The number of scientific procedures carried out on animals last year was the highest in Britain for almost 25 years, according to figures released by the Home Office.
More than 3.79m procedures, which range from breeding GM mice to mimicking neurological diseases in animals, were carried out, marking a rise of 68,100, or two percentage points, on 2010 figures.
Since 1987, the Home Office has monitored animals in research by counting the number of procedures that scientists start work on annually. In that year, the department reported 3.5m uses of animals in research projects. Many animals are used for more than one authorised procedure.
The coalition government has pledged to reduce the use of animals in scientific research, but at a press conference in London on Tuesday to announce the latest figures, Martin Walsh, head of the Animals Scientific Procedures division at the Home Office said that was “a long-term project.”
“You may be able to reduce the number of animals in specific areas, but the overall rise would tend to mask this. It’s something you can’t do in 12 months,” he said.
Animal welfare and anti-vivisection groups expressed dismay at the latest rise, with the RSPCA calling on the government to commit to ending severe animal suffering.
The latest figures obscure substantial shifts in the way animals are used by scientists at universities and in the pharmaceutical industry. Much of the baseline rise comes from the greater use of fish and birds, which overwhelm a drop in the number of procedures carried out on monkeys, down almost half or 2,213, and rats, down 33,604.
The surge in procedures on fish, up 72,959 on 2010, was driven in part by their adoption for toxicology experiments previously carried out on rats. The figure was boosted by more university researchers turning to zebrafish to study basic physiology and embryonic development. In the first few days of life, zebrafish are transparent, which allows scientists to watch their organ development, and test the impact of chemicals on their growth.
Judy McArthur Clarke, head of the Home Office’s Animals in Science Regulation Unit, said the figures do not reveal how much animals do or do not suffer during the course of research projects. “This is something we are working with European member states to come to an agreement on. I’m hoping in future years we’ll have much better measures of this, because it is a significant drawback,” she said.
The Home Office categorises animal research projects as mild, moderate or substantial, according to the severity of the procedures carried out. A blood test ranks as a mild procedure, while procedures used to model diseases in animals are typically ranked as severe. In the latest figures, 61% of procedures were moderate and 36% classified as mild.
The Home Office released the figures alongside its annual report on the use of animals in science. The report revealed that government inspectors dealt with 39 licence infringements, more than they had handled in any of the previous five years. In one case, 208 mice drowned when a water dispenser malfunctioned and flooded their cages. A week later, at the same establishment, eight rats drowned when a leaky roof caused more cages to flood. The laboratory upgraded its facilities and was required to submit a formal report to the Home Office.
“We want the government to commit to ending severe animal suffering and for scientists to focus on changing these procedures so they cause as little pain and psychological suffering as possible,” said Penny Hawkins at the RSPCA.
Fran Balkwill, of the charity, Understanding Animal Research, said: “Animal research is conducted for the benefit of humans and animals alike, and we have made great strides in the past few years towards preventing or treating diseases that would have seemed incurable even a decade ago. We hope to see, in the coming years, further decreases in the number of dogs, cats and primates used, in line with efforts towards reduction, refinement and replacement of animals in research advocated by scientists and overseen by NC3Rs [the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research].”
The latest figures show that 48 more procedures were carried out on cats in 2011 compared with 2010, but the research is done to benefit cats, and focuses on feline physiology and nutrition.
Stephen Whitehead, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, added: “Where medical research is concerned, we have a straightforward option: continue with medical research, and continue to save and improve lives, or stop medical research, and stop our quest to cure Alzheimer’s, HIV, cancer, and every single disease that is currently untreatable. For me personally the decision is obvious: we have to prioritise human life at the same time as continuing to strive to reduce the number of animals used in research.”
[Lab rat via Shutterstock]
Ken Starr is an awful choice for Trump’s legal team because he’ll look like a hypocrite: Former federal prosecutor
President Donald Trump has a severe hypocrisy problem, and it has extended to his legal team. In a CNN explainer answering legal questions from viewers, former state and federal prosecutor Eli Honig explained that the choice of Ken Starr for Trump's legal team was a terrible idea.
Trump has chosen lawyers that are like a Fox News legal discussion panel. Pat Cipollone, Alan Dershowitz, Robert Wray, Pam Bondi and Jay Sekulow are all key people Trump has called on to defend him. But one person stands out, Honig explained. Ken Starr.
"He may emerge as a symbol of hypocrisy," Honig said. "He was the independent counsel who pursued Bill Clinton in the 1990s. Ken Starr turned over Heaven and Earth in his investigation of Bill Clinton. He talked to everyone who ever had known Monica Lewinsky, ex-boyfriends, teachers, window washers. And here he's going to say you shouldn't be hearing from primary witnesses?"
‘Comparing yourself to terrorists?’ Internet cracks up at Trump saying dead 9-11 hijackers got more justice than him
President Donald Trump quoted Fox News host Mark Levin that left many scratching their heads. Levin, who has a show on Sunday evenings, claimed that the terrorists from Sept. 11 got more due process than the president.
The claim was a curious one because, as many on Twitter noted, it's not often that the president of the United States compares himself to a terrorist. Secondly, the 9-11 hijackers all died in the attack, as they were on the planes that crashed into the buildings and into a Pennsylvania field.
Trump is known to quote Levin frequently, though the citations often make the president look worse.
If people of color showed up to a Capitol protest heavily armed — Trump would call them terrorists: commentator
Legal analyst Areva Martin explained in a CNN panel discussion Sunday that the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. holiday has historically been a day in which white supremacists rear their ugly heads with racist protests and other public displays of bigotry. Monday's expected rally of racist gun nuts expected at the Virginia capitol is no different.
Colorblind author Tim Wise said that it's a whole different level with pro-gun activists. He noted that there was a message from the NRA that former President Barack Obama was going to take everyone's guns away. Of course, that never happened, but it was part of the narrative to scare sensible gun owners. Now, President Donald Trump is employing the same idea, saying that the rally of racists in Virginia is being spun by the president as another Democratic power-grab. Wise called it a kind of "front-lash" instead of "backlash."