HSUS- Vivisection Adversary or just Consultants of P&G? Part 1

Posted in Animal Testing by ALib on the June 19th, 2009

Questionable Pact
Part 1

Procter & Gamble (P&G) and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) have for some time an arrangement that both believe is very beneficial to both of these organizations interests.
Read Part 1.

“Procter and Gamble and The Humane Society of the United States believe by working together we can enhance the likelihood of achieving our common objective of making animal testing for consumer products unnecessary,” comments Dr. Andrew Rowan, executive vice president of operations for The HSUS.

Among their aims are to “promote, develop and raise awareness of alternatives methods”; “promote and expedite the development, validation and regulatory acceptance of nonanimal test methods”; “eliminate any technically unjustified regulatory requirements relating to animal testing” and “engage governments and encourage them to provide sufficient financial support.”

There are some worthwhile aims here. So a win-win situation for all concerned? The “world’s largest consumer products company” receives the

co-operation of the USA’s “largest animal protection organization.”

The HSUS gives awards to P&G and P&G recommends the HSUS. There’s so much back slapping that it is hard to know your back from your front. Is this collaboration questionable?

The first question is why was this collaboration needed? Surely P&G could have carried out all of these aims themselves without the need of HSUS’s endorsement. By aligning themselves with P&G, HSUS have weakened their own position as a neutral “animal protection organization.”


  • Share/Bookmark

HSUS- Vivisection Adversary or just Consultants of P&G? Part 2

Posted in Animal Testing by ALib on the June 19th, 2009

HSUS’s Gain
Part 2

The HSUS are “backed by 10.5 million Americans”. The opportunity to present this collaboration as a “success” and a step forward must be appealing and would help generate more donations.

P&G themselves recommend HSUS which allows HSUS to reach a new group of people who can now call themselves “animal welfarists.” And there is an improved element of respectability, one more multinational organization tipping their hat to the HSUS. But is there a flip side? Does this collaboration harm the movement to end vivisection?

Which brings us to the non human animals that both organizations are keen on saving from experimentation.
A quick look at the HSUS’s website states that the P&G facility in Cincinnati, Ohio

exploited 690 animals in 2004. That’s 290 dogs, 214 Guinea Pigs, 134 Pigs, 5 Rabbits and 6 Weasels/Ferrets/Minks.

Or how about the P&G owned “pet” food company Iams? Their facility in the Paul F Iams Technical Center, Dayton, Ohio tested on 319 animals; 196 Cats and 123 Dogs.
These figures of animals are a tiny fraction of the animals that P&G choose to test their products upon.


  • Share/Bookmark

WWF’s ties with Animal Testing

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the June 18th, 2008

W.W.F. & Vivisection
A big love story

WWF is an environmental organisation set up in 1961. Their goal : “we’re in the business of saving our one and only planet.”
Certainly. But this will not apply to the ones who live in it: elephants, seals, whales (1), and especially the million of animals who die each year from toxicity tests, thanks to the generous help of WWF.

Thousands of species are affected each year by toxic chemicals, which lead to deformities, reproductive problems, etc. These encocrine Disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are synthetic chemicals that interfere with naturally produced hormones.
Many everyday products contain EDCs such as pesticides, phthalates used in plastic, bisphenol A used in the lining of tin cans, etc.

To rid the world of serious chemical threats to wildlife and people - remember, WWF is here to save the planet - WWF thinks that the best way is to call for an increase in toxicity testing.

How ironical is that, when we know that all these chemicals had already been tested on animals in the past and “supposedly” proven safe by the fraudulent vivisection community.

Indeed, WWF has invested on EPA (environmental Protection Agency)’s Endoctrine Disruptor Screening program (EDSP) which goal is to evaluate the effects of industrial chemicals on the human hormonal (or endoctrine) system by looking at the reproductive organs of animals.


  • Share/Bookmark

Bad Medicine, Documentary.

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the February 28th, 2007

The Human and Nonhuman Cost of vivisection.

Bad Medicine is the first UK produced film exposing the true human cost of animal experimentation.

Although many people believe that vivisection is a ‘necessary evil’, essential to the well-being of themselves and their loved ones, the reverse is actually the case; that basing human medicine on the false methodology of animal experimentation is a major cause of untold human suffering and death. Vivisection is also a violations of the rights that nonhuman animals have.

This is the film that the BBC would show you if it were not bed-fellows with the vivisection industry itself, and this film was made in order to go some way to redressing the torrent of pro-vivisection propaganda which has poured forth from the vivisection syndicate and the

industry-beholden media - the BBC in particular - over the past several decades.

The DVD is 45 min long and contains interviews with several doctors such as Dr Monheim - FADALI, Director of DLRM (Doctors and Lawyers for Responsible Medicine), Dr Tony PAGE, author of Vivisection Unveiled, Mat Fraser, actor, and among others, naturopath and BAVA Director Pat RATTIGAN.


  • Share/Bookmark

Pfizer Violates Animals’ Rights.

Posted in General news, Animal Testing by Glô! on the December 27th, 2006

Pfizer’s Rights Violations.

[1] Nonhuman Rights Violations.

Pfizer is a major customer of HLS, the largest contract vivisection lab in Europe, responsible for exploiting, torturing and killing 500 nonhumans a day.

Pfizer-Sandwich Ltd, in Kent, UK, breed as well nonhumans to be used in experiments. The drug Viagra was tested on beagles at their lab in Kent. The experiment involved mutilating dogs’ genitalia and was described as part of an on-going study into how the drug worked: at the time, the drug was already undergoing human trials. The dogs were killed at the end of the experiment.

[3] Human Rights violations.

Pfizer manufactures BEXTRA which is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. It was approved by the FDA in nov 2001 to treat osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and the severe pain associated with menstrual cramping. Pfizer and the FDA were negotiating the inclusion of a black box warning (FDA’s highest alert category) on all Bextra labeling to disclose info about the risks of developing serious skin diseases caused by taking this drug. Other side-effects include cardiovascular risks, heart attack, stroke, toxic epidermal necrolysis, stevens-johnson syndrome.


[1] Pfizer-Sandwitch Ltd
[2] Animal testing :
  . Buav Campaigns
  . Welsh Association of licenced Kennels
[3] viagra side effects :
  . Wikipedia
[4] Bextra
  . a

  • Share/Bookmark

Pfizer Heart Drug widthdrawn From Trials

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the December 26th, 2006

Deaths Halt Development Of Pfizer Heart Drug

On the 02/12, Pfizer, the world’s biggest pharmaceutical company, confirmed the widthdrawal of a new cholesterol- lowering drug, called TORCETRAPIB, from trials, due to an increase rate of mortality from heart attacks and strokes in a trial involving 15,000 patients.

This drug, which was combined with LIPITOR (Atorvastatin calcium) was supposed to raise the levels of good cholesterol in the bloodstream, but in earlier trials it had shown signs of raising blood pressure slightly, which is a risk factor for both heart disease and stroke.

After 15 years of research and $800 million spent to develop this drug, pfizer is in the process of asking the clinical investigators to inform the patients to Stop taking the study medication immediately.

At its recent research and development meeting, Pfizer had highlighted that the results

gathered from the trials and research looked very promising.


  • Share/Bookmark

Vivisection in Rio De Janeiro

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the September 20th, 2006

Help Rio de Janeiro
outlaw vivisection

A law is being argued in Rio De Janeiro that would completely prohibit vivisection and experiments on animals.

This law (projeto de lei 325/2005 - authored by City Councillor Claudio Cavalcanti) was approved by the council in march, but then vetoed by the mayor Cesar Maia. The law will be voted again after the presidential election (october) . It will take 26 votes to overturn the veto.

Activists in Brazil are reaching out to the worldwide animal rights

movement for support.
Claudio Cavalcanti, from Defense of Animals adds: “In case the Mayor’s veto is overturned, this law will represent the liberation of animals from laboratories in the city of Rio de Janeiro and this will set a national and international precedent to end the systematic and continuous torture of millions of animals worldwide.”


  • Share/Bookmark

Juice Tested on Animals

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the September 12th, 2006

Welch’s pledges to end Animal Tests

by the American Anti-Vivisection Society.

In the April 2004 issue of the Activate for Animals, we told our readers that Welch Food, Inc. was funding animal tests to study the possible health benefits of drinking grape juice. They later learned that these experiments included dogs who had their chests cut open and their stomachs filled with grape juice and rats who were poisoned and then fed grape juice, both done to study the effects of Welch’s products on the body. Monkeys and rabbits were also used in experiments. After receiving numerous letters from consumers asking Welch to stop experimenting on animals, and a threat of a boycott from animal protection organizations, Welch recently released a statement saying that it would no longer conduct animal tests.

  • Share/Bookmark

George, Another Victim of Vivisection

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the July 24th, 2006

The Story of Georges.

Kidnapped… Imprisoned… Blinded… Killed by Oxford University.

George was almost certainly kidnapped from his natural habitat. He could have come from a number of different countries; perhaps it was from the tundra of Tanzania or it could have been the sugar plantations of Mauritius or in the jungles of Indonesia and China.

The truth is however, George never got to see that homeland again.
Instead, he ended up inside the laboratories of Oxford University where he was to die after years of exploitation and physical/mental torture by a university vivisector.

The information about George comes from the Oxford University professor who was responsible for violating George’s basic rights. Interestingly, the same professor was investigated by the police in 2004 for cruelty to a monkey he was experimenting on.


  • Share/Bookmark

Red Bull funds Animal Testing

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the July 4th, 2006

Red Bull funds animal testing

An investigation done by the German organisation “Doctors Against Animal Experiments” has revealed that soft drink producer Red Bull has close ties with vivisection by regularly funding animal research projects.

At the university of Vienna, Austria ,during these experiments sponsored by Red Bull, rat babies were drowned. Other rat babies were held under water for 20 minutes to study the late effects of respiratory arrest and oxygen deficit at the time of birth.

The experiments were meant to test long-term damages after a lack of oxygen administration. Pregnant female rat mothers were killed by breaking their necks. The uterus - including the rat babies - was then held under water for 20 minutes. In former experiments, it was tested how long the babies would survive under water. After 21 minutes, 90% of the babies died. After 22 minutes, all died. Rat babies that survived suffered lifelong conduct disorders.

According to Dr. Corina Gericke, spokesperson of Doctors Against Animal Experiments, these experiments are cruel and useless as “the causes of respiratory distress in human infants, so called perinatal asphyxia, which is supposed to be mimicked here, are diverse and also totally different from the laboratory situation. Also the effects of this are already well-known”.

More info:

  • Share/Bookmark

Testing of Drugs on Nigerian Children - Pfizer

Posted in Animal Testing by Glô! on the May 21st, 2006

Pfizer tests on humans and nonhumans animals.

Author: Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today
Article Date: 07 May 2006 - 7:00am (PDT)

During an epidemic in Nigeria in 1996, Pfizer illegally tested an unapproved drug on children with brain infections, says a panel of Nigerian medical experts. According to the report, published in the Sunday (today) edition of the Washington Post, this violated international law. The report was completed five years ago, but never came out in the open.

According to the report, the Nigerian government had not authorised Pfizer to administer Trovan, the unauthorized drug, on 100 children. Trovan was administered to children and babies in Kano, Nigeria. Trovan was an experimental antibiotic drug.

According to the report, three laws were violated:
1. Nigerian Law,
2. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child,
3. The International Declaration of Helsinki related to medical research.


  • Share/Bookmark

l> >