The new animal welfare bill & lab animals.

R

rabshan

Mama Doe

• Feb 24, 2006

• #1

I am furious :evil: :shock: after just hearing that the new animal welfare bill will NOT include those poor animals who are kept in labs :shock: apparently they are excluded from having the "5 freedoms" which are being given to pets :shock: :evil: WHY :?: do they NOT feel do they NOT get frightened should they be denied toys or play time THEY more than any others DESERVE these freedoms for the short time that they are allowed to live in these awful conditions surely something can be done to ammend this act to INCLUDE them :evil: what do you guys think about this :?:

 

rabswood

Wise Old Thumper

• Feb 24, 2006

• #2

I haven't read anything about this?
Are any of the orgs such as BUAV doing anything about it?

Rabswood

 

Tamsin

Administrator

Staff member

• Feb 24, 2006

• #3

Isn't that just because they're covered in different legislation? There is seperate legislation for farm animal etc. as well.

Tam

 

R

rabshan

Mama Doe

• Feb 25, 2006

• #4

the animAL WELFARE BILL & LAB ANIMALS

Yes lab animals are covered by an act that was brought in in 1986 (scientific procedures act) but we have moved on since then we now know that its not right to keep bunnies dogs cats rats & many other creatures in "lab" conditions :shock: how can this act NOT include them :shock: they have a short miserable life filled with pain :shock: IF they have to survive in these conditions then they should be as humane as possible they have a RIGHT to freedom too

 

J

Jack's-Jane

Wise Old Thumper

• Feb 25, 2006

• #5

It makes me sick to think of how lab animals suffer :x :x . I read in the paper that one of the MAIN OFFENDERS in Animal Testing for COSMETICS,L'Oreal, :evil: :evil: is making a bid to take over........THE BODY SHOP!! :shock: Jane and Buns xx

 

Tamsin

Administrator

Staff member

• Feb 25, 2006

• #6

Then that act would need updating, akaik you can't write a new set of legislation that says something different to the other... they have to ammend the orginal otherwise it's confusing as to what applies. It's how the law works.

Maybe they update the other act next.

Tam

 

I

Inimical Me

Wise Old Thumper

• Feb 25, 2006

• #7

JCO said:

It makes me sick to think of how lab animals suffer :x :x . I read in the paper that one of the MAIN OFFENDERS in Animal Testing for COSMETICS,L'Oreal, :evil: :evil: is making a bid to take over........THE BODY SHOP!! :shock: Jane and Buns xx

Click to expand...

:shock: Really?! :shock:

 

T

twilightpagan

Mama Doe

• Feb 26, 2006

• #8

I say ban testing on animals,test on criminals who have commited murder and pedofiles!!!Test on them!!! :twisted:

 

K

KatieB

Warren Scout

• Feb 28, 2006

• #9

That is so true, test on people like that- it might stop them doing these horrifc crimes- would love to see this happen but the human rights people would have a field day :evil:

Notice how they are quick to stand up for 'people' who hurt others but not for animals that are being tortured just so a new lipstick is created.

And the argument that testing on animals for medical purposes is vital is stupid - why wonder whether a new cancer cure will work the same as it did on a rabbit- on a human, test straight onto murders!

Apologies for the ranting it makes me soooooo mad!

 

B

BlackCat

Warren Scout

• Feb 28, 2006

• #10

When it comes to medical testing on animals I believe that in some cases it is necessary, but cosmetic testing is just wrong.

I would love to say yes to the idea of testing on cons but apart from the human rights issues there are many disadvantages including the potential use of illegal substances. You could only test on cons that were kept in solitary :roll: not going to happen.

 

T

twilightpagan

Mama Doe

• Feb 28, 2006

• #11

Why test on innocent animals who havent harmed anyone??
Most of these animals that have and are being tested on will be thrown in a rubbish bag,not even dead and suffering,it gets right up my nose.
These criminals that have been convicted without a doubt and have killed some one,should be tested on,they get off lightly and what about human rights to the family whos relative was murdered??
These sort of criminals have lost there human rights the min they took a life!! Sorry for the rant, :roll: :evil: