|







|
|
Doctors Fear Animal Experiments Endanger Patients
A new survey commissioned by
the patient advocacy group Europeans for Medical Advancement (EFMA) seems to
show that the government has lost touch with the views of health professionals
- let alone the public - in its support for the animal
experimentation industry.
The EFMA survey showed a staggering level of distrust amongst General
Practitioners (GPs) in results obtained from animal experiments:
-
82% were concerned that
animal data can be misleading when applied to
humans
-
Only 21% would have more
confidence in animal tests for new drugs than in
a battery of human-based safety tests
-
83% would support an
independent scientific evaluation of the clinical
relevance of animal experimentation
These results confirm that a
silent majority of doctors do not believe that
animal tests are the safety net that the public and medical profession are
frequently assured they are by the government and the pharmaceutical
industry.
A recent article in the British Medical Journal entitled, 'Where is the
evidence that animal research benefits humans' concluded that animal studies
should not be conducted 'until their validity ... to clinical medicine has
been assessed'. This new survey is indicative of this developing scepticism
about the value of animal experiments.
Adolfo Sansolini, Chief Executive of the British Union for the Abolition of
Vivisection (BUAV) says, "The early promise of the Labour government has
turned into full and blind support for the animal experimentation industry. The
BUAV only recently revealed that the Government had paid a staggering £85,506
towards a flawed and misleading MORI opinion poll commissioned by a coalition
of wealthy pro-vivisection organisations. The BUAV has submitted a formal
complaint about this poll to the Market Research Society, as it feels that its
leading questions have breached polling industry guidelines. The government is
now deaf to the suffering of animals in the laboratory, their cries drowned out
by government support for the economic interests of the industry. Dare we
hope that they will listen to the professionals who care for the nation's
health and lives?"
The Home Office recently admitted in response to a Parliamentary question
that, “The Home Office has not commissioned or evaluated any formal research
on the efficacy of animal experiments” and “The Government has no plans to do
so.”
The current system of licensing for animal experiments requires the Home
Office to apply a 'cost:benefit' test - under which the likely animal
suffering has to be weighed against the anticipated benefit. The BUAV claims
that this is impossible without a proper evaluation of the efficacy of
experiments and challenges the government to review its decision. Until it
does, the government is agreeing to the suffering of millions of animals
each year for dubious and 'untested' purposes.
BUAV
No material on this website may be copied or published elsewhere
without permission.
(c) Ooze Online 2001 - 2005
|