:

    What about animal testing for Veterinary Medicine? Does PETA agree with that?

  • Carolyn Cavallo says:




  • Thomas Urland says:

    Tierversuche sind nachweislich nicht erforderlich und mit nichts zu rechtfertigen. Wer sie dennoch aus geld- und wissensgier durchführt, ist ein Verbrecher und sollte dafür streng bestraft werden. Eine Gesellschaft die solche Abartigkeiten zuläßt, verachte ich zutiefst. Hallo reiches Deutschland und ihr anderen verkommenen Industriestaaten!

  • libguest says:

    @Cindy: While I am happy to hear that you do not support animal-based research into human diseases, I strongly object to your idea of using human prisoners for medical experimentation. This idea goes against fundamental human rights (as does the death penalty in my opinion, but this is not the point here). What makes you think that it would be ok to inflict suffering on a human to prevent suffering for an animal? I believe that ideas like this are cruel, dangerous and discredit the just cause of fighting medical experimentation on animals.

  • dawn says:

    end all animal testing NOW! if people want to offer to be test subjects, more power to them. when we use other species it doesn’t even translate to humans anyway. stupid…

  • rose cromby says:


  • Lena Bajraktari says:

    Animal research is insane and inhumane. What makes us so special that humans can’t volunteer more than they should in labatory experiments? Perhaps it’s fear, uncertainty, pain, cruelty, and torture. These are the same feelings that animals experience and endure through these countless evil experiments. They must ALL STOP NOW!!! I would love to see the many senseless and worthless humans out there, endure the same… if you’re bold and stupid enough. Sounds psychotic? Exactly, that’s my point. It takes these kind of people to torture innocent animals in labatories across the globe, not to mention other countless forms of animal abuse and behavior. These acts are immoral.

  • Alisha Chavez says:

    & To “Who Cares”? You are ignorant. Get out of here.

  • Alisha Chavez says:

    To John Markus: Your arguments are not only invalid, but inaccurate. While I understand your viewpoint of wanting to find a cure for cancer, there are of course, other ways of doing that. The technological advances, such as computer simulation and tissue samples, would allow this to take place. Instead of animal research, these alternatives need to be utilized. From that, you go on about hunting, which is random and completely irrelevant to the topic. Of course, while I do not condone hunting animals, my main concern is simply animal experimentation. It’s unnecessary and useless of taxpayer dollars. The more you inform yourself about the alternatives available, the more you will disagree with your statement of harming animals for the sake of human’s mistakes.

  • Dilek Gonen says:

    Everyone who’s pro animal testing should read the comments by Cindy Rapp. Before having more insight, nobody should advocate this cruelty. Animal testing is not a 100% guarantee to save people’s lives while it guarantees the death of innocent lives. Who is to decide which life is superior to another anyway?

  • Victoria says:

    I don’t get it, some of you say that we should test on animals? If people think that animal testing just for a cure for cancer, alot of times it’s failed. It isn’t fair for the animals either because it’s like testing on humans for a cure of a disease that animals have. And they don’t do that, right? So to the people who think testing is “ok”, you’ve got your facts wrong.

  • Michelle S. says:

    Cindy Rapp, I agree 100%

  • Spider Woman says:

    John Markus: people like you stand for the principle that the stronger makes the law – in less nice words this is called fascism! You have to consider that there is a strong minority worldwide who pretends that animals are feeling beings and have the same right for protection and shelter as the human beings! The greatest souls on this planet, above all human rights activists like Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Henry Dunant, Susan B.Anthony, Maria Montessori, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Albert Schweitzer, Victor Hugo and hosts of others always included the animal kingdom into their fight for justice. People who think that non-human life is less worth are dramatically wrong! We see this already from the destruction and degradation of this planet! Also Mother Earth is a sentient being who slowly gets fed up with this continuous respect- and loveless plundering by the human species and she starts withdrawing her gifts! But people are blind, deaf and dumb and they continue their harrassment until there shall be nothing left but ashes, poison and garbage – that’s it!

  • RAT KING says:

    maybe after two years you have over a hundred pigs from two – but after some years of speciesists like you – you have no more planet at all fullstop

  • Lena Torsson says:

    Stop this tortue! Experiment on yourselves if you think it is that pleasant and harmless! Shame on you, animal abusers :@