ARAN Uncovers Deadly Irish Animal Experiments In New Scientific Critique

The formidable forces that have conspired to present the animal research debate to an unsuspecting public as "scientists versus terrorists" have very nearly succeeded in their mission. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of protest against animal experiments is lawful and peaceful. However, animal researchers know full well that as long as the debate is seen in the public eye as a purely ethical one, they can rest assured that their work and their livelihood will continue to enjoy unwavering government support and public funding.

Potentially the biggest challenge to animal research is ironically, not from without, but from within their own establishment. If it "takes a thief to catch a thief", then it takes a scientist to catch out another scientist. Following are some examples of animal research conducted in Ireland. They all share one thing in common: a commitment to a methodology that is scientifically invalid and devoid of compassion, even where the animals are anaesthetised. The information presented here represents the discovery of scientific data for its own sake - a crumb amongst the millions of other crumbs of basic research that are discoverable, but essentially inapplicable to human or animal health.

Example 1

Title of study: "Changes in Pericytes and Smooth Muscle Cells in the Kitten Model of Retinopathy of Prematurity: Implications for Plus Disease".

English translation: kittens deliberately blinded by exposure to the effects of too much oxygen

Where conducted: Department of Anatomy, Institute for Biomedical Research, University of Sydney, Australia, in conjunction with Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Queen's University, Belfast, Ireland (published in 2007).

Comment (expert opinion): "It is possible that data directly relevant to human patients could come from autopsies from babies with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) who died of complications of their prematurity. In contrast, the applicability of the animal model is questionable, because the method of induction of disease in the kittens differs from that in humans. In particular, the research protocol involves "vaso-obliteration" or "localized vessel regression," while in ROP the problem is neither: it involves failure of normal blood vessels to develop in the first place. While the kitten and human condition might resemble each other, even subtle differences in pathogenesis can result in differences in disease manifestation at the cellular level at which these studies are focused. Further, any differences between cats and humans in normal retinal structure at an anatomic or cellular level would compromise the application of animal data to humans" [e.g. the human eye depends on the fovea and macula, two important structures which cats do not have].

Stephen R. Kaufman, M.D.
Medical Research Modernization Committee co-chair
www.mrmcmed.org

Example 2

Title of study: "Increased intestinal permeability in rats subjected to traumatic frontal lobe percussion brain injury"

English translation: Smashing rats' brains affects their gut

Where conducted: UCD Conway Institute and School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland (published in 2008)

• animal researchers don't talk to hospital doctors about their work
• clinical trials with human patients get underway even before the animal research is completed
• drugs that fail in animals are used in humans anyway
• a drug that increased overall mortality in animals was, nonetheless, used in people
• most of the animal research that was analysed was poorly conducted and gave conflicting results
• in particular, one systematic review looked at the use of steroids in treating people with severe head injuries. Whereas the animal experiments had provided mixed results, the drug clearly increased the risk of death in patients and had to be discontinued

Example 3

Where conducted: Cork University Hospital and University College Cork, Department of Anaesthesia, Wilton, Cork, Ireland (published in 2003).

Comment: Ten healthy Labradors were used in this study. Instead of studying already sick animals and trying to help them, the researchers used healthy dogs and deliberately made them ill by injecting them with a chemical known to cause kidney failure. The dogs then received an experimental drug that the researchers thought would improve their condition. Instead, they discovered the opposite - the animals' condition worsened. This is another sad example of bad science.

Example 4

Where conducted: Department of Surgery, RCSI Research and Education Centre, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin (published in 2007).

Comment: Forty healthy rats were used in this study. All of the animals were killed at the end of the study so that their tissues could be studied. The data obtained in this study may be applicable to rats, although it is highly unlikely that any veterinary surgeon would use this information at all. In fact, the researchers intended this study for human medicine. However, since there are huge anatomical and physiological differences between rats and humans, we will never know whether this experimental treatment is of any use, or worse still, whether it will actually cause more harm than good when applied in practice (See Comment for example 2 above, which also applies here).

Example 5

Where conducted: Department of Physiology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland (published in 2006).

Continuous  B-blockade and artificial vagal stimulation with noradrenaline create a convenient experimental "preparation" that serves the investigators stated purpose while simultaneously making it irrelevant and inapplicable even to dogs - let alone humans. Both the experimental results and the conclusion that vagal tachycardia is not important physiologically are unfounded, as the data are derived from a non-physiological laboratory modification of a dog.

As with much animal experimentation, the focus here was to create an artificial situation to make the investigation "work," disregarding the relevance and applicability of the results obtained in that artificial situation".

Example 6

Title of study: "Characteristics of the response of the iliac artery to wall shear stress in the anaesthetized pig".

English translation: Effect of experimental changes in blood flow on the blood vessel of anaesthetised pigs

Where conducted: Biological Services Unit and Department of Physiology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland (published in 2007)..

Comment: this is a sad example of researchers performing essentially the same experiment over again, with minor variations. A similar study was conducted in 2001, using dogs instead of pigs. One must ask the question, how can data obtained in a healthy pig be applied with any degree of confidence to a sick human patient? Bad science!

Example 7

Title of study: "Age-related and Non-age related Changes in 100 Surveyed Horse Brains".

Where conducted: Central Veterinary Research Laboratory, Backweston Campus, Celbridge, Co. Kildare, Ireland , and School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, Conway Institute of Biomolecular and Biomedical Research, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland (published in 2006).

Example 8

Where conducted: Department of Surgery, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland (published in 1991).

Comment: Although these experiments took place in Ireland in 1991, they are essentially a repeat of a similar study conducted on dogs in 1980, at the Nuffield Department of Surgery in Oxford.

Examples 7 and 8 warrant a further comment (published September 24, 2006 in the UK Sunday Times):

"AS A veterinary surgeon, for the better part of 25 years in animal welfare, your article about greyhounds (News, last week) revealed only the tip of the iceberg. The sheer volume of greyhounds discarded by the racing industry will always overwhelm the number of households able to provide them with loving care.

Exactly the same problem applies to horse racing - the only difference being that many unwanted horses will end up on the dinner plates of some of our European Union neighbours.

As long as society condones our betting culture the animals will pay the ultimate price. By allowing the racing industry to purpose-breed such large numbers, no amount of legislation will provide a humane solution to what is as much a cultural problem as it is a welfare one".

Andre Menache MRCVS, Veterinary surgeon

'The advancement of knowledge for its own sake does not justify inflicting pain and suffering on sentient creatures. Nor does the law provide any meaningful protection for these laboratory animals. Animal experimentation is not about science or helping human beings through meaningful, rational research. It is about the search for grants, academic prestige and career development.

At a time when the scientific validity of animal experimentation is increasingly questioned from within the research community itself, it is time for thinking scientists to publicly challenge the relevance of such experiments.'
Source:www.animalaid.org.uk