Cherwell.org - Student news and reviews at Oxford University
Tuesday 9th February, 2010
Cherwell Cass Business School
Protesters demand end to Oxford animal testing

by Rishi Stocker | 16:27 GMT, Thu 30 April 2009

Photo: Cherwell

Animal rights protest group SPEAK this week handed over a 65,000-signature petition to Oxford University, condemning the opening of the Oxford University Biomedical Sciences Centre and calling for an end to all testing on animals.

A spokesman from SPEAK said the 65,000 signatures had been gathered for the cause of stopping animal testing at Oxford specifically and were ‘proof of the strength of feeling against its operations among the local community and tourists alike.'

The petition was accompanied by a march down Cornmarket.
Another activist told the BBC "We're hoping the University will take notice at the amount of opposition to the experiments they do. We were hoping to either get the building stopped, or get it changed to a cutting edge lab looking at alternatives [to animal testing]. The new lab means we can now concentrate on all animals being tested on at Oxford University, and not just the new building."

The moves were timed to coincide with the end of the World Month for Laboratory Animals, an international campaign with which SPEAK has been heavily involved. The group has organised demonstrations throughout the UK against animal research and testing. Similar groups overseas have also been involved in the month of protest, with one demonstration in California seeing a dramatic confrontation between pro-testing and anti-testing campaigners.

Toby Holder, a spokesman for the pro-animal research group Pro-Test, questioned the value of the petition. "Over the last five years, SPEAK has gathered this enormous amount of signatures, but I'm not sure what it hopes to achieve by handing it to Oxford University."

"Even if it was 65000 signatures, they don't have the right to halt the medical advances for the rest of us."

The submission of the petition comes shortly after a major victory for the anti-testing movement, when the British Union of Anti-Vivisectionists forced Oxford and other universities to publish figures on primate testing, which they had previously refused to do.

The university have released a statement in response to the petition and protest, saying "Animals are only used when no other research method is possible." The spokesman said further: "We recognise that people have a range of views on this issue. The university has always said the building (the Biomedical Sciences Centre) is going to be better for animal welfare and is supporting research into disabilities and deadly diseases."

SPEAK's spokesman dismissed this statement as ‘meaningless', saying the public should focus on the animals that are ‘convulsing and dying at the bottom of their cages in the centre.'

The group's website urges tourists to boycott Oxford, urging students and tourists to "Say no to the city that supports corruption and cruelty. Boycott Oxford and say yes to a science based on compassion that actually works."

The petition has been met by mixed reactions from University students. Robert Smith, a Biochemist in his first year at St Hilda's College, believes that one should focus on the rewards that animal testing can reap in the field of medicine, while still ensuring that animals were kept as comfortable as possible. "When we think of animal testing cruelty and exploitation are often the first things that come to mind. It is sometimes easy to lose sight of what it can actually achieve. As soon as one looks at the number of instances where new cures for human diseases have been found thanks to tests on animals it becomes much harder to condemn. That having been said I feel that measures should be taken to improve as much as possible the conditions in which laboratory animals are kept. Consideration for the animals' welfare is equally important."

A 2005 Cherwell survey showed that 86% of Oxford students are in favour of the university carrying out research on animals, with just 11% opposed. By a similar margin, 84-10, they also supported the new animal research facility. Many students said that the actions of animal rights campaigners had made them more likely to support testing.

Page last updated: 2009-05-01 04:17:39
Comments and Opinions:
"Animal Rights" by dragonsgemcat
Posted: 23:55 GMT, Sun 3rd May 2009
I disagree with activists but object to animal testing. This view is supported by many scientists who feel that better alternatives with more accurate results should be developed, we can start with cell cultures. Penicillin would not have used if it had been tested on animals and thalidomide was! There are also experiments for the sake of them and the lack of care of the animals in the lab.
"END Oxford Testing" by Rita Leone
Posted: 23:18 GMT, Sun 3rd May 2009
Please END this horrific useless painful and inhumane testing of the animals.... animals suffer just as we do....and they are not made like us so this is spending wasting tax dollars for NOTHING!! We don't learn anything from this tortue/abuse of innocent animals...more sophisticated methods are available that does not include hurting and eventually killing the animals.... This is ATROCITY
""petition"" by Mrs Caton
Posted: 21:57 GMT, Sat 2nd May 2009
You Dr., along with Oxford Uni's Managers and its Pro (Animal) Testing indoctrinated students should remember that not everyone in civy street agrees with what you are doing to sentient creatures in the name of so-called Research. The University could have chosen to make its new research facility a world leader in cutting-edge, non-animal using technology. Why it chose not to do so is to its shame
"Belief Systems" by Pam
Posted: 20:25 GMT, Sat 2nd May 2009
Laboratory terrorists have developed their believe system that it is okay to kill and terrorize others, as long as there is some benefit achieved from the terrorizing. Would they dare suggest that we should experiment on babies or the handicapped if great benefit could be achieved from it. I hope not! No one has the right to torture or harm others just to reap the benefits for their own group.
"petition" by DR. Rosset
Posted: 20:56 GMT, Fri 1st May 2009
Animal rights terrorists have developed this belief system and are trying to impose it on the rest of the world. They don't have that right and if they are allowed to succeed new diseases and old diseases will develop that we will not know how to handle. Of course that is what some of their web sites advocate the end of the human race. One needs to question how they postured the petition.
 
Your email address:
Name:
Comment subject:
Your comment: (max length: 400 chars.)

characters left
Security verification: (Enter the code in the box below)



No MinisterSaturday 12:45Matters Scientific
MOST DISCUSSED THIS WEEK
C2 HIGHLIGHTS
COMMENT AND WORLD

Cass Business School
© 2008 Oxford Student Publications Ltd.
Design by Henry Clarke Price, Chris Baraniuk and Adam Hadley
About Us | Get in touch | Send us news | Advertise | RSS Feeds