News Archive
Another New Virus
As recently as 26th of February a new pig virus was reported
to have infected two workers in Sydney, Australia. Causing deformities
and stillbirths among pigs and severe flu-like symptoms in the two workers,
the virus was traced back to a colony of fruit bats near the piggery.
One of the most frightening potential consequences of xenotransplantation
(animal-to-human tissue transplants) is the transfer of viruses carried
by donor animals into the human population. Pigs are considered to be
"safer" donors, microbiologically-speaking, than primates as
the infections from which they suffer are less likely to cause human disease
than those of primates, but it has already been shown in the test tube
that their viruses can infect human tissue. Xenotransplantation's advocates
have claimed that screening could eliminate viruses but we have no mechanism
to detect unknown viruses. As Australian virologist Peter Kirkland told
a meeting in Sydney "you can't screen for disease agents that you
don't know about." The discovery of this new virus, and the fact
that it transferred from bat to pig to human being through a far less
direct route than the implantation of living tissue inside the body, is
yet another reminder of the level of our ignorance in this area, and the
potential risks of this procedure.
Uncaged Campaigns 01.04.98
Scientists Call for Moratorium on Xenotransplantation
Seven specialists with an interest in xenotransplantation, led
by Fritz Bach of Harvard Medical School have called for a moratorium on
human trials in the USA until an informed public debate on the issue has
taken place.
In a letter to Nature, published 22nd January, they note the risk of
infectious agents crossing from pigs to human beings and write "given
the potential risk to the public, the issue is first and foremost an ethical
one..an informed public debate is needed so that the public can decide
whether it wishes to consent to clinical xenotransplantation at all and,
if so, under what conditions." Nature's editorial counselled caution,
and another editorial in The Economist on 24th Jan wrote "to allow
any further xenotransplants without a far clearer idea of the potential
risks - and a strong, international system in place for monitoring recipients
- would be folly indeed."
The risk of transfer of pathogens and the potential for a transferring
virus to cause an epidemic has been highlighted by the recent outbreak
of flu originating in chickens in Hong Kong - HIV 2 is also known to have
originated in monkeys. In October 1997 British scientists announced the
discovery of viruses carried by pigs' own DNA which can infect human tissue
and which, according to one researcher may be impossible to eradicate
prior to transplant (New Scientist 18/10/97). Screening for unknown viruses
is an even greater challenge.
As Bach writes, the risk of infection in the general population renders
the issue one of concern to everyone; in effect any human trial constitutes
an experiment on the entire population. For a critically-ill individual
patient offered a xenotransplant in the absence of a human organ, the
risk of infection may appear to be worth taking; the possible consequences
of that decision have far wider ramifications however. It is essential
therefore that an informed public debate precedes any progression to clinical
trials. This is particularly important at present as the UK government's
decision on human trials is expected to be announced within a month.
Of course, many scientists and others consider the unknowns surrounding
xenotransplantation an indication for more animal research. The fact is,
of course, that no animal experiment can prove the safety of animal organs
which, theoretically, could last twenty years in a human being. Even the
smallest immunological difference between humans and experimental animals
could become the gateway for a pathogen. The moral and prudent solutions
to the shortage of organs are prevention of conditions that may lead to
the need for a transplant, improving the supply of usable human organs
and improving the long term success of human transplants.
It is interesting to note that opinion polls have shown some divergence
in attitudes to xenotransplantation between the USA and the European Union.
In the US 75% of people would consider an animal organ for a loved one
if no human organ was available. In the EU only 36% thought the practice
morally acceptable. Most interestingly, the US study found opposition
to xenotransplants strongest among those people with the highest level
of knowledge about it.
No big surprise?
Uncaged Campaigns 28.01.98
Baboons Frozen in Cryogenics Experiments
At the start of the year US scientists announced that they had
successfully resuscitated baboons which had been frozen in ice for several
hours.
By replacing the baboons blood with an artificial plasma while slowly
cooling them down to 1°C, the normal deterioration of the tissues
that would be expected with freezing was prevented. The baboon experiments
follow experiments in which hamsters were resuscitated after seven hours
at 1-2°C with no heartbeat. The number of animals who died before
these "successes" were obtained has not been reported in the
UK press.
These results were announced at the annual meeting of the American Association
of Anti-Ageing Medicine. It is thought that the research could ultimately
lead to the development of techniques to cool human beings in "suspended
animation" for many years, possibly in order to be treated when medical
research discovers treatments for conditions which are incurable at the
time of freezing-or even to allow space travel. Less fantastical potential
uses for the technique, if successful, could include the cooling of trauma
victims, such as soldiers on the battlefield, until more specialised help
is available, and in various kinds of surgery. The research was performed
by Biotime of California.
Although the cooling procedure was carried out under anaesthetic, all
the animals involved must have suffered considerably. Baboons are highly
intelligent animals that normally live in complex social groups: the isolation
and confinement of laboratory conditions must inevitably be extremely
stressful for them. Assessing any fine neurological or even psychological
damage that may occur in the freezing process is clearly extremely difficult,
if not impossible, to do using animals so if this technique ever reaches
human beings the first patients will be undergoing a substantial risk.
The question remains, of course, whether it ever will reach that stage.
The technique was presented and widely reported as a kind of sci-fi miracle,
promising life-saving results. In reality, the technical, ethical and
financial obstacles to suspended animation for human beings makes it unlikely
it will ever be used for that purpose - there is a massive difference
between freezing an animal in a laboratory for a very short period and
a usable, practical, economically-viable medical technique for human beings.
What may result is a useful aid to certain types of surgery. The hype
suggests that medical technology and the animal experiments will, as ever,
change the world. The reality is that there have been no world-changing
developments in medicine for many years, despite millions of animal experiments.
This is just another example of animal suffering to prove simply that
something can be done.
Uncaged Campaigns 28.01.98
Five Hundred Descend On Oxfordshire Cat Farm
Hillgrove Farm near Witney, Oxfordshire, and its proprietors,
the Browns, have been the subject of an intense campaign as a result of
their business of breeding cats for vivisection. Sunday 18th January 1998
saw the largest demonstration at Hillgrove. Around 500 people from around
the country gathered to voice their opposition to Hillgrove's trade in
cats.
After encircling the farm, protesters blocked the road and held a spontaneous
march towards Witney town centre. In the meantime, other protesters visited
the home of an employee of Hillgrove. The pressure on Hillgrove and the
Browns is building. It is reported that their other business interests
are suffering: apparently, their Bed & Breakfast business has ceased
and the Caravan Club have decided not to visit Hillgrove any more. Protesters
receive strong support from local people unhappy with Hillgrove's trade
in cats, with many motorists sounding their horns in support of the demonstrators
at the roadside, and local residents applauding the march towards Witney.
The police presence was less numerous than for the demo in November.
Not what one would have expected had one believed media reports from November's
demo of the police being pelted with missiles by hundreds of people! For
the most part, the demonstration passed off peacefully apart from some
aggressive behaviour by mounted police. However, reports have been received
of one person being beaten up by the police at the home visit, in addition
to some petty arrests.
The bill for policing Hillgrove Farm now stands at some £300,000.
How much longer can Hillgrove continue to breed cats to sell to vivisection
laboratories? With the campaign's momentum increasing, that bill will
continue to rise inexorably.
The media bias continues as well. BBC Thames Valley Radio put out an
outrageous report on their news bulletin at 17.00 hours on the day of
the demo. They described Farmer Brown as breeding cats for "medical
experiments", thereby giving the false impression that the torture
of the cats brings direct health benefits for humans. There is no such
thing as a "medical" experiment on a nonhuman animal. They also
quoted Farmer Brown's claim that the animals do not endure any "unnecessary
suffering", without allowing the Hillgrove Campaign to give the facts
about the fate of the cats. Finally, the report contained an interview
with a protester described as "dreadlocked". This can only be
interpreted as a crass attempt to reinforce stereotypes and prejudices
among their less enlightend listeners. The whole piece was intrinsically
biased, with the overall aim being to discredit the campaign as much as
possible. BBC TV News bulletins took a similar line.
Action!
- It is of the utmost importance that media bias does not go unchallenged.
Complain to BBC Thames Valley Radio, PO Box 952, Oxford OX2 7YL, or
telephone them on 01645 311444. Also complain to BBC Programme Complaints
Unit, BBC Broadcasting House, London W1A 1AA.
- For background information on Hillgrove Farm's cat breeding business,
updates on the progress of the campaign and dates of future events,
contact SAVE THE HILLGROVE CATS, Box CB, 111 Magdalen Road, Oxford OX4
1RQ.
Uncaged Campaigns 19.01.98
MOD Experiments Kill 11,000 Animals In 1996
A written parliamentary answer has provided much sought information
about the use of animals in military experiments. 11 221 animals procedures
were performed on a range of animals including primates, in 1996, although
the MOD is refusing, unsurprisingly, to disclose the nature of those procedures.
This figure compares with about 4 500 procedures in 1992. Six of the MOD's
project licences (out of a total of 36) allow "substantial"
suffering to be inflicted, the maximum level permitted under British law.
John Chisholm, director of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency,
based at Porton Down stated that the increase in numbers of experiments
since 1992 was partly due to research designed to bolster the UK's "biological
defence capability," and there is concern that a new research programme
into "Gulf War Syndrome" may lead to further increases in the
coming year.
Recent American animal experiments completely failed to find a cause
for the syndrome.
The Government stated prior to the election that they would not allow
animals to be used for the "testing and development of weapons"
but secrecy surrounds the whole area, making evaluation of the Government's
adherence to this promise impossible. "Defensive" work such
as that described with biological weapons would be exempt from that prohibition,
making the value of the promise questionable in the extreme, even if it
could be assessed.
Uncaged Campaigns 08.12.97
Renewed Call for Royal Commission on Animal Experiments Following Withdrawal
of Diabetic Drug
Uncaged Campaigns have called on the Government to honour its pre-election
promise to have a Royal Commission of Enquiry into animal experiments
in the light of the withdrawal of troglitazone, as widely reported on
2nd December. While much concern has focussed recently on the use of animals
for cosmetic and military testing, medical experimentation has escaped
censure because of its presumed utility to human beings. The withdrawal
of Glaxo-Wellcome's troglitazone, a drug intended for the treatment of
diabetes, is clear evidence that the use of animals in the testing of
medicines is not justified by the results.
Like all other medicines on sale in this country troglitazone was tested
on animals prior to human trials yet, according to Glaxo's data sheet,
although a number of other potential problems were identified, no "data
of clinical significance" about liver effects was obtained in this
way. 130 cases of liver damage and six deaths have been linked to its
use worldwide in just three months on sale. This drug joins Opren and
Eraldin amongst others on the long list of those deemed apparently safe
following animal tests which have then proved dangerous to human beings.
2.7 million animals at least were used in experiments in this country
last year, the majority in the development and safety testing of medicines.
This procedure is scientifically flawed and completely outdated, as the
events surrounding troglitazone show. The Labour Party promised a Royal
Commission on animal experiments before the election, presumably in recognition
of the need for a fundamental re-evaluation of their moral justification
and scientific validity. The tragic consequences of the inaccuracy of
animal experiments in the case of troglitazone demonstrate once again
the urgent need for such an investigation.
Spokesperson for Uncaged Campaigns, Alistair Currie said:
"The case for the abolition of animal testing of medicines
and its replacement with more modern and sensitive techniques is now
overwhelming. An informed public debate about the whole issue is essential.
We hope that the Government can show that they are willing to respond
to a pressing need and not just to newspaper headlines on this issue.
We are calling on them to honour the promise they made, in the recognition
that human and animal welfare is at stake and we trust that they will
not sacrifice it in the face of pressure from vested interests, or in
the mistaken belief that they have conceded enough on animal issues.
Inflexibility is not the same as strength."
Uncaged Campaigns 08.12.97 |
