Sociology announces a moratorium on animal testing
Courtney Kaminski
Issue date: 3/14/07 Section: News
Grant Klacko, a member of the Brock Animal Rights Club, said that part of the reason the photos were of such concern is because animal testing is fairly unnecessary.
"Is animal testing at Brock necessary? No, of course not. Animal testing isn't necessary anywhere as more humane methods have been in practise for years," said Klacko.
"I am well aware that the psychology department is the largest at Brock and that their research programs bring in a large portion of money for Brock. However, I do not believe that this research has to or should involve cruelty towards animals. I ask only that the researchers and administration try thinking with their hearts rather than through their wallets. The university has a duty to its student population and I whole-heartedly believe that the majority of Brock students would be strongly against unnecessary cruelty towards animals."
Sorenson said that he believed that this issue stretches far beyond the confines of Brock's campus.
"I think these concerns are part of a broader debate about the use of animals in research in general," he said. "Many animals are used in research that is not only painful for those animals, but also which is redundant and trivial."
"A typical defence of this type of research is that it is necessary for curing human diseases like cancer or AIDS. The fact is, we're all concerned about those. But it seems that medical research is often dwarfed by testing for other things like cosmetics and household products."
Sorenson also said that even in the cases where testing is done for medical research there is a question that exists about the validity of that research. Part of the argument is that the effects will not be consistent between animal species and humans.
Currently, any research at Brock that involves the use of animals must be reviewed and approved by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), through the Office of Research Services.
According to their Web site, the university currently holds a Certificate of Good Animal Practice from the CCAC. This certifies that Brock is an institution which "practises the guidelines of the programs of the CCAC, has been assessed by expert panels composed of scientists, veterinarians and community representatives and has been found by the panel and by the CCAC Assessment Committee to have standards of experimental animal care and use which satisfy the CCAC's guidelines and policies, and have therefore been assigned a CCAC status of Compliance or Conditional Compliance".
"Is animal testing at Brock necessary? No, of course not. Animal testing isn't necessary anywhere as more humane methods have been in practise for years," said Klacko.
"I am well aware that the psychology department is the largest at Brock and that their research programs bring in a large portion of money for Brock. However, I do not believe that this research has to or should involve cruelty towards animals. I ask only that the researchers and administration try thinking with their hearts rather than through their wallets. The university has a duty to its student population and I whole-heartedly believe that the majority of Brock students would be strongly against unnecessary cruelty towards animals."
Sorenson said that he believed that this issue stretches far beyond the confines of Brock's campus.
"I think these concerns are part of a broader debate about the use of animals in research in general," he said. "Many animals are used in research that is not only painful for those animals, but also which is redundant and trivial."
"A typical defence of this type of research is that it is necessary for curing human diseases like cancer or AIDS. The fact is, we're all concerned about those. But it seems that medical research is often dwarfed by testing for other things like cosmetics and household products."
Sorenson also said that even in the cases where testing is done for medical research there is a question that exists about the validity of that research. Part of the argument is that the effects will not be consistent between animal species and humans.
Currently, any research at Brock that involves the use of animals must be reviewed and approved by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), through the Office of Research Services.
According to their Web site, the university currently holds a Certificate of Good Animal Practice from the CCAC. This certifies that Brock is an institution which "practises the guidelines of the programs of the CCAC, has been assessed by expert panels composed of scientists, veterinarians and community representatives and has been found by the panel and by the CCAC Assessment Committee to have standards of experimental animal care and use which satisfy the CCAC's guidelines and policies, and have therefore been assigned a CCAC status of Compliance or Conditional Compliance".
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
wordster
posted 3/14/07 @ 10:31 AM EST
Kudos to the sociology department and masters program in Social Justice and Equity studies,at Brock University, who've declared a moratorium on all research involving animals. (Continued…)
Post a Comment