UC Davis "Monkey Farm" Wants Expansion : LA IMC

The UC Davis Primate Center is listed as the fourth worst laboratory in the United States by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA.

UC-Davis subjects more primates to painful and distressing experiments than any other U.S. university: More than 2,000 primates were used there in 2004. In addition to this unparalleled exploitation of primates, more than 500 dogs, 400 cats, 450 rabbits, and 250 horses were used in painful or distressing experiments at UC-Davis in 2004.

In Febuary 2002, a monkey was killed by a propeller. In 2004, seven long-tailed Macaque research monkeys were killed when they were left in a 175 degree room for hours. In 2006, Cheri Stevens, a former employee of the center, testified that primate center technicians intentionally malnourish, euthanize and mistreat the approximately 4,700 monkeys at the center, and even that one worker had trained a monkey to masturbate

It is clear that the center is sadistic, unscientific, and immoral. We urge the UC regents to vote no on the expansion.

UCD Primate Research Center; Cruel, Ineffective and Wasteful

Several Reasons to Shut Down UCDPRC

This will take too long to write in paragraph format, so here's a list of reasons to shut down UCD's Primate Research Center and School of Comparative Medicine;

1. Cruelty to sentient beings that are humanity's closest relatives and possibly our only chance for survival from our self imposed holocaust of toxic carcinogens..

http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

2. Research results from primate testing is often inaccurate and unreliable. Although primates are our closest relatives, their body and brain is different enough that the term 'comparative' is a misnomer. What works on a non-human primate test subject (often macaques) may not work on a human medical patient and vice versa..

online example;

"They point out that drug therapies can have vastly different effects on different species. Strychnine, for example, kills people but not monkeys, and Belladonna is deadly to humans yet harmless to rabbits. Research findings in other species cannot therefore be automatically transposed to people.

We have witnessed many times the tragic consequences of blind faith in animal testing. The anti-rheumatic drug Opren killed 76 people and caused serious illness to 3,500 others, despite having been declared safe after seven years of animal research.

Likewise, thousands of people with heart trouble suffered adversely after taking the animal-vetted drug, Eraldin. Since then, further experimentation has failed to find a single species that reacts to Eraldin in the same way as humans.

Undeterred, the big pharmaceutical corporations have cynically exploited public fears concerning life-threatening diseases like cancer and HIV to demand more money for animal experiments and to oppose animal welfare legislation restricting their activities."

read on @;

http://www.abolitionist-online.com/article-issue05_why.animal.research.peter-tatchell.shtml

3. Removal of primates for captive research testing from their native tropical rainforest habitat alters the ecosystem as many primates are vital to plant/tree species as seed distribution from fecal droppings. Many of these plants that primates help transport to new locations within the rainforest may one day provide humanity with medicinal components to the very illnesses we seek to cure by testing the primates. In other words, removal of primates to captive research facilities like UCD is like a doctor, shaman shooting themselves in the foot before operating on a patient..

research abstract;

"The role of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) as seed dispersers in the Kibale Forest Reserve of western Uganda was assessed by analysing 1849 dung samples from two chimpanzee communities and by conducting germination trials on dispersed and non-dispersed seeds. Of the chimpanzee dung samples, 98.5% contained seeds, and fig seeds were the most common. The number of large seeds (>2 mm) per dung sample was often high, even for species with a relatively large seed. For example, Mimusops bagshawei has a 15-mm diameter seed and had an average of 26.5 seeds per sample. In addition, many seed species were found in the dung repeatedly over several months. Germination trials demonstrated that the species of seed commonly collected from dung were viable. Comparisons of both the rate and success of germination of chimpanzee-dispersed seeds with seeds collected directly from the parent trees, showed that gut passage increased the speed and probability of germination. The number of large seeds dispersed by the chimpanzee population was estimated at 369 large seeds km$^{-1}$ day$^{-1}$. We suggest that in Kibale, chimpanzees may play a more significant role in primary seed dispersal than implied by their low numbers and biomass."

article found @;

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0266-4674(199408)10%3A3%3C355%3ASDBFCI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z

4. Many of the test results from animal research are exploited by pharma and/or chemical corporations to speed additional products onto the consumer markets. Majority of animal research is NOT for the purpose of life saving cures, instead is used to get the latest sleeping pill, diet pill or other 'quick fix' enhancement drug to consumers without any real data on side effects on humans..

5. In many cases scientists already have known for decades that certain products in our environment are directly correlated with serious illness in humans (ie., cancer, leukemia, etc..) and these products are; pesticides, nuclear radiation, petrochemical emissions, etc.. If we really care about people we would have ceased exposure of humans to these dangerous chemicals years ago, not continue to expose people to toxins in the environment and then use the higher rates of cancer to justify cruel and inaccurate experiments on animals..

another example;

"Within Texas, Mobil's emissions are 385% above the state's refinery average. Residents in the nearby neighborhoods have been complaining of headaches, nausea, eye and nose irritation, and other health problems for years. Research by neighbors brought additional problems to light; Rev. Malveaux said the neighbors were shocked to learn that "when there was threat of hurricane or bad weather that the refineries were in threat of losing petroleum which meant they have to dump all of their waste product in the storm drains." He summed up the attitude of many of the neighbors by saying, "Once we got to asking questions, we found out there was more information being hidden from us than there was being given to us." While four enforcement orders and penalties were issued from 1987 to 1993, no further enforcement orders have been issued since. Unfortunately, the violations and unhealthy emissions continue to worsen."

read on @;

http://www.txpeer.org/toxictour/beaumont.html

6. The amount of money UCD is wasting on the maintenence of their primate research facility could instead be used for; alternative health and nutrition research on humans, non-toxic organic gardening (ie., eliminate carcinogenic pesticides), ethical ethnobotany that values human symbiosis in ecosystems, etc..

7. Human stem cell research more accurate!!

Human stem cell research is far more accurate and far less cruel than animal testing. Perhaps the accuracy of the testing would result in corporations avoiding this type of research? Those rats, dogs and primates have different levels of resistance than do humans. Human stem cell research is non-invasive and tests the effects of synthetic products on human systems..

Why religious fundamentalists oppose human stem cell research is a result of prefix 'embyronic' being overplayed by media. The embyro itself isn't being wasted in this process, yet not all human stem cell research is even embryonic. In addition, in vitro embyros are not removed from a human body. There are other forms of human stem cell research that don't rely on embyros..

background on human stem cell ban;

Embryonic stem cells, taken from surplus eggs produced by in-vitro fertilization, may provide replacement cells for damaged or diseased organs because they have the potential to grow into any type of tissue. Fetal or adult stem cells, which are taken from umbilical cords or bone marrow, have limited uses because they reproduce more slowly and may already have specialized.

"Stem cells could improve the human lot enormously,'' says Moulton, 54, founder of Alchemy Partners in London, which manages 2.3 billion pounds of assets. "The pace needs stepping up.''

Bush Ban

Bush banned the use of federal funds for new embryonic stem cell experiments on Aug. 9, 2001, limiting scientists who get government money to experiments on previously created cell lines. Lawsuits and political wrangling have stalled efforts to raise state money for research in California, New Jersey and Wisconsin.

The Bush administration's policy is driven by political debts to conservative groups, who oppose the destruction of embryos on ethical grounds, says Mark Frankel, director of the scientific freedom and responsibility program at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington.

"This administration wears its religious beliefs on its sleeve at times,'' Frankel says. "Now you have a patchwork of different policies with different states. It's going to add to the confusion and provoke a brain drain.''

human stem cell research could render animal research obsolete;

"Stem cell research may also reduce the need for animal testing, currently required before drugs are tested on humans, and speed up development of medicines. A new treatment typically takes eight to 10 years to gain approval from U.S. regulators.

"Creating cell lines that can be used by pharmaceutical companies for drug testing is a very realizable goal that exists now,'' says Josh Brickman, a New York-born researcher now working at Institute for Stem Cell Science in Edinburgh."

entire article @;

http://www.curesforcalifornia.com/page.php?id=176

What we don't want is for biotech corporations to take advantage of human stem cell research for genetic engineering and military purposes. Not only do medical professionals need to battle the religious right who seeks to outlaw stem cell, we need to prevent biotech and military from hijacking human stem cell research for destructive of exploitative purposes..

We can contrast this with the genetic engineering in the US compared with seemingly similar evolutionary hybrid breeding programs of N-fixing soil microbes in Cuba. The GE research in the US is mostly used by Monsanto and other biotech corporations for profit (DNA id engineered for compatability with pesticides) monoculture cash crops or by the military (ie., Ft. Detrick, Maryland) for bioweapons purpose. Not only do Cuban gardens excel in organic bioethical methods, their hybrid breeding methods are safer, more accurate & more ethical than GE research as they don't cross the species boundary..

Back the the debate on human stem cell research. There is no legitimate reason for the religious right to oppose in vitro human stem cell research. The source of the ban on human stem cell research is the GW Bush regime's religious fundamentalist campaign contributers like Pat Robertson and ilk..

Focus on the Family, Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network all promote false views that the embryo used for testing is already fully developed into a human. This is the same debate with pro-choice activists about a women's right to choose an abortion during the first few days of an unwanted pregnancy. The fallacy is in proscribing human attributes to several small cells, visible only by microscope..

Another myth is that there would need to be a great harvet of embryos in the near future. There are embyros in liquid nitrogen storage that would go to waste if they are not used for stem cell research purposes. The current exsisting lines of human stem cells would be greatly improved if only scientists were allowed to work with the already frozen embryos in cold storage..

background on stem cells;

"These are sometimes called "pre-embryos." They have no brain, central nervous system, mouth, heart, lungs, or other internal organs. They have no organs to see, hear, touch, taste; they lack a body, head, arms, legs; they have no self awareness, memory, thought processes, or consciousness. They are smaller than a pin-prick. They consist of a number of identical, undifferentiated cells containing human DNA. They do have the potential to grow into fetuses and become newborn babies. Many, probably most, pro-lifers believe that they are human persons with souls. Skeptics feel that souls do not exist -- in embryos, fetuses, newborns, children or adults.

There is no simple way to dispose of the excess embryos. Occasionally, a couple will need to go back for a second try at achieving a pregnancy. Two to four additional embryos are removed from storage, thawed out, and implanted. But even when that happens, perhaps 16 of the couple's ova will remain in storage. There is currently no simple way of handling the unneeded embryos:

Fertile couples have children on their own, and have no need of frozen embryos.

Infertile couples have a number of options: They might have the clinic implant in the woman's uterus an embryo formed from her partners sperm and either her ovum or the ovum of another woman. Frozen embryos would only be needed if the original embryos did not produce an embryo.

The woman may be artificially inseminated with sperm from a stranger in order that the resultant child will genetically be partly her own. There would be no need to create embryos in the lab.

The couple may accept a surplus frozen embryo formed by strangers' ovum and sperm, and left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures. This is called "embryo adoption." At this time, very few couples find this alternative acceptable.

If a woman without a male partner wishes to become pregnant, then she will normally want to be artificially inseminated. Again, there is no need for frozen embryo.

The surplus embryos will almost all be eventually be destroyed, even if it happens accidentally, decades later, due to equipment malfunction or human error.

Research on surplus embryos in government labs is currently suspended. But if it were to be re-authorized, then researchers could remove some of these embryos from liquid nitrogen storage, thaw them out, and allow them to grow to the blastocyst stage. This consists of a collection of 100 to 300 undifferentiated cells, still lacking a brain, central nervous system, mouth, and other factors as described above. The stem cells would then be extracted, killing the embryo in the process.

If an artificial womb were developed, these embryos could be thawed out and allowed to develop into newborns. There are many more North American couples willing to adopt babies than there are embryos in the medical freezers. However, development of an artificial womb has its own unique ethical concerns.

Some scientists reason that the unneeded surplus embryos should be used to benefit humanity rather than be simply discarded. Many pro-lifers regard these surplus frozen embryos as actual human persons with souls, deserving of protection, even if there is no practical way to have them develop into a fetus and later become a newborn."

read on @;

http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem1.htm

No coincidence here, the same people of the religious right who brought you the apartheid wall of Zionist Israel are also promoting the ban on any human stem cell research, including in vitro. Oh yeah, and isn't this the same wiseguy who (on CBN) called for the assassination of (popularly elected, unlike GW Bush) Venezualan President Hugo Chavez??

"Pat Robertson, host of Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club and founder of the Christian Coalition of America, called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

From the August 22 broadcast of The 700 Club:

ROBERTSON: There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war."

read on @;

http://mediamatters.org/items/200508220006

So here's a question; How is it that this Pat Robertson character who calls for the assassination of another nation's elected leader is the most influential voice on our own nation's policy on human stem cell research??

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

Original Cities

Surviving Cities

UC Davis "Monkey Farm" Wants Expansion

regardin UCdavis