VOICES OF THE VOICELESS

Over the years, some of the most innovative thinkers of the 20th century and beyond have added their voices to the anti vivisection movement in outright condemnation of the barbaric practise of vivisection since its inception over a hundred years ago. Others who have worked hands on in the laboratory have also joined those ranks, offering sound moral and scientific challenges to vivisection based on their own experience of its futility.

More than a century of vivisection has contributed no meaningful discovery in combating any of the major killers of the modern age; some discoveries, which have allegedly been attributable solely to vivisection could have been discovered using alternatives to animals. Yet even were that not so, most of the arguments by both philosophers and scientists opposed to the use of animals in research have tended to the view that regardless of the end product, vivisection is immoral, cruel and barbaric, and renders inhuman those who practise it.

To those of us in 2005 who have been campaigning for some time, a year, let alone a hundred years, is way too long. The Brown Dog statue, which stands in a quiet, secluded corner of Battersea Park in South London, is a monument to the animals who suffered at the hands of vivisectors all those years ago. We must ensure that one day in the very near future, it will also become the monument that represents the end of vivisection and the dawn of a new cruelty-free science. Until that day, not one of us can afford to rest on our laurels.

Though progress seems far too slow at times, we have reason to be proud of the movement’s achievements thus far. There is no doubt that we are making inroads, building on what others have done before us. We are after all, a very young movement that has yet to gain the acceptance of say, the Green Movement; the views we represent require far more radical thinking and a greater change in perception within society than any other, so it is to be expected that their wider acceptance will be a slower process.

The coming months promise to be interesting and hard fought. Whatever advances we make, whatever tactics we choose, we must always remember that for the animals abused in the laboratory, every extra day we fail to secure their freedom can be counted in the number of lives lost – their lives. We would also do well to remember that the humans duped into believing that the torture of animals is pain–free and morally acceptable, and that it will ensure cures can be found to disease, deserve better than to be deceived by those in whom they have put their trust.

Those that defend vivisection never tire of accusing animal rights campaigners of being anti science, and of posing a threat to human life by opposing the torture of animals in laboratories from both ethical and scientific perspectives. Some of the most vociferous condemnation has come from the liberal media who have been manipulated by the vivisection industry into doing their bidding.

Those that practice and advocate vivisection do so from a narrow and rigid perspective, which renders them insensitive to and incapable of reasoning beyond it. Their refusal to think outside the box is to some extent informed by the institutionalised view that holds good in most areas of society, that animals are expendable commodities that exist for the benefit of humanity. Many continue to uphold this belief because they themselves have been led to believe that it is correct and proper to do so, and that their view has the high ground over the ethical considerations surrounding animal exploitation. Breaking this cycle of indoctrination requires intelligence, imagination, compassion and the willingness to use them for the benefit of all. Some in the scientific arena have already taken that courageous step. Sadly, many refuse to do so, whether because they stand to gain personally through its continuance, or merely because they lack the intelligence and imagination to change.

The anti-vivisection movement is shaping history. In future generations, when history comes to judge the moral advancement of our species, 2006 could very well be seen as a significant landmark. As the barriers around the South Parks Rd development are raised higher, balaclava’d figures trim the top with a final festive finishing touch of barbed wire to bring in the New Year. Many will be questioning the image this invokes, resonant as it is of the most abhorrent camps set up during times of war and occupation to seal the fate of those within, and conceal what goes on behind them. But we mark well the implicit message: the growing isolation of those intent on the continuance of vivisection shows that metaphorically, they are under a self-imposed siege. The higher the walls, the more obvious it becomes that they have something to hide, and that is anathema in a society that is meant to stand for openness and democracy. Soon there will be no place for them to hide.

We should take comfort as much from the extreme lengths these people are willing to go to protect their interests as we did from the cessation of building works 18 months ago. As 2005 approaches its end, those who care about the millions of animals that die in vivisection laboratories in this country every year to line the pockets of a few, those who care about free thinking and free speech, should prepare for what is set to be an eventful year in the history of animal rights in this country. We aren’t alone in what we stand for – we have only to read some of the comments made by others who spoke out against vivisection before us to realise that it is only a matter of time before the ranks of those who oppose it will be far greater than those who support it. Our task now is to build towards that future with complete commitment and the certainty that we can and WILL win.

"We cannot solve the problems we have created with the same thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein, PhD (1879 – 1955), who received the Nobel Prize in physics in 1922. His General Theory of Relativity laid the foundation for cosmology and our understanding of physical reality.

"We sacrificed daily from one to three dogs, besides rabbits and other animals, and after four years experience, I am of the opinion that not one of these experiments on animals was justified or necessary."
Dr. George Hoggan (1875), student of Claude Bernard, MD, a leading and ardent vivisectionist. Bernard (1813 — 1878) was France’s most famous physiologist. In his 1865 book, "Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine," Bernard argues that progress in medicine is not possible without animal-based physiological research. He taught that the researcher must not be hampered by the blood and cries of his animal subjects.

"During my medical education … I found vivisection horrible, barbarous and above all unnecessary."
Carl Jung, MD (1875 – 1961), the founder of analytical psychology. His break with Freud is an important event in the history of psychoanalytic thought. Jung stressed the human psyche’s quest for spiritual and archetypal meaning vs. Freud’s emphasis on sex and aggression.

"The inhumanity of science concerns me, as when I was tempted to kill a rare snake that I may ascertain its species. I feel that this is not the means of acquiring true knowledge."
Henry David Thoreau, Journal (1854). Thoreau (1817 — 1862) described himself as "a transcendentalist and natural philosopher." His essay, "Civil Disobedience," influenced both Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

"Vivisection has done little for the art of the doctor at the bedside, but it has done immeasurable harm to the character and mind of the rising generation of doctors." - Dr. Rudolph Hammer, LLD (1909)

"Atrocities are not less atrocities when they occur in laboratories and are called medical research."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950), the 1925 Nobel Laureate for Literature. Best known for his plays and essays, he was a theatre critic, political activist, socialist, and an opponent of war.

"Whenever people say, ‘We mustn’t be sentimental,’ you can take it they are about to do something cruel. And if they add, ‘We must be realistic,’ they mean they are going to make money out of it."
Brigid Brophy (1929 – 1995), English-Irish novelist and playwright.

"We are drowning and suffocating anaesthetized animals in the name of science…. We are producing frustration ulcers in experimental animals under shocking conditions in the name of science…. We are observing animals for weeks, months, even years, under infamous conditions in the name of science…."
Robert Gesell, MD, Professor of Physiology, University of Michigan, speaking to his colleagues in the American Physiological Society (1952)

"I abhor vivisection…. I know of no achievement through vivisection, no scientific discovery that could not have been obtained without such barbarism and cruelty." Charles W. Mayo, MD (1961), son of the co-founder of the Mayo Clinic. Dr. Charles W. Mayo (1898 — 1968) was a skilled surgeon and a member of the Mayo Clinic’s Board of Governors. The Mayo Clinic is consistently ranked among the top three U.S. hospitals.

"Kindness to animals must be taught to our students early in life."
John Ames, MD, (1969)

"Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is ‘Because the animals are like us.’ Ask the experimenters why it is morally ok to experiment on animals, and the answer is: ‘Because the animals are not like us.’ Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction."
Professor Charles R. Magel (1980)

"Giving cancer to laboratory animals has not and will not help us to understand the disease or to treat those persons suffering from it."
Albert Sabin, MD (1986), developer of the live-virus polio vaccine. Sabin (1906 — 1993) was a physician and microbiologist who developed a live-virus polio vaccine that helped curb the spread of the then deadly disease.

"It is totally unconscionable to subject defenceless animals to mutilation and death, just so a company can be the first to market a new shade of nail polish, or a new improved laundry detergent."
Abigail "Dear Abby" Van Buren, testifying before Congress, (1988). Abigail Van Buren is a well-known syndicated advice columnist and author.

"At present it is a rare person that emerges from medical training with his or her humanity intact."
Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 261, p. 2011, (1989)

"It [referring to dog labs] did more to damage my identity as a physician than anything else. I learned nothing physiological. I learned that life is cheap, and that misery can be ignored."
Murry Cohen, MD, (1990s), founding co-chair of the Medical Research Modernization Committee. He has authored numerous books, articles, chapters and letters on animal experimentation, including "Of Pigs, Primates, and Plagues," a scientific critique of xenotransplantation.

"By and large students are taught that it is ethically acceptable to perpetrate, in the name of science, what from the point of view of the animals would certainly qualify as torture. By the time [the students] arrive in the labs they have been programmed to accept the suffering around them."
Jane Goodall, PhD, Through a Window — My 30 Years With the Chimpanzees in Gombe (1990). Dr. Jane Goodall is a world-famous primatologist whose decades of field research in Africa have contributed significantly to our understanding of chimpanzees and humans. She is author of several books and an internationally recognized lecturer.

“What good does it do you to test something [a vaccine] in a monkey? You find five or six years from now that it works in the monkey, and then you test it in humans and you realize that humans behave totally differently from monkeys, so you’ve wasted five years.”
Dr. Mark Feinberg, a leading AIDS researcher.

Disclaimer: The information on this website is for the purpose of legal protest and information only. It should not be used to commit any criminal acts or harassment.