The Seattle PI has published yet another editorial piece regarding the animal experimentation at the UW, including their ongoing probation with their accrediting agency, and investigations and criticisms from governmental investigators.
The PI begins by addressing the President and The Regents of the UW. The piece goes on to talk about the billions of dollars (and yes that's billions with a B) that the university has in its coffers:
“Some degree of animal experimentation figures into grants involving $250 million or more. It was institutionally neglectful or worse to let some facilities become so derelict as to prompt replacement demands from the national accrediting organization." [emphasis added]
The board is not about to let the U get away with actions it apparently thinks are despicable. The language is strong - and rightfully so. See the full text here:
Animal Research: Make the Grade .
Aug 26, 2007
| [+/-] |
Sneak peek: Editorial board on animal experiments and facilities at UW |
Mar 11, 2007
| [+/-] |
Sneak Peek: Wild rhesus monkeys taken in Nepal |
Monkeys captured for vaccine research
The research center has taken permission from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC) to capture 50 monkeys including five male, according to him.
The team has trapped 20 monkeys within three days from Bhutandevi area. Nine of them have been sent to Kathmandu, while the remaining are to be sent on Saturday, he said.
There are already 80 rhesus monkeys at the breeding center of the research center in Kathmandu, Khadka said. DNPWC is paid Rs 25,000 for each monkey captured and used for the research, he said.
Full text available at South Asian Media Net: Monkeys captured for vaccine research
Mar 1, 2007
| [+/-] |
University of Washington On Probation (March 1, 2007) |
University of Washington On Probation (March 1, 2007)
Highlights of the nine-page letter of probation from the accrediting agency are noted in this online article. They included:
"Serious deficiencies that had the potential to negatively impact the health, well-being, and safety of animals and humans were not being identified during the facility evaluations." (p. 2)
"Deficiencies that were identified were not classified as significant or minor, and no time frame for corrections [was] detailed." (p. 2)
"None of the laboratories where animals were housed had emergency power or environmental alarms." (p. 3)
The letter also included concerns about widespread overcrowding, unsanitary and unsafe conditions in rooms and cages where animals were kept, and a host of other serious risks for animals and workers at the UW.
Feb 16, 2007
| [+/-] |
Not ready to make nice |
The UW is seeking sympathy for the state of its animal facilities and that animal suffering that takes place there. Oh yeah. And $20 million dollars. But the Editorial Board at the Seattle PI and local citizens aren't buying it.
One local citizen wrote: "I'll make sure to tell these vivisectors that no, definitely no, emphatically no, I'm 'not ready to make nice', for the mice and for all the animals they hold captive in horrible conditions. I'll let them know that there is no excuse for animal abuse. "
And the PI made this observation: Research on lab animals raises various questions about ethics, humane treatment and safety. The public generally trusts that there are processes in place to assure that the work is the only option, well thought out and conducted with the highest attention to minimizing animals' suffering.
It's discouraging, then, to find the accreditation committee concerned about what it called a "lack of oversight responsibilities."
I'd argue that the word discouraging is at least an understatement. There is no need to be so cautious with words or conclusions. From the animals' perspectives, it is more than discouraging. It is painful, frightening, stressful, oppressive, unjust, cruel, dreadful, etc. etc.
Most people see compassion and integrity as virtues. Most people love animals. Most people abhor suffering. For most people, then, the situation is much more than discouraging; it is offensive.
Feb 12, 2007
| [+/-] |
UW on probation for animal lab violations |
The University of Washington has been put on probation for
widespread violations in its animal laboratory facilities, which
include its Washington Primate Research Center and several other
sites for other animal research.
More from the article:
Debra Durham, a researcher and investigator for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in Seattle, said the university's claims are preposterous and the program suffers from a systemic problem that spans decades.
"I get frustrated with the fact that they push it off as growing pains or shortage of money when animals' lives are on the line," she said.
"If you don't have the infrastructure to take on a task, the responsible thing is not to do it."
Among other findings in the report:
Only a taped line on a hallway floor separated HIV-infected primates and dirty primate cages from workers carrying their lunches to a break room, which "created the potential for humans to be exposed to the health risks associated with non-human primates."
There was no pre-employment medical evaluation or ongoing medical evaluations of lab workers who were routinely exposed to allergens.
On one floor of the Health Sciences Building, "the odor and level of dust in many of the rooms was intense."
The majority of rooms on that floor were "significantly overcrowded, creating the potential for worker injury and inconsistencies in environmental conditions for the animals."
* Read the full article at:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/303462_uwlabtest13.html
Feb 9, 2007
| [+/-] |
Sneak peek: proposed expansion at CNPRC |
"UC Davis proposes to build five new buildings at the California National Primate Research Center west of the main campus. A focused environmental impact report on the project is available for public review.
A public hearing will be Feb. 22 and comments will be accepted through March 7."
Massive expansion at CNPRC - see full text here
Feb 8, 2007
| [+/-] |
Primates' namesake defends abuse at Harvard |
Harvard is one of the wealthiest universities in the country, and yet apparently unable to follow even the most minimal welfare guidelines for animals, i.e. those provided by the Animal Welfare Act.
"Stop Animal Exploitation NOW! (SAEN) cited 32 federal violations by Harvard in a nine-month period. The violations included cases in which a “researcher strangled a primate through negligence, monkeys are deprived of water, rabbits and wallaby’s receive improper anesthesia."
A story in the Harvard student paper, The Crimson, carried the story about SAEN's announcement. A university representative was contacted for response. You will NOT believe the fellow's name: Gibbons. Gibbons? You are kidding me. That's like someone who runs a dry cleaning business being named Bob Grungy, or a dentist named Susie Snagglepuss. He seems convinced that things like pain management or a failing to observe an animal to ensure his safety are unproblematic.
A Harvard Medical School spokesman, Don L. Gibbons, contested the validity of the report, claiming that all but one of the violations were reported because of clerical errors, and did not actually involve animal abuse.
The one exception was the incident of the asphyxiated primate, which Gibbons called “an unfortunate accident.”
A death that could have been prevented if someone would have been paying attention is unfortunate?
In the experiment, a monkey was drinking grape juice through a hose and “loved the grape juice so much, it stuffed the tube down its throat,” Gibbons said.Parched with thirst, desperate for anything to drink...that's no accident, pal.
The researcher could only see the back of the monkey’s head and didn’t realize the monkey was suffocating until it was too late, according to Gibbons.
Feb 5, 2007
| [+/-] |
Biowarfare and baboons |
News item: Biodefense lab needs support of community
The city's top research institutions are preparing to make their case to the Department of Homeland Security later this month about why San Antonio should be the home of a new national laboratory charged with studying the world's most dangerous disease threats.
Well if that doesn't sound delightful, I don't know what could.
Now, it seems, folks are thinking it's a good time to check on community support...or given the opposition mounted in Seattle, Boston and elsewhere, the degree of resistance expected.
For an article about community support, there is surprisingly little content about the community, the experiments already underway, or what kinds of experiments would be undertaken at the proposed facility, i.e. animal experiments. They mention that the new proposal aims to replace the Animal Disease Center in NY, but not much else.
As for what they have to offer, besides a massive collection of chimps, baboons and other monkeys, the project proponents seem to think the social life will be the big draw:
“Jean Patterson, who heads the virology department and BSL-4 lab at Southwest Foundation, said a big selling point for San Antonio will be the community.
"Plum Island is a terrible place to work," Patterson said. "You have to take a ferry. You miss the ferry, you sleep on the lab floor.”
The full article is available online.
Info about SFBR here:
Feb 3, 2007
| [+/-] |
Simians and SAM |
Seattle Weekly writer John Metcalfe looks at some of the most undesirable neighbors in popular and pricey Belltown. Specifically, the new and highly-anticipated sculpture garden built by the Seattle Art Museum (SAM), expected to attract throngs of visitors from all over the world, is juxtaposed with the WaNPRC.For the UW scientists, whose research focuses on developing AIDs vaccines using monkeys, the unveiling of the city's newest tourist amenity coincides with their own renovation plan. The center is hoping to upgrade to Animal Biosafety Level 3, so that it can infect monkeys with more virulent microorganisms.
The explanation of biosafety level 3 is minimal here, and I doubt many will have a point of reference for either of the agents mentioned in the example. However, the word bioterrorism might pique the interest of some:The center is now at a biosafety level of "2 plus," according to center director David Anderson. With the kick up to Level 3, the researchers could be infecting animals with pathogens that have a higher risk of human transmission and pack more wallop, such as tularemia or rabbit fever, which is considered a possible bioterrorism agent and can be spread through the air.
I'm sure the folks who pay top dollar for their pricey waterview condos, hip boutiques and martini bars love the new rabbit fever feature.
There are a few quotes from locals in the article, but the author seems more focused on the views of the undesireable neighbors (a stinky meat processing plant is also featured)." One might think that the invasion of world-renowned sculpture would be inconvenient for an animal- testing facility that tries, through lack of signage, to remain invisible to the general public and animal-rights extremists. (Ecoterrorists set the University of Washington's Center for Urban Horticulture ablaze in 2001, and researchers with the primate center have had protesters show up at their homes.) The park's previous incarnation—by all accounts a fallow, oil-soaked field stalked by perverts and reprobates—was perhaps an ideal neighbor.
But Anderson isn't perturbed by the encroaching international art spotlight and influx of tourists. "We have a very secure building," he says. "With the way some of the animal activists have approached this, we keep a tight lid on it."
I wonder if the "perverts and reprobates" appreciated having vivisectors next door?
Check out the full article in the Seattle Weekly.
Jan 8, 2007
| [+/-] |
Making millions with monkeys |
Tracking down data on failures in transparency and oversight in biosafety, The Sunshine Project has become acquainted with some of the National Primate Research Centers (and affiliated institutions) as well as others that have been criticized for primate experimentation:
"How big is this enterprise? At just one venue, the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research (SFBR) in San Antonio, Tex., there are 6,000 caged chimpanzees, baboons, and other primates, Sunshine reports, whose upkeep alone costs U.S. taxpayers $6-million annually. SFBR genetically engineers monkeys and harbors some of the world's most dangerous viruses such as Ebola and Lassa, authorities state. "
In their 2004 report, Mandate for Failure, TSP named the University of Washington for the most embarrassing moment for biosafety regulators. This dubious distinction came courtesy of its programs for 1918 flu experiments, which took the modified and modest "Texas strain" with genes from the Spanish flu strain (including genes responsible for virulence).
Plans to expose monkeys to 1918 flu at the WaNPRC were dependent upon the retrofitting of labs there, a process which was repeatedly delayed. Progress was apparently too slow for investigators; it seems that the program may now be moved to a Battelle Lab in Ohio. Notably, Battelle is also named in the TSP report for biosafety failures of its own.
Other institutions under the lens for primate experimentation and biosafety failures include the University of California at San Francisco and Wake Forest University.
See the entire piece at opednews.com
Dec 7, 2006
| [+/-] |
WA: UW rents animals for experiments - The Daily of the University of Washington Online |
UW rents animals for experiments - The Daily of the University of Washington Online
A dog will cost you $18.60 per day, while a brooding hen will cost $18.90. Other animals are rented for just a few cents per day.
Primates are "rented" through the Washington National Primate Reseach Center under similar arrangements.
Dec 6, 2006
| [+/-] |
WI: LTEs on Primate Experimentation Museum |
Wisconsin State Journal
Animal testing is outdated technique
Why are those concerned about the exploitation of animals by the research community so often labeled anti- science? As a health-care professional, I care deeply about human health. I also care about the thousands of monkeys living in small, barren cages, removed only to endure the cruelty of man's most painful experiments.
After studying this issue, I am convinced that using animals for predicting human disease has sent researchers - who so boisterously defend the exploitation of animals in the name of scientific progress - down one dead end after another.
---
Dec 3, 2006
Dec 1, 2006
| [+/-] |
proposed lab would test deadly, infectious diseases on animals |
The Badger Herald - Town debates UW proposal: "“So, are we talking about absolutely the worst, the most infectious, terrible diseases in the world coming right here to the heartland?” one female resident asked the panel. "
Local people are not pleased with the University's proposal...see more in the article.
Nov 30, 2006
| [+/-] |
WI: If You Can't Beat 'em, Protest 'em |
madison.com | archives: If You Can't Beat 'em, Protest 'em:
"Now that animal-rights activists have won the right to buy land for a museum next to UW-Madison's primate labs, you have to wonder who's going to visit.
It's hard to imagine dad offering to pack up the kiddies for a fun day at a display of cruelty to animals.
'Wanna go down to the Primate Freedom Project and see the new torture methods?'
'Yeah!'"
Oct 23, 2006
| [+/-] |
Mangabeys saved, Yerkes thwarted |
Associated Press
Researchers Abandon Monkey Experiments
By MIKE STOBBE , 10.23.2006, 08:35 PM
A research center has dropped a controversial proposal to conduct medical experiments on up to 100 endangered African monkeys that are natural carriers of a form of the AIDS virus but do not get sick from it.
The Yerkes National Primate Research Center sought to use sooty mangabey monkeys in a first-of-its kind agreement that required scientists to help conserve the species in the wild.
But Yerkes withdrew the proposal last month in a letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which regulates use of endangered species. Government officials confirmed the decision Monday. Yerkes officials refused to discuss it.
The decision was celebrated by animal-protection groups that feared the Yerkes proposal might be the first of many applications seeking permission to harm endangered species in exchange for financial contributions to conservation programs.
"If the application had been approved, it would have established a dangerous precedent," said Tanya Sanerib, a Washington-based lawyer representing a coalition of animal-protection organizations.
Full article available at:
Researchers Abandon Monkey Experiments - Forbes.com
For backstory, see:
6/5: http://monkeymaven.blogspot.com/2006/06/research-center-applies-for-permit-to.html
6/23: http://monkeymaven.blogspot.com/2006/06/abc-news-goodall-others-oppose.html
7/16: http://monkeymaven.blogspot.com/2006/07/real-monkey-maven-speaks-out-about.html
Oct 12, 2006
May 2, 2006
| [+/-] |
The eyes have it: Part II |
Recently, I mentioned some vision experiments that I dubbed "Life through a keyhole," and "The eyes have it: Part 1." Here is another example of a vision experiment performed on monkeys. Citation: L Kiorpes, C Tang, and JA Movshon (2006) Sensitivity to visual motion in amblyopic macaque monkeys. Vis Neurosci 23(2): 247-56. Summary of experiment: Nine young male rhesus macaques were used in the experiment. In addition, data from nine others used in an earlier study served as normal controls. For four of the experimental monkeys, a “lazy eye” was induced surgically at ~4 weeks of age. Judging from the detail in the methods section, surgery was performed under ketamine sedation rather than anesthesia and no analgesia was mentioned. The other five monkeys were raised wearing a single defocus lens beginning from ~4 weeks of age and ending before 8 months of age. Operant conditioning for visual tasks was used to measure the perception of motion ranging from very small to larger movements. Tests were done for motion at different speeds, visual distances and levels of contrast. General vision tests (like the ones humans get for glasses) were also performed. Results: Under some conditions the lazy eye performed better than the “fellow” eye and under other conditions worse. In some cases, performance was roughly equal. My notes: Funding Acknowledged: National Eye Institutes EY05864 and EY02017. Additional support was provided by an investigatorship from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Also acknowledged RR00166 to the Washington National Primate Research Center.
Affiliations: New York University Center for Neural Science
