|
More Uncaged sites:
| |
news release
 Uncaged's fight to stop new pig transplant horror
This autumn, Uncaged is stepping up to the plate to campaign against
re-emerging GM pig organ transplant (xenotransplantation) experiments.
Xenotransplantation has been condemned as 'dying on its feet' by scientific
experts, and is deeply
unpopular with the public. Despite this, the UK
Government has once again bypassed its own regulations to promote horrific
animal cruelty.
This bizarre research - which appears to be taking place at Imperial
College London according to published scientific papers - first came
to light following boasts
in the media by one of the scientists involved,
Professor Lord Winston. Xenotransplantation threatens to open up a whole
new area of misery and death for animals, as well as expose humanity
to new viral epidemics. Given the massive biological obstacles to such
transplants, this research is virtually certain to fail. But in the meantime,
hundreds of pigs and other animals are suffering cruel and pointless
vivisection. This research project also threatens a repeat of the horrific
Diaries of Despair, where biotech company Imutran transplanted pig organs
into hundreds of higher primates at Huntingdon Life Sciences.
 Our Diaries of Despair revelations exposed the horrific reality of animal
testing and vindicated our opposition to pig organ transplants. Five
years of intensive cruelty had simply proved that it is not possible
to transplant organs between different species, separated by 180 million
years of evolution [1]. This is more bio-alchemy than bio-technology - science
that has been perverted by arrogance and greed.
Illegitimate animal testing
Imutran was closed
down immediately Uncaged exposed the truth about
their activities. Scientific commentators pronounced that pig organ transplants
were 'dying on their feet', and the Government's own expert advisors
acknowledged that the research had been a 'blind alley'. Furthermore,
a detailed study funded by the pro-vivisection charity Wellcome Trust
has found that the public overwhelmingly rejects
the idea of pig organ transplants as unethical and dangerous. It was seen as the least popular
solution to transplant waiting lists, with the public sensibly preferring
greater promotion of donor cards or a 'presumed consent' system.
In 2003, Uncaged won a historic
legal victory on public interest grounds,
which allowed us to publish documents leaked from Imutran and the Home
Office revealing the inside story of their failed pig-to-primate organ
transplant experiments. We had argued that it was necessary to reveal
evidence of law-breaking and Home Office failure to regulate the research.
The emerging picture of the licensing of these experiments exposes the
same rubber-stamping approach to animal research regulation.
Rubber-stamping
The Home Office has bypassed various stages of scrutiny in licensing
this research. Department of Health's United Kingdom Xenotransplantation
Interim Regulatory Authority's (UKXIRA) official remit includes advising
the Government on the acceptability of applications to undertake xenotransplantation
research and also act as a focal point in Government for xenotransplantation
issues. It has also made much of its role in advising the Home Office
over xenotransplantation research on animals.
Yet our request under the Freedom of Information Act has shown that
the UKXIRA was not consulted about the merits or otherwise of this research.
We have also learned that the Animal Procedures Committee (APC) was not
consulted, despite the wider ethical implications and social concerns
surrounding pig organ transplants (Home Office policy states that the
APC should be consulted on such research) [2].
Given that the government's own scientific advisors have essentially
written off pig organ transplants, it's scandalous that the Home Office
has gone behind their back to rubber-stamp these bizarre experiments
that are causing pain and suffering to hundreds of animals. Further enquiries
have also revealed that the Home Office has failed to keep tabs on the
results of the research programme, meaning that it cannot be implementing
the core requirement of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986
- the so-called 'cost-benefit assessment'.
This is further confirmation that the claims of 'strict regulation'
are cynical lies designed to manipulate the public conscience. In reality,
vivisectors are a law unto themselves, free to explore abstract theoretical
questions for the sake of professional advancement and that can have
no bearing on defending public health.
Action
- Contact your MP to urge them to complain to the Home Office
about this research. Click here for
suggested wording - but composing your own message will be most effective.
You can find out who your MP is by clicking here.
- Please make
a vital donation so we have the funds to pursue this campaign as vigorously
as possible. Possible future actions that need financing include organising
imaginative and peaceful protests, legal challenges to Government secrecy,
public education and lobbying campaigns.
References:
- Hammer C. 'Xenotransplantation: the good, the bad,
and the ugly or how far are we to clinical application?' Transplant
Proc. 2003 May;35(3):1256-7.
- See APC's
Annual Report for 2004, page 3, paragraph
7.
Uncaged Campaigns 09.10.06 |
