HOSTGary wrote (in reference to a quote about the failure of animal models to successfully reproduce the HIV-1 virus),
- 3 This last quote underscores a major problem with animal testing. Different species contract different diseases, the same disease agent (e.g., a virus) has a different effect on different species, the same disease manifests itself differently in different species, and the same vaccine differs significantly in its efficacy and side-effect generation across species. .
According to Vivisection.net, the U.S. vivisection industry annually spends $18 billion on animal experiments, with a large proportion of that funded by U.S. National Institutes of Health. If animal experimentation is such a failure, why is it so ubiquitous? Could it perhaps be that it is so profitable? The 4Medical Research Modernization Committee thinks so:
- Vivisection is lucrative. Its traditionally respected place in modern medicine results in secure financial support, which is often an integral component of a university's budget. Many medical centers receive tens of millions of dollars annually in direct grants for animal research, and tens of millions more for overhead costs that are supposedly related to that research. Since these medical centers depend on this overhead for much of their administrative costs, construction, and building maintenance, they perpetuate vivisection by praising it in the media and to legislators.
(It might also be mentioned that the industry supplying the animals used for testing is also quite lucrative.)
Indeed, members of the medical community are starting to question the validity of animal experimentation, and have already developed alternative research models, such as mathematical modeling, use of lower organisms, computer models, and human studies.
Where are the animals obtained?
Doctor-Senator Frist's unique methods aside, dogs and cats used in research and education are obtained from a number of sources, including either Class B dealers (random source dealers) or Class A dealers, as defined by USDA licensing requirements.
Class B Dealers
Class B Dealers routinely get animals from "bunchers," who obtain them by various means:
- "Free to good homes" ads
The buncher will pose as a potential adopter by promising a good home to the cat or dog. - Theft
Bunchers will steal pets from the streets, yards, or parked cars. - Pound Seizure
This was a long-time source of animals, as unadoptable cats and dogs were released to bunchers in lieu of euthanization at the pound. Pound seizure has fallen out of favor, as most legitimate laboratories require healthy, viable animals of known background for experimentation purposes. The National Institutes of Health (the largest user of animals for research in the U.S.) stopped using animals from pounds several years ago for this reason. However, according to PeTA, there are only 14 states that currently have laws prohibiting pound seizure, and less scrupulous laboratories still use animals from this source, where permitted.Incredibly enough, Minnesota has a pound seizure law which forces pounds and shelters to release animals (after a 5-day waiting period) to any licensed institution that has requested them . Other states with similar laws include Iowa, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Utah. 1
Class A Dealers
May accept animals from breeders or other legitimate sources.
Pound Seizure
Laboratories, schools, and other institutions may obtain animals directly from pounds.
Commercial Animal Breeders
There are some commercial breeders who breed cats and dogs specifically for research and teaching purposes, while others breed them to wholesale out to pet stores. These breeders are all regulated by APHIS, a division of the USDA. Institutions
Some private and federal research facilities breed their own animals.
Footnotes:
3 A Cat Lover's Thoughts on OSU's Cats/AIDS Experiment
4 The MRMC is a nonprofit health advocacy organization composed of scientists and medical professionals who identify and promote efficient, reliable, and cost-effective research methods. The MRMC focuses exclusively on the scientific merits of different research approaches, even though some undoubtedly raise serious and important ethical concerns.
Next > Is the picture totally bleak?
