Antivivisectionists have long tried to portray the use of animals in defence research as some kind of horrific evil. In fact, this type of research is overwhelmingly about trying to alleviate the suffering of people who have been injured by weapons—either directly in combat or as civilians. This includes people who have been attacked by conventional weapons, of course. But there is currently an emphasis on defensive measures against chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) weapons.

The Ministry of Defence has just published for the first-time a strategy for defence technology. It states that the long term objective is to ‘identify generic medical countermeasures against all toxic and infectious agents that may be used as CBRN weapons. We recognise that this is ambitious so in the short term (5-10 years), some focus will remain on specific solutions such as vaccines and anti-toxins against particular agents of concern’.

Inevitably the use of animals will remain a vital part of this strategy. The document states that:

Medical countermeasures research, in common with the majority of hazard assessment research, will rely heavily on data derived from animal experiments for the foreseeable future… As part of an integrated approach to CBRN medical countermeasures research, MOD will pursue reduction, refinement and replacement of animal experimentation as well as exploiting developments in academia and industry in this regard’.

The use of animals in this area of research still falls under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and must be properly justified. Some MPs have been agitating against defence testing on animals. They might want to spend some time thinking about the possible victims of future terrorist attacks before they oppose something just because it sounds distasteful.