During the nineteenth century, a new found awareness of animal welfare led to organized efforts that helped pass The Cruelty to Animals Act in Britain in 1849. In December 1875, Frances Power Cobbe, founded the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection (later, the Victorian Street Society), the first organization to campaign against animal experiments. Cobbe would be the founder of other animal advocacy groups including the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. Other parts of the world would also begin the fight against animal cruelty. In 1871, the first vivisection laboratories in the country were at Harvard University, despite opposition from the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA). Various animals’ rights groups formed and tried to outlaw the cruelty practices, they would help pass legislation during the 1890s that outlawed repetition of painful animal experiments for any purpose.
In 1906, after a series of injuries, sicknesses, and deaths, Congress passed the Pure Food and Drug Act (PFDA). Until the 1930’s, doctors lobbied for a crack down on drugs and personal products sold. It wasn’t until after the death nearly 100 people that the public put enough pressure on Congress to strengthen the original PFDA. In 1938, the Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (PFDCA) passed stating that animal testing would be a requirement for all products. Wilson-Sanders notes that as time progressed the testing requirements were “gradually amended to include different species and to last for longer time periods.”
The antivivisection movement did not resurge again until the 1960s. Pepper, a Dalmatian disappeared from a family’s backyard, they searched for the truth and discovered that she had been sold to a hospital that conducted an experiment on her and euthanized her. People wanted new legislation that protected animals and would be monitored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) were brought forth. Congress passed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 making it necessary for animal dealers to be licensed and laboratories regulatory. In 1970 the act was renamed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and covered all warm- blooded animals, a year later rats, mice, and birds were excluded. In 1985, the act was amended again to require that researchers minimize the animal’s pain whenever possible through the use of anesthesia, pain killers, and humane euthanasia. In 1990, it was extended to farm animals.
Around this time Richard Ryder, coined the term speciesism referring to a “widely held belief that the human species is inherently superior to other species and so has rights or privileges that are denied to other sentient animals […] can also be used to describe the oppressive behaviour, cruelty, prejudice and discrimination that are associated with such a belief.” Ryder, after years of inflicting pain on animals through research, Ryder began to work against the evils done to animals by humans. Like many others before and after him, he used his sympathetic imagination to understand the animal’s experience. While in this class, we’ve been challenged not only stand outside ourselves and see how our reactions have affected other earthlings but to also try and place ourselves in the position of those animals who are so often mistreated in order for the human race to achieve a medical or scientific advance of some sort. But are the experiments performed considered essential for the betterment of mankind, is the use of animals even really necessary?
These questions constantly crossed my mind throughout the course especially when considering that we, as humans, try to separate ourselves from animals, why then is it that we try to find out about ourselves through the use of creatures that are different from us. Animal research is an established practice done all over the world that many believe is beneficial to advancements however it is also a horrible experience for the animals partaking in the procedures. As earthlings, we must consider that we are alike and that we are harming a part of ourselves and therefore to protect our own we should get rid of animal research ending animal cruelty and the moral damage that we are causing to ourselves. However this goal cannot be obtained right away, smaller steps must first be taken, the implementation and enforcement of laws has already began in past generations now we must ask ourselves what will we do? I think of the class and the small group of dedicated young men and women and how we could change the treatment of animals, what better way than to start right here on campus.
Built in the summer of 1977, the ARC (Animal Resource Center, previously the Animal Research Center) was originally a 50,000 square foot facility capable of housing 10-15,000 laboratory animals per year. Claiming to be "Seeking progress for all species through research" and located on 2701 Speedway, the “centralized facility permits the most efficient and up-to-date environmental control for sanitation and animal health monitoring. It also has access to a diagnostic laboratory, two complete animal surgery suites, several darkrooms, controlled environment rooms, and a necropsy room.”
The three primary units of the center are veterinary support, husbandry, and administrative services intended to help researchers and their goal. Users of the center include students and faculty from the departments of Anthropology, Chemical, Electrical, and Bio-Engineering, Biochemistry, Kinesiology, Nutrition, Microbiology, Molecular Biology, Psychology, Zoology, and the School of Pharmacy .Since its construction, a 20,000 square foot extension was added with facilities for molecular biology, biohazard, and transgenic research. People in the building of assistance to researchers are fifteen part and full-time animal attendants and technicians, an administrative associate, a facilities manager, a compliance and training manager, and the director whose specialty is lab animal medicine. The mission statement of the ARC states that they will oversee “the care and use of vertebrate animals utilized as part of the research and teaching activities of the University and serves as a source of expertise and support for investigators and the administration on all issues related to laboratory animals.”
The activities performed in the center are pre-approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee whose mission is to “oversee the provisions for the care and well-being of animals used for research and educational purposes at The University of Texas at Austin. The IACUC is also committed to serving the public by ensuring conformance to all legal and ethical standards regarding the use of animals in research.” The facility is not open to everyone, to get into the center you must first fill and print out the ARC record, have it signed by your PI (Principle Investigator), obtain a proximity card from the ID center located in the FAC ID, and take printed form and ID to ARC front office to get card activated. When getting access to the center you must then enter the lobby/office/conference area and in order to go beyond this point you must be escorted by UT faculty member. “ALL visitors must register at the front desk of the ARC prior to entering the animal care areas.”
A limited amount of information regarding the ARC is posted online and few even know that the location exists on campus. These two factors lead me to believe that UT officials are aware of the uproar that would occur if the campus were made aware of the experiments that take place inside. While not much is made public about the projects conducted and several rules and guidelines are in place for researchers to follow, dreadful things still take place daily. In the experience of one of Professor Bump’s students who openly shared his work at the center he testified that the humane treatment of animals is sometimes overlooked for the benefit of research outcomes. “The subjects did not receive sedation or anesthetic as those chemicals would conflict with the aims of the experiment” (553). The results of the experiment were a priority over the treatment of animals. Something must be done, undoubtedly things of this nature take place more often than not and it’s these things that call for action and change. To get the ARC, and the atrocities that go on inside of the building, removed from campus we must first inform individuals about the situation. School officials have either intentionally or unintentionally kept the center out of sight and mind for students, even for those who pass it every day after all there is no sign with its name brightly displayed as is with other buildings on campus.
Simple ways of stopping the problem as individuals are by getting rid of household products that are tested on animals or are produce by harming animals, shopping for cruelty free supplies, or joining an organization that fights for animal rights (377). Students that already participate in organizations geared towards the protection of animals rights would be a great asset to the removal of the ARC since they in turn would further distribute information and be able to help investigate what takes place at the center. A rally in the west mall would be very helpful in getting the word out there to those other people who might care but not be involved with any campus organization. Enabling students to stay motivated, engaged, and propelled by a growing sense of confidence would be a challenge but social gatherings in which to discuss a plan of action for the upcoming semester would help keep people interested in what’s going on. By next semester, after further research has been done and information gathered to be considered a good story, it would be great to get the Daily Texan to write an article on what’s been uncovered. They would also be able to confront school officials more so than students involved in trying to remove the center from campus. It can be assumed that school officials would be reluctant to talk about the matter, this would then cause more support within the community and help enable a stronger voice against the ARC. In about mid October, after talking to officials of SG and other student based groups, I would want to see if anything could be done about presenting a piece of legislation to the campus which would call for the removal of the ARC.
Considered one of the top schools of the nations, UT is thought of as an example to many. To help lead the fight against animal cruelty would encourage other campuses to do the same and cause students to become informed about the laboratories and experiments that take place on their campus. Just looking out for animals can make a big change “In everything you do, try to educate others, stop cruel behaviors, and bring about a revolution in human consciousness” (350). We must stop being selfish and consider those that are harmed daily for no other reason than to answer a question. They are not at fault for the lack of answers and should be treated with more respect. With a few simple changes in ourselves, afterwards our community, and later the world all earthlings can live a peaceful life never worrying of any harm coming their way as many animals who live in fear about being abducted do today.
WORD COUNT WITH QUOTES: 2007
WORD COUNT WITHOUT QUOTES: 1732
Bibliography
"Animal Facility Access Policy ." UTARC. http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/access.pdf
(accessed March 29, 2010).
"General Information ." UTARC . http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/facility.htm (accessed
March 29, 2010).
"IACUC Mission Statement." Office of Research Support . http://www.utexas.edu/research/rsc/iacuc/
about.html (accessed March 29, 2010).
"Research Animals- History ." Libraby Index . http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2180/
Research-Animals-HISTORY.html (accessed March 29, 2010).
"Speciesism ." Richard Ryder . http://www.richardryder.co.uk/speciesism.html (accessed March 29,
2010).
No comments:
Post a Comment