Nobody will condone the methods used by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) activists convicted on Christmas Eve for their attacks on the animal research laboratory Huntingdon Life Sciences and associated companies and individuals. But that should not blind us to the fact that they have a point which deserves much more public attention than it has received so far. We treat animals badly and inflict unnecessary cruelty on them. We may be the dominant species on this planet, but that doesn’t mean we are entitled to brutalise and subject to our pleasure other animal species which also have neural systems, cranial capacity and a desire for life. Yet we do, constantly. We should change our ways in several important respects.

ALF have directed their counter-attack against vivisection. They have a case. The number of animal experiments continues to rise, from 2.6 million a year in 1999 to 3.1 million in 2006. This raises several questions. Are all of these animal tests strictly necessary for research into conquering disease? The answer is clearly No. A significant proportion are used for testing cosmetics, not drugs. Even the drug tests are unreliable when drugs react differently when administered to different animal species, and what may be safe for animals is not necessarily safe for humans, and vice versa. Increasingly tests are used for cloning or genetic modification. The UK uses more animal experiments than any other country in Europe; Germany for example uses only half the UK number. The use of monkeys, though small, is increasing fast; experiments on monkeys amounted to 0.2% in 2005, but that was still 4,652 tests. Above all, there are many alternative techniques available which are far from fully exploited, including computer modelling, testing human cell/tissue cultures, test tube techniques, and far more systematic studies of patients.
Nor is vivisection the only source of unnecessary cruelty to animals. In addition to bloodsports where animals are hunted and killed for human pleasure, factory farming to maximise profit by cramming animals into very small spaces in insanitary conditions is also callous. Only human greed prevents the enforcement of significantly higher welfare standards for animals in captivity, and the UK should take the lead in establishing much higher standards, even unilaterally in the absece of wider EU consent.
Yet another area where the treatment of animals could be much better handled lies in the management of abattoirs. Despite some recent improvements brought about by EU regulation, the slaughter of animals (which vegetarians would anyway abhor and seek to minimise or end) can still undoubtedly be undertaken by more humane procedures.
It is often said that the treatment of the elderly and of criminals marks out how civilised a society is. We should add to that the treatment of animals.

Bookmark to: