Kent based Animal Aid are calling for a boycott of charities that fund medical research using animals. This is from Kent News:
The group’s director Andrew Tyler said: "Animal Aid is under no illusions as to the pro-animal research lobby’s significant financial and political clout.
"But the British public do not like the idea of animals enduring great suffering to no purpose – and our report Victims of Charity argues that this is precisely what is happening."
He called on the public to withhold fiancial support until the charities pledged to end funding of animal experiments.
And this from today's Independent:
Animal Aid plans to take out a series of newspaper adverts urging the public to stop giving money to Cancer Research UK, the British Heart Foundation, the Alzheimer's Society and Parkinson's UK unless they end their support for animal testing.
It is morally wrong to use animals in this way and the evidence of the benefits to research are questionable. We must put pressure to stop the testing.
Green Party campaigner in Kent. Also a nurse, academic, former manager, writer, Druid, husband and father...
7 comments:
This is grandstanding by Animal Aid the law dictates that new medication is tested on animals so any funding by charties will of course involve animal testing. It is the law that needs changing so pressure should be on lawmakers not people who have essential services funded by thesef charties
Thanks
I'm definitely going to be funding cancer research etc now.
Hi Stephen, I'm happy to accept that it is the law that needs changing, but I think that it is important to get the message out in whatever form can be effective. There is no need for these charities to fund research using animals (their funding is directly supporting the aspect involving animal reseach and could be directed to other aspects of the research as I understand) and if they stopped it would send a good message which is why I support Animal Aid's campaign.
Steve: I assume you are the same 'Steve' that has put bizarre accusations on my blog in the past. your latest sick comment is not wanted either. Please stop.
Hey, I support the use of animals in research.
Am I allowed to say that? It's not 'sick'. It's just a view you don't hold. It's pretty tragic if the Green Party health spokesman sees someone who supports animal research as 'sick'.
Cancer Research certainly need to fund research using animals. And this is a position supported by the vast majority of doctors and researchers involved in cancer research.
You're happy to quote science when it suits (climate change) but not when it doesn't (research using animals and homeopathy). The scientists are correct in all three spheres.
regarding my previous posts. Four in a year. Two boring and two asking why you have 13 tags for Israel (and 21 for Gaza). There's only one tag for Iraq and five for Afghanistan for example. And none for Darfur, Syria, Libya etc.
Hardly a 'sick' question. And given debate about anti-semitism and the Green Party, one worth answering.
You can, of course, delete my posts should you wish.
Steve,
Your post was not made to enhance a discussion on ethics or to debate whether animal research has any place in the modern world, it was done to offend. That is frankly wrong.
The reason I blogged a larger number of times during that Gaza conflict was that I simply found the murder of 1400 Palestinians by Israel deeply upsetting.
As usual you equate any criticism of Israel with a anti-semetism, yet most of my blog posts criticise the UK government and yet you do not accuse me of hating Britons or Christians. That is bizarre.
I see no point in your earlier comment to my blog and while I am happy to accept comments that enhance debate and discussion, I ask you to not post offensive remarks in the future.
Post a Comment