Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe number of scientific procedures carried out on animals rose by 6% last year to just over 3.2m. The vast majority (83%) used rodents, while the number of procedures that involved monkeys was down 6% with 3,125 monkeys being used in total.
The overall increase is due largely to the continued trend for researchers to use more genetically modified mice and fish in experiments. Creating GM animals involves two steps of breeding and these animals are counted in the figures as having undergone a scientific "procedure". In 2007, 1.15m GM animals were used, a rise of 11% on the previous year. Over a third of all procedures in 2007 were breeding animals.
"As the volume of medical research increases, which we all want to see, then the overall volume of legitimate and useful animal experiments will increase despite steps taken to minimise their use," said Liberal Democrat MP Dr Evan Harris, who is a strong supporter of the regulated use of animals in scientific research. He welcomed the use of more GM animals because he said this was a refinement that would make animal use more relevant to human diseases.
Iain Simpson of the Oxford group Pro-Test agreed: "We view the increase in the use of transgenic animals used as especially positive as it shows that academics are continuing to use innovative new methods to find cures for life threatening diseases."
The figures, which were released by the Home Office this morning, show that 83% of procedures used rats, mice and other rodents, 10% used fish and 4% used birds.
The number of procedures carried out on dogs was up 600 (9%) while the number carried out on cats dropped by 216 (41%) and the number of cattle procedures was down 2000 (39%). Genetically normal animals were used in 1.73 million regulated procedures (54% of the total), up 5% on the 2006 figures.
The total number of animals used was 3.125m, an increase of 6%.
Home Office minister Meg Hillier said: "As the regulator we ensure that a proper balance between animal welfare and scientific advancement is maintained; and that the regulatory system is effective, efficient and impartial ... Advances with non-animal test methods continue to be made, but at present licensed animal use remains essential to develop improved health-care technologies."
Groups who oppose animal testing condemned the figures, pointing out that they represented an increase of 21% in animal experiments since Labour came to power.
"In 1997 animal welfare tokenism may well have been a vote winner for Labour. But it has resulted in an eleven year record of failure that has now seen the number of animals dying in British laboratories reach three million for the first time in 16 years," said Wendy Higgins of the Dr Hadwen Trust. "If the government doesn't take urgent action to implement a clear strategy to replace animals with advanced techniques, Labour's legacy for lab animals will be an appalling failure."
She said that 0.00002% of Britain's science budget was spent on government funding of non-animal replacements.
Michelle Thew, chief executive of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, said: "It is a national disgrace that the number of animals subjected to experiments has massively risen under this government. Despite clear public concern on this issue, the government has made no attempt to take the necessary action and develop a clear policy on getting the numbers down. The UK should be leading the way in reducing animal testing, but these latest statistics show there is a long way to go."
© 2008 The Guardian
9 Comments so far
Show AllWe're all lab animals on this funky planet. Think of all the chemical combos we encounter each moment of our lives. The animals will have the last laugh, our science is a crap shoot at best. When it's time to pay the piper...it's gonna hurt something awful...
"Pass me another bowl of that Campbell's Chemical Soup, will ya honey."
Test medicines on sick people with the disease being cured who give willing consent and makeups can easily be made using safer and cheaper techniques without torture.
Innocent creatures that suffer just like the scientist torturng them should not be forced to live and die in pain and fear for no reason.
You can see that the monkey in the picture is scared, how could anybody do somthing like that is sickening and what the poor creature is suffering for is probably 100% pointless and ust another excuse to make the helpless suffer.
EVERYBODY WHO READS THIS ARTICLE PLEASE CHECK LABLES AND DO NOT BY ANYTHING THAT IS TESTED ON ANIMALS!!
I work in medical product development, and am 100% behind finding alternate ways of testing new products. There are surely vested interests in the animal testing industry, and other corruptions caused by anti-social profit maximization, but who wants to take a powerful drug that has never been tested for long term effects? This kind of test would require generations of human volunteers, or, alternately, generations of rats, which could make the drug available (or abandoned due to unexpected side effects...) in a tiny fraction of the time. Go tell your cousin with AIDS that he will have to wait another 30 years for a promising drug, and see how you feel about rat testing then.
Again, I laud efforts to expose unnecessary animal testing and to develop alternatives, but let's not get overzealous! Call it specio-centric, but at this point in time, there is often no reasonable approach that does not include execution or pain for innocent and dumb animals.
BASTARDS . They're not after cures, they're after grants . That's why a cure for cancer will not be found : there's too much money coming in, year after year, for further experimentaions .
And there's always the asterisk *May not apply to humans .Just as WTF wrote, the figures are horrific, the murder of 356 sentient creatures each hour in the UK alone . And what life-saving discovery has been made by Great Britain lately ? We can all start by readind labels and chose products Not Tested on Animals and those containing no animal product .
If the primary interest was engaging in effective experimentation there are superior alternatives available today to animal testing. Animal testing and vivisection are a result of requirements based on laws and that have not kept up with advances in science and the lab. Remember, animal testing is BIG BUSINESS. How many breakthroughs have been missed because they don't work on animals but may be completely effective in humans!
the sad irony of the word "humane" is that it reveals our anthropocentrism...
science is necessary, and I support it, but there are alternatives to using animals. it is NOT 'necessary.'
Science is a tool. No better or worse than government. Both have been used well and misused.
The blindest heathen on the planet are those who worship at the alter of science or government-----and they are many.
I agree with WTF and anbaric.
I'm 100% opposed to the use of monkeys, dogs, cats, birds, fish, cattle, rodents, etc., in any kind of research, which I think should be carried out on a voluntary basis on animals that are in a position to give informed consent. To me, it's very disappointing to learn that vivisection is alive, well, and growing in the UK.
3,125,000 animals slaughtered in one year, in the UK alone. That averages 356 animals every hour, 24/7.
Americans slaughter an average of over 800 ex-pet dogs and cats every hour, 24/7.
Why? Human vanity.