Many of these horrific tests involve repeatedly force-feeding or forcing dogs to inhale substances for weeks, months, or even more than a year to measure the effects of repeat exposure on the liver, kidneys, lungs, heart, and nervous system.

Experimenters often administer drugs, pesticides, or other toxic chemicals by gavage – this means they insert a force-feeding tube down the dog’s throat so chemicals can be pumped into the stomach on a daily basis. Instead of receiving love and affection, these dogs will experience side effects such as vomiting, tremors, and raised temperatures. At the end of the test, experimenters will kill and dissect the dogs.

The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 requires research establishments to use scientifically satisfactory non-animal methods wherever possible. The premise of my speech is the fact that this requirement is not being properly enforced or regulated. The UK legal framework should ensure accordance with the principles of the three Rs, which stand for replacement, reduction and refinement. Under the law, a licence cannot be granted to a testing laboratory unless the Home Office is satisfied Toggle showing location ofColumn 2WHthat a non-animal approach could not give the desired scientific answer. Applicants are asked to demonstrate that they have considered non-animal alternatives for the tests they propose to do, but in reality this is treated more like a box-ticking exercise, providing only the most cursory information, such as how opportunities to replace animal testing with non-animal methods were considered. The application is then evaluated by one of a very small number of inspectors—a medical doctor or veterinarian who is not necessarily an expert in that area of testing—and inspectors often have a background in animal testing themselves.

The reality is that applications are very unlikely to be refused. According to some research, no licences were refused for animal experimentation between 2018 and 2021. That is a problem, because analysis of the licences granted during the first half of 2020 showed that researchers often failed to adequately explain their strategy to search for non-animal methods. In one example, only a one-word answer was given on the application. Simply put, the legal framework to uphold the principle of the three Rs is not being effectively enforced. The implications of that cannot be overstated.

A recent report from the animals in science regulation unit described deeply troubling animal welfare failings in British laboratories between 2019 and 2021. I am sure colleagues have been sent videos, pictures and links to many of them, especially regarding the MBR Acres site in Cambridgeshire. Those failings include a non-human primate dying after becoming trapped behind a restraint device, boxes of 112 rats being moved in error to a compacter, where they were crushed alive, and numerous incidents of animals being left without food or water.

In my view, the UK cannot claim to have high standards of animal testing welfare when we allow animals to die of starvation, suffocation or asphyxiation—whether they are used for testing or whether they become one of the numbered surplus that get slaughtered every year. To give some numbers on that, in 2017, 1.81 million animals were either bred for laboratory use and discarded as surplus, or killed for their body parts to be used for testing.

X9-K9 Security:
Can anybody recommend this company? I understand it uses trained dogs to prevent people from trying to rescue any of the 2,000 dogs inside MBR Acres right now.
194 Pontefract Road Cudworth, Barnsley, South Yorkshire S72 8AF

https://www.freedomfairies.com/fairyland-guide/dinosaur-guide