When researching this article, I read extensively about the supposed benefits of vivisection and of the drawbacks- I’ve already mentioned the suffering of the animals (and the human character), so I’ll move on to scientific “advancement” (as they call it).
During my visit at the Coulston website, I noticed that they boasted “Coulston Foundation is still in the forefront of developing new techniques for animal care and animal housing.” According to the above-mentioned incidents and testimonies, this is a lie. Then they continue to say that “Coulston Foundation has participated in the development and testing of DNA-based vaccine against HIV. This development alone could save millions of human and animal lives in the future.” Firstly, I am not aware of too many animals suffering from AIDS. Secondly, after 2 decades of severe animal cruelty, they’ve not found anything.
The Foundation is participating in research for a back pain remedy- again, nothing conclusive.
The Coulston Foundation also houses the National Center for the Study of Aging in Chimpanzees. They write that “Older persons are more prone to problems such as gait (walking) disturbances, falling down and injuring oneself, mental confusion, and various pains and infections. Many afflictions of aging persons are present in aging chimpanzees.” (I mean both my mom and her 19 year-old cat are forgetful… so what?) The Coulston Foundation goes on to say that “In the near future, it will be possible for today’s children to face retirement years without the worries associated with growing older. It will be possible for older people to work longer or explore entire new careers if they choose.”
If this doesn’t convince you, such foundations will always glorify the (non-)fact that animals were very valuable in finding a vaccine for polio. Not only was this long ago (20’s and 30’s), but we are also realizing that this is not even true. Studies on monkeys actually led to gross misconceptions that delayed the fight against poliomyelitis. Primate studies actually contradicted previous human studies- which were accurate, resulting in a misdirection of preventative measures, thereby delaying the development of a vaccine.
In the 60’s, scientists deduced from several animal experiments that inhaled tobacco smoke did not cause cancer. For many years afterward, the tobacco lobby was able to use these studies to delay government warnings and to discourage doctors from intervening in their patient’s smoking habits.* (source: Scientific American: Feb. 97)
Many animals, particularly rats and mice, synthesize within their bodies approximately 100 times the recommended daily allowance for humans of vitamin C, which is believed to help the body ward off cancer.* (source: Scientific American: Feb. 97) So much for cancer research.
For the most part, test results vary from species to species- this does exclude human to animal. David Salsburg of Pfizer Central Research has noted that out of 19 cancer-causing chemicals in humans, only 7 caused cancer in mice and rats (using standards set by the National Cancer Institute). That’s definitely not a match.
And as for heart disease, they cannot even begin to consider any tests valid (since “right and wrong” are non-issues) until their animal subjects are eating 5 hamburgers a week, as does the average American.
Other areas where animal research has grossly misled science (and then science of course, misleads the public because they really shouldn’t be doing what they’re doing) are diabetes, stroke, and birth defects.