If ever there was a distasteful campaign, it is the current publicity that the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) is seeking in its opposition to the use of animals for research into illegal drug abuse.
The problems of drug abuse may seem very distant to a group concerned solely with animal rights. Yet for those who are affected—directly and indirectly—they can devastate people’s lives. The scornful approach which the BUAV takes in suggesting that ’health consequences of their use are entirely avoidable‘ says more about the mentality of animal rights campaigners than anything else.
The BUAV fails to explain its totally contradictory approach. On the one hand it describes research using animals into such drug abuse as a ‘complete waste of time’. On the other hand, it states that the funds would be better spent on other relevant facilities, such as ‘improving drug rehabilitation centres’. If this drug use is entirely avoidable, then why is it wrong to research treatments for the problems of illegal drug use, but worthwhile spending money on rehabilitation?
The BUAV states that the government already refuses to issue licences for animal tests on other non-essential products such as tobacco, alcohol, weapons, and cosmetics. It is ibeing economical with the truth. It is true that the testing of such products themselves has been banned. But it is still permissible to administer tobacco and alcohol to research the diseases that are caused by them. This is acknowledged in a press release from the BUAV in 2004 which accepts that ‘researchers are still able to get licences in the UK to test tobacco and alcohol on animals for health related research such as lung cancer, liver disease etc.’
The BUAV has also grossly distorted information that they received from the Medical Research Council (MRC) under a Freedom of Information request. The MRC informed BUAV that it provided a total of £1.6 million over five years to one university for research on addictive drugs. The £10 million figure for expenditure over a decade is a BUAV invention.
The BUAV appears to be getting frustrated that the debate is not going its way. It actually made the absurd claim in a letter to The Guardian that organisations representing researchers are seeking to highlight the activities of ’one or two isolated extremists‘. Presumably the fact that there are many more than ‘one or two’ animal rights extremists are in jail is not a reason for BUAV to check its facts more carefully. It seems that only by resorting to gross distortion and exaggeration can it get the publicity that it needs to feed its fundraising activities.
<Wrap up...>
