Tag Archives: animal testing

Opinion: The Liberal Democrats must support biomedical research

Lab_animal_testingNorman Baker has stated he wants to ban animal research in the UK.

Recently, the first successful Ebola treatment to be used on humans was developed thanks to research in monkeys by combining three monoclonal antibodies which had been harvested from mice. With 1,000 people dead, 2,000 sick, four countries affected, and tens of thousands at risk, this treatment could become a game changer.

But Norman Baker wants to ban animal research in the UK.

Thanks to animal research conducted in the UK, we …

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 24 Comments

The Independent View: Norman Baker’s move to cutting edge science will benefit Britain

Norman Baker’s calls for an end to animal testing were dismissed as “short sighted” in Alasdair Hill’s Lib Dem Voice article (‘Why a ban on animal testing is short-sighted and bad for our knowledge-based economy’).

But the comments made by the Liberal Democrats’ Home Office Minister are welcomed by the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) which has long championed moves towards modern science, benefiting humans and animals alike. However, progress away from animal tests will falter while researchers are working within an outdated system that hinders scientific progress and keeps animal experiments hidden from public scrutiny.

Posted in The Independent View | Also tagged , and | 14 Comments

Opinion: Why a ban on animal testing is short-sighted and bad for our knowledge-based economy

University of the West of England, laboratory, science. Some rights reserved by JiscLast week the BBC reported on a piece of potential Lib Dem policy that was picked up by Lib Dem Voice yesterday; Norman Baker’s desire to ban all animal testing. Now the spurious use of animals with scant regard for animal welfare is of course wrong but an outright ban on this practise shows a lack of understanding of the use of animals in the first place.

Medical research needs animal testing. Norman Baker MP is absolutely correct in that we should be using alternative techniques where they exist and develop them so they can be used in the future. However when testing new drugs there is no way round testing the toxicity and efficacy in animals. Cell-based techniques cannot be used as a complete substitute because we need to see the effects of medicine against a whole organism; the success and dangers of drugs depends on a whole suite of systems and complex biological relationships that can only be seen using whole-organism models. I certainly wouldn’t want to give an experimental drug to human volunteers before it has been tested in animals.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 22 Comments
Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarJeff 18th Oct - 1:35pm
    Allan Brame 17th Oct '19 - 11:44pm: Perhaps the more significant point is that Remain parties did not take the Referendum seriously enough, miscalculating that...
  • User AvatarJeff 18th Oct - 1:32pm
    Arnold Kiel 18th Oct '19 - 12:46pm: The EU, btw. was never an important UK decision-maker, another propaganda-lie you apparently fell for. ‘We cannot afford...
  • User AvatarDennis Wake 18th Oct - 1:09pm
    nigel hunter: Most farmers voted for Brexit so if farms go out of business whose fault is that ? There might be a lot of...
  • User AvatarJames Belchamber 18th Oct - 12:50pm
    Great to see so many people coming out in support of Mark. Couldn't agree more, especially on the issue of focus. We deserve a full-time...
  • User AvatarArnold Kiel 18th Oct - 12:46pm
    John Marriott, any successful democracy makes not only good use of - it also maximises - its solution space. Brexiters have convinced you that only...
  • User AvatarPeter Hirst 18th Oct - 12:37pm
    It's becoming clearer by the minute that Boris Johnson's deal is just a steam roller approach to deliver on his mandate to those who elected...