Sometimes you have to take a stand !

1006296_633709039974814_600555514_n

We recently had a bill passed in parliament that in itself wasn’t a bad bill. It puts the onus on manufacturers of party pills to prove the safety of their product before it can be sold here in New Zealand.

What is bad though is that the bill will demand these manufacturers to use animals in testing.

This press release form the

“The Bill now has a clause in it specifically addressing how the government will require the use of animals in the testing to be governed. The new clause contains no new protections for animals to be excluded from the testing that aren’t in the Animal Welfare Act 1999 and we know how meaningless token phrases about ‘welfare’ and ‘suitable alternatives’ are in that Act. All we can know for sure now is that animals will be used and that is appalling” said New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society spokesperson Stephen Manson.

I am outraged !!

We are condoning and  pushing animal testing of products so that people can get high legally.

I am disgusted at our government for this.

And so today…Chevvy and I are marching for the animals. All around New Zealand protests are planned at this insane move from the New Zealand Government which waves itself around as a beacon of animal protection.

Bullshit !!!

Our government makes me ashamed to be a KIWI !!!

Over 300,000 animals are used for testing of products in New Zealand every year.

That’s right.

300,000

EVERY YEAR

There is no excuse for this to happen…especially so that a few people can get high. These same people are desperate to test the drugs themselves…so let them and not the animals.

Now I am off to dress in black and wave our sign. I will let you know how it goes.

2013-07-29 15.59.47

Advertisements

Author: Jo Bryant

I was born in the land of Banjo Paterson, gum trees, and weather extremes. I am a freelance writer. I live in the Bay of Plenty, New Zealand, but still like to claim my Australian heritage. I graduated with a Bachelor of Communications in 2008. I am writing my first novel. I love to write poetry, short stories, and also write for the web. And there is nothing that is on a par with a sunny summer's day spent at Waihi Beach.

25 thoughts on “Sometimes you have to take a stand !”

  1. You may not like this but I agree with using some animals to test for cures for the likes of cancer etc.
    But not for some drug crazed freak so that they can kill themselves, as you say, let them do the testing.

    Like

    1. I don’t like any kind of animal testing Harry…that said I know that in the past it has yielded results in research. However today animal testing is one of the least accurate forms of testing that is available. Usually only approximately 65% accurate where other methods are 80% plus accurate in their results. So to me it is a no brainer…use the more accurate method. But this is insanity. Also in these tests there are substances that are already known to be toxic to dogs…the same substance that is in caffeine and chocolate. So how the hell can any test be reliable. Not only that but they are testing the limits on the animals so that they can later safely test any human subjects. It is cruel and so unnecessary.

      Like

        1. You might be interested in these facts on animal testing Harry.

          (1) Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals.

          (2) According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree only ’5%-25% of the time’.

          (3) 95% of drugs passed by animal tests are immediately discarded as useless or dangerous to humans.

          (4) At least 50 drugs on the market cause cancer in laboratory animals. They are allowed because it is admitted the animal tests are not relevant.

          (5) Procter & Gamble used an artificial musk despite it failing the animal tests, i.e., causing tumours in mice. They said the animal test results were ‘of little relevance for humans’.

          (6) When asked if they agreed that animal experiments can be misleading ‘because of anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans’, 88% of doctors agreed.

          (7) Rats are only 37% effective in identifying what causes cancer to humans. Flipping a coin would be more accurate.

          (8) Rodents are the animals almost always used in cancer research. They never get carcinomas, the human form of cancer, which affects membranes (e.g lung cancer). Their sarcomas affect bone and connecting tissue: the two cannot be compared.

          (9) Up to 90% of animal test results are discarded as they are inapplicable to man.

          (10) The results from animal experiments can be altered by factors such as diet and bedding. Bedding has been identified as giving cancer rates of over 90% and almost nil in the same strain of mice at different locations.

          (11) Sex differences among laboratory animals can cause contradictory results. This does not correspond with humans.

          (12) 9% of anaesthetised animals, intended to recover, die.

          (13) An estimated 83% of substances are metabolised by rats in a different way to humans.

          (14) Attempts to sue the manufacturers of the drug Surgam failed due to the testimony of medical experts that: ‘data from animals could not be extrapolated safely to patients’.

          (15) Lemon juice is a deadly poison, but arsenic, hemlock and botulin are safe according to animal tests.

          (16) Genetically modified animals are not models for human illness. The mdx mouse is supposed to represent muscular dystrophy, but the muscles regenerate without treatment.

          (17) 88% of stillbirths are caused by drugs which are passed as being safe in animal tests, according to a study in Germany.

          (18) 61% of birth defects are caused by drugs passed safe in animal tests, according to the same study. Defect rates are 200 times post war levels.

          (19) One in six patients in hospital are there because of a treatment they have taken.

          (20) In America, 100,000 deaths a year are attributed to medical treatment. In one year 1.5 million people were hospitalised by medical treatment.

          (21) A World Health Organisation study showed children were 14 times more likely to develop measles if they had been vaccinated.

          (22) 40% of patients suffer side effects as a result of prescription treatment.

          (23) Over 200,000 medicines have been released, most of which are now withdrawn. According to the World Health Organisation, only 240 are ‘essential’.

          (24) A German doctors’ congress concluded that 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illness are caused by medicines. All have been animal tested.

          (25) The lifesaving operation for ectopic pregnancies was delayed 40 years due to vivisection.

          (26) According to the Royal Commission into vivisection (1912), ‘The discovery of anaesthetics owes nothing to experiments on animals’. The great Dr Hadwen noted that ‘had animal experiments been relied upon…humanity would have been robbed of this great blessing of anaesthesia’. The vivisector Halsey described the discovery of Fluroxene as ‘one of the most dramatic examples of misleading evidence from animal data’.

          (27) Aspirin fails animal tests, as does digitalis (a heart drug), cancer treatments, insulin (causes animal birth defects), penicillin and other safe medicines. They would have been banned if vivisection were heeded.

          (28) In the court case when the manufacturers of Thalidomide were being tried, they were acquitted after numerous experts agreed that animal tests could not be relied on for human medicine.

          (29) Blood transfusions were delayed 200 years by animal studies, corneal transplants were delayed 90 years.

          (30) Despite many Nobel prizes being awarded to vivisectors, only 45% agree that animal experiments are crucial.

          (31) At least 450 methods exist with which we can replace animal experiments.

          (32) At least thirty-three animals die in laboratories each second worldwide; in the UK, one every four seconds.

          (33) The Director of Research Defence Society, (which exists to defend vivisection) was asked if medical prgress could have been acheived without animal use. His written reply was ‘I am sure it could be’.

          Like

    1. Considering there are over 450 methods which are considered more accurate that do NOT involve animal testing it is both ludicrous and indefensible to still be requiring the use of animals in any type of testing.

      Like

    1. I would like to use the politicians that allowed this in some of these tests. That statement alone is likely to get me watched here in New Zealand soon. Our government is pushing through a bill that will allow New Zealand to spy on its citizens much like the data trawling that Edward Snowden recently showed was happening in America. And we have recently had two cases that really scare me.

      1) A journalist who wrote articles that the Defence Force did not like has had the same Defence Force allegedly spying on him and allegedly tracking his phone calls.

      2) A political journalist has had her phone call information handed to a committee.

      New Zealand is not the clean green land of the free that our government likes to portray to the rest of the world.

      Like

  2. Good for you Jo! More people should stand up against this sort of thing!! Why don’t they “test” it on the the criminals in the jails or do they now have more rights than innocent animals?

    Like

    1. Oh Gilly…New Zealand is not all green and lovely. In its present state there is much that makes me sad about this country. Especially when much of the animal testing is done for stupid reasons such as this.
      For example…this from SAFE, a New Zealand animal welfare group.

      While some research is non invasive, many experiments in this country involve extreme cruelty. The National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC) asks companies to grade their tests as causing ‘little or no impact’ up to ‘very high impact’ (previously referred to as ‘very severe suffering’).

      Animals in the top category will have undergone procedures that cause extreme pain – both mental and physical. Tests may involve conducting major surgeries without the use of anaesthesia, experiments causing them to die from poisoning, severe restrictions on water or food intake, purposeful exposure of conscious animals to lethal extremes of cold, cutting of motor nerves and studies of the effects of chemicals which cause a protracted death with marked distress. If someone did the same to their companion animal dog or cat they would be prosecuted.

      And I recently read this PDF…though it is long I wish everyone who thinks animal testing is okay would read it. It broke my heart and made me angry at the same time.

      Like

    1. So do i. Especially since I read a document on how badly animals suffer here in New Zealand with it. It is shrouded in secrecy and badly managed so the animals are just left to die needlessly, A great majority of the testing done is also duplicate testing that has already proven that the tests are worthless to anyone. Mindless slaughter of innocent lives. New Zealand is going backwards these days in this regard. If the world really knew about New Zealand and our dreadful record with animal welfare it would condemn us outright.

      Like

There are two things I know for certain. One: Bert and Ernie are gay. Two: I want to hear your opinion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s