Before going into details, could it not be said that experimenting on dogs for any reason is effectively the ultimate betrayal of man’s best friend?
In Dante’s classic “Inferno” (part of the famed Divine Comedy), the ninth and final (worst) circle of Hell is reserved for betrayers who are consumed by Satan himself.
Could it be that the treacherous and cold-hearted sociopaths who carry out these cruel and inhumane experiments should be justifiably condemned to this – or at least a similar – eternal fate?
What tests are used in pharmaceutical experimenting on dogs?
Despite the fact that given the obvious genetic difference between dogs and humans it is scientifically flawed, to say the least, to assume that any results of testing on dogs will extrapolate to humans, Big Pharma remains committed to following this inhuman and barbaric path.
Multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical interests would have you believe that this level of unspeakable suffering of sentient beings is necessary for the good of humanity.
This is clearly anthropocentric, disingenuous and morally indefensible.
The dogs are used to test the effectiveness and safety of pharmaceutical products in a misguided attempt to determine how this will play out with regard to human health. These tests involve feeding the test product to the hapless subject on a daily basis for months to determine and assess any deleterious effects. The test substance may be forced on the dog in a number of unpleasant ways, including:
• As pills in their food
• Force-feeding
• Injection
• Inhalation
The majority of dogs who survive these barbaric tests are subsequently killed so that their organs and bodily tissues may be examined.
Experimenting on dogs – what institutions are implicated?
In addition to the questionable practices of pharmaceutical companies a number of corporate concerns and institutions can be named and shamed for experimenting on dogs – these include:
• Chemical and pesticide companies
• Contract laboratories
• Government owned facilities
• Universities
• Charities – notably the British Heart Foundation
Which breeds of dog are used in these cruel experiments?
According to the American Anti-Vivisection Society between 70,000 and 75,000 dogs are used for research in the United States alone each year. The majority of these dogs are beagles.
In 2022, 4,122 regulated experiments were carried out on dogs in the U.K. Of those experiments, 4,014 were on beagles.
So, what have beagles done to warrant this unspeakable fate?
Purely and simply their docile character. This along with their conveniently housed size – more can be maintained in these laboratory facilities – means they are considered to be convenient and economical experimental test models.
Doesn’t the fact that particularly pleasant dogs are “rewarded” by horrific experimental torture (“legitimate testing”) make the betrayal of “man’s best friend” seem that much worse?
Experimenting on dogs – where do these animals come from?
The vast majority of these unfortunate creatures are purpose-bred to be sold to laboratories. Many thousands are born at breeding facilities run by, what is termed as government licenced “class A dealers”.
An example of this objectionable business is the global company, Marshall BioResources.
These callous bastards run two government approved factory farms in the UK supplying mainly beagle puppies to various institutions for testing. These people have been breeding a wide range of animals for experimental purposes, including beagles, since 1962.
What does life mean for a laboratory dog?
The suffering of these dogs is immense and the painful experiments are only a part of it. This includes the following:
• They are kept isolated and alone in awful steel cages with few, if any, comforts.
• They suffer from loneliness and anxiety – without the companionship of other dogs (let’s not forget the dog is a pack animal) or humans.
• They are able to watch or hear the suffering of other dogs – these may include parents, siblings or offspring.
• They may experience mistreatment through poor handling by inexperienced or callous laboratory staff.
What laws protect dogs used in experiments?
UK legislation
Controls on the use of animals in experimental research were revised in 1986 as the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (ASPA) and nothing has happened to improve the welfare of these unfortunate animals since then.
The Home Office licences all such “scientific” procedures in the UK within the remit of ASPA and defines “procedure” as:
“…any act that may cause an animal a level of pain, suffering or distress equivalent to or greater than the introduction of a hypodermic needle”
They may well refer to establishments that the government deems to have people with “sufficient training, skills and experience”, however what it amounts to is revealed in the above quotation.
U.S. legislation
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is even older than U.K. legislation – coming into being in 1966 – this the only law in the U.S. regulating the treatment of animals in research. This law is woefully inadequate as it effectively offers minimum standards for food, housing and exercise.
A 2014 audit found that within the laboratory environment:
“…animals are not always receiving basic humane care and treatment and, in some cases, pain and distress are not minimized during and after experimental procedures.”
Are there non-animal alternatives to experimenting on dogs?
Even elements of the establishment question the relevance of animal experimentation. The following statement was made in a BMJ review paper:
“The claim that animal experimentation is essential to medical development is not supported by proper, scientific evidence but by opinion and anecdote. Systematic reviews of its effectiveness don’t support the claims made on its behalf” (Pandora Pound et al).
This makes a mockery of the prevailing nonsense that claims that as animal experiments have been in place for centuries at the same point in time as medical progress has been made, they must be necessary. This is a distortion of cause and effect and very flawed scientifically.
Clearly a paradigm shift to considering human-relevant research tools has been long overdue. More appropriate pharmaceutical testing should take place in vitro in the laboratory on human cells or cell lines. Computerised systems could be utilised to interpret and integrate this information using data from human and population studies. Such results would be significantly more relevant to actual humans than data acquired from deeply flawed animal testing.
Unfortunately, such alternatives, at the present time, face a number of establishment obstacles including formal validation and (surprise, surprise) inadequate funding. Interestingly, experimenting on dogs or other animals has not met these hurdles.
What can be done?
As individuals we cannot be effective against governmental bodies and huge corporate concerns. Our best way forward is to support organisations that are equipped and experienced in taking on these callous organisations.
With this in mind, I would encourage you to actively support in any way you can, Cruelty Free International, PETA and Stop Animal Exploitation Now (SAEN).
Acting together, we can facilitate the end of these obscenities.
As a final karmic thought, we can only hope the perpetrators of these brutal, sadistic and callous acts are condemned to something like the ninth circle of Hell!
Please feel free to leave a comment on this article and please share this with anyone you know who may be interested.
“TO BE TRULY FREE – BE PHARMA FREE”