Friday, 22 July 2011



To: The Editor, letters page, Kent on Saturday - From: Hazel Dawe, campaigns officer, Tonbridge and Malling Green Party 27 Audley Avenue, Tonbridge Kent Tn9 1XF Tel: 01732 355185, Mobile 079444 71083

Dear Sir or Madam, Dr David Scott of Cancer Research overstates the case for animal testing in medical research. There is no need to torture and kill animals in laboratories to carry out relevant and effective research into cancer treatment. Unfortunately the “rigorous government guidelines.” are not always applied rigorously. For example, opponents protest that “the Home Office is too quick to approve an experiment and … grants project licenses without adequate scrutiny “ Critics of animal testing have complained that “researchers who are presenting their case may perform the cost-benefit assessments [themselves] rather than the Home Office “ Hardly a rigorous procedure. 1)

The relevance of animal testing for human biology is questionable. The Safer Medicine Campaign states that “the effectiveness of animal tests has never been measured against a panel of state-of-the-art techniques based on human biology.” Why not? The Campaign has established that “92% of new drugs successful in animal studies go on to fail in clinical trials” 2)

FRAME, the Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments aims to completely eliminate the use of animals in medical experiments. There are alternatives: human tissue and cells which have been donated can be used to model reactions and, as soon as it is safe, trials are needed on human volunteers anyway.

Tonbridge and Malling Green Party would urge people to support the Animal Aid campaign and halt donations to Cancer Research UK, the British Heart Foundation, Parkinson’s UK and the Alzheimer Society until these charities agree to minimise and, eventually phase out, the use of animal testing in their research.

Hazel Dawe, Campaigns officer, Tonbridge and Malling Green Party



No comments:

Post a Comment