A n i m
a l W r i t e s © sm
The
official ANIMAL RIGHTS ONLINE newsletter
Publisher ~ EnglandGal@aol.com
Issue # 02/03/02
Editor
~ JJswans@aol.com
Journalists ~ Park StRanger@aol.com
~ MichelleRivera1@aol.com
~ sbest1@elp.rr.com
THE EIGHT ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE ARE:
1 ~ Why The FDA Requires Animal Testing
2 ~ International Foundation for Ethical Research Alternatives
in Scientific
Research
3 ~ Vegetarian Nutrition
4 ~ AR2002 - Discounted Registration Closes 2/15/02
5 ~ Pet Theft
Awareness Day
6 ~ Drugstore.com
7 ~ Return From the Land of Denial
8 ~ Memorable Quote
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`
~1~
Why The FDA Requires Animal
Testing
Source: http://www.navs.org/index2.cfm?doc=37,140,18,36,,
Dr. Ray Greek
Scientific Advisor, NAVS
President, Americans For Medical Advancement (AFMA)
Pharmaceutical
companies continue to test on animals and the Food and Drug Administration
continues to require it, but not for the reasons you might suspect. It is not
that the information garnered from animal models is necessarily accurate or
predictive, and certainly not that it protects consumers. Often, in fact,
animal-modeled data works to human detriment. Sometimes, drugs are approved too
quickly based on positive results in animals. Then patients who are taking them
fall ill and may die as a result.
So, why does use of the animal model continue in drug development and approval?
The answer has three parts.
Animal models allow pharmaceutical companies to hasten drugs through approval,
thus minimizing the expensive development process that is also fraught with
unforeseeable challenges. That lab animals can be contained, controlled and
monitored renders them ideal little drug factories, and though the drugs
produced may work in the animals, it does not necessarily follow that they will
benefit a completely different species. It just "appears" that it
will. Anita O'Connor of the FDA once said, "most of the animal tests we
accept have never been validated. They evolved over the last twenty years, and
the FDA is comfortable with them." Lab animals do produce hard data upon
which researchers and the FDA can agree. However, the truth is that the data is
really only relevant to the species it depicts.
Second,
animal models furnish pharmaceutical companies with liability protection. If a
drug harms a human, company representatives can testify that it tested safe on
animals. Having done this due diligence often decreases the judgment amount due
the plaintiff. Juries usually cannot understand high-tech tests such as the
in-vitro and computer-modeled techniques that are based on humans. But they do
understand if something kills a rat, it may be harmful for humans, or if a rat
thrives, a human may do likewise. Animal models are a simple solution - too
simple to be accurate. The third reason animal testing continues has to
do with a growing complicity between pharmaceutical companies and the FDA.
Pharmaceutical companies are big campaign finance contributors having given $44
million over the last ten years. FDA scientists who approve drugs or decide
upon regulations are also current, past or future employees of the drug
industry. They are inextricably tied to the industry that they are supposed to
be policing. What this means is that the FDA is effectively financed and
staffed by the pharmaceutical industry. The agency "works for" the
industry, not for consumers, because consumers are not making campaign
contributions; nor are they arbiters of job security.
Rezulin—A Case Study
In recent years, pharmaceutical companies have exerted huge pressure on the
government to speed the drug-approval process. And the government accommodates
them. In 1988, the FDA approved only four percent of new drugs introduced into
the world market. In 1998, the FDA's first-in-the-world approvals spiked to
sixty-six percent. What this means is mammoth domestic sales, which would be
great if the drugs were needed to save lives. But they do not necessarily save
lives, and in some cases, may actually do more harm than good.
In a recent Los Angeles Times article seven drugs approved by the FDA were
withdrawn, cited as suspects in over a thousand deaths. Of these, six were
never proved to offer lifesaving benefits and the seventh, an antibiotic, was
unnecessary because other, safer antibiotics were available. Positive
animal-model results allow FDA personnel the "proof" they require in
order to commend drugs such as these that obviously demand more careful
scrutiny.
Though there are innumerable incidences of animal testing working against
consumer benefit, Warner-Lambert's anti-diabetes drug Rezulin is a glaring
example of the FDA's "fast-track" approval process in action. Rezulin
lowered blood sugar in rats without hurting them.. But according to articles in
the Los Angeles Times, Warner-Lambert also knew Rezulin could compromise the
human liver well before the approval process began. Prior to submitting Rezulin
for FDA review, Warner-Lambert removed a recommendation for monitoring the
liver from the labeling. Had the recommendation remained, it would have slowed
the drug-approval process. Company press and officials also claimed that the
drug was the first anti-diabetic drug to target insulin resistance and that it
was virtually free of side effects. Soon after Warner-Lambert submitted for FDA
review in the summer of 1996, Dr. John L. Gueriguian, the medical officer
assigned to examine it, cited Rezulin's potential to harm the liver and the
heart. Gueriguian also questioned its viability in lowering blood sugar for
patients with adult-onset diabetes.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Dr. Murray M. "Mac" Lumpkin (now
being considered for appointment as FDA commissioner) and Dr. Henry G. Bone
III, chairman of the FDA advisory committee quietly collaborated with
Warner-Lambert. Under pressure from Warner-Lambert, Gueriguian was stripped of
the assignment in November 1996. The FDA staff withheld the existence of
Gueriguian's review from the advisory committee that would decide on the drug,
Warner-Lambert officials did not reveal that liver injuries in patients taking
Rezulin were nearly four times as likely as for those given placebos, and the
FDA approved it in January 1997.
Liver failures occurred immediately. Despite this, Warner-Lambert launched a
nationwide marketing campaign that included sales training seminars with actors
playing physicians. The company became involved in the National Institutes of
Health's nationwide diabetes study. Leading the $150 million study was
Dr. Richard C. Eastman, who also served as a paid consultant to pharmaceutical
companies. Eastman received $78,455 in 1997 from Warner-Lambert alone. The
manufacturer also generated funding or compensation for at least twelve of the
twenty-two scientists selected for the NIH study. Seven obtained up to $300,000
in grants, speakers' fees of $1000 per address, and other stipends. These
researchers instructed physicians nationwide to prescribe this dangerous and
not necessarily effective drug as part of the study - all this under the
auspices of venerable science.
Coincidentally, Warner-Lambert awarded funding that could total fifty million
to Dr. Jerrold M. Olefsky's team at University of California, San Diego.
Olefsky is an inventor of Rezulin. He is also a founding co-chairman of the
National Diabetes Education Initiative, a group established and financed by
Warner-Lambert that also drove physicians to prescribe Rezulin. Meanwhile,
thanks to a slick ad campaign, Rezulin was performing as the Warner-Lambert
mission demanded - "not missing an opportunity to reach the market."
Back at the FDA, re-examination of the drug was sluggish. On the eve of a
hearing to reassess the diabetes pill, the FDA appointed two new members to the
advisory panel. Both had received income during the last two years as leaders
of a diabetes education group funded exclusively by Warner-Lambert and its
Japanese partner. Though Rezulin killed hundreds of people and obliged many
more to undergo liver transplants, Warner-Lambert made over two billion dollars
before it was withdrawn in 2000.
Though reliance on the animal model did not by itself cause this corruption and
tragedy, it very definitely contributed. Eliminate the tool - in this case,
animal testing, and fewer people will die, and researchers will be challenged
to develop more effective and safe means of testing.
Of course, simply stopping the animal testing will not ensure that all new
drugs are safe. But it will help. Pharmaceutical companies and government
officials will have to rely on human-based methods and will hopefully expand
testing to assure consumer health.
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~2~
International Foundation for
Ethical Research Alternatives in Scientific Research
The
International Foundation for Ethical Research (IFER) is pleased to announce the
availability of Graduate Fellowships in Alternatives In Scientific Research.
IFER is dedicated to the development and implementation of scientifically valid
alternatives to the use of animals in research, product testing, and education.
IFER is also committed to programs designed to increase public awareness of
such alternatives. The purpose of these Graduate Fellowships in Alternatives in
Scientific Research is to provide monetary assistance to graduate students whose
programs of study seem likely to have an impact in one or more of these areas.
Awards
The fellowships will provide $12,500 annually in stipendiary support and $2,500
for supplies per year. The fellowships are renewable annually for up to 3
years. Continued funding is dependent on student progress and availability of
funds.
Expectations
In return for funding, IFER expects:
* annual progress reports,
* acknowledgment of support in publications and formal presentations,
* copies of all publications,
* a copy of the thesis or dissertation including a special section
detailing the relevance of the work to IFER's goals and replacement, reduction,
refinement and responsibility (the 4 R's) as they relate to the use of animals
in research, product testing, and education.
In addition, the student's graduate advisory committee must (as possible)
contain one member with particular interest or expertise in animal welfare.
Eligibility
Application is open to students enrolled in Master's and Ph.D. programs in the
sciences, humanities, psychology, and journalism.
Sample Areas of Interest
IFER has supported research in the following areas. However, this list is not
intended to be exhaustive.
* Tissue, cell, and organ cultures
* Clinical studies using animals or humans
* Epidemiological studies
* Enhanced use of existing tissue repositories and patient databases
* Public education
* Computer modeling
Application
Application Deadline March 15
Submit a proposal that meets the following guidelines:
1. Application may be submitted by a faculty member for an identified
student or a student to be named. Graduate student applicants must have an
identified faculty sponsor.
2. Include a descriptive title.
3. Include an abstract of no more than 100 words.
4. Include a brief (no more than 2 typewritten pages) description of the
proposed graduate project and how it will affect the 4 R's directly or enhance
public awareness of the 4 R's.
5. Include a specific description of the proposed project (no more than 2
typewritten pages) including the methods used for evaluation of student
performance and progress and a plan for dissemination of relevant knowledge
during and after performance of the project.
6. Include a bibliography citing relevant source materials.
7. Provide a 2-page curriculum vitae for the faculty sponsor.
8. Provide a brief description of your organization and the facilities
available for this project.
Our greatest interest is in how the proposed project will enhance the student's
involvement in issues of animal welfare and how the project's outcome will
affect the use of animals in research, product testing, and education. Please
keep this in mind when preparing your application, and please be specific.
Send application materials to:
Animal Welfare Fellowships
The International Foundation for Ethical Research
53 West Jackson Boulevard
Suite 1552
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Further information may be obtained from Mr. Peter O'Donovan, Executive
Director, IFER (312) 427-6025
or email: <ifer@navs.org>
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~3~
Vegetarian Nutrition
From http://www.pcrm.org
Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine
A
college course taught completely online is now available for anyone interested
in health and nutrition issues.
No prerequisites required.
Learn how to use vegetarian diets to help prevent heart disease, cancer, and
other serious illnesses.
Find out how a vegetarian diet fits the lifestyle of an athlete, helps you
achieve and maintain a healthy weight, and provides a base for optimal health.
Develop your skills for menu planning, evaluating diets, counseling vegetarian
clients, and locating reputable materials.
Taught by Brie Turner-McGrievy, M.S., R.D., staff dietitian at the Physicians
Committee for Responsible Medicine and adjunct professor at the University of
Alabama.
If you have Internet access, you can enroll. The University of Alabama's
Distance Education Program is currently offering this course on a semester
basis. The course began on January 9, 2002. [Contact the program for next
course.]
For more information on how to enroll, visit the University of Alabama's
Distance Learning home page or call 1-800-452-5971.
For more information about the course content, e-mail the instructor or call
her at 202-686-2210, ext. 310.
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~4~
AR2002
Discounted Registration Closes 2/15/02
Here
is a friendly reminder that the discounted $100 registration rate for Animal
Rights 2002, our movement's annual national conference, goes up to $120 on
February 15. Refunds are provided for cancellations. Visit
http://www.animalrights2002.org for more details and registration.
The conference will be held between June 28 - July 3 at the Mclean (VA) Hilton
(same place as the past two years), near the nation's capital.
The program is expected to follow last year's pattern, including plenary
sessions, workshops, 'rap' sessions, campaign reports, videos, and exhibits, as
well as Newcomer Orientation, planning meetings, group workouts, Employment
Clearinghouse, and Awards Banquet.
However several new features are being considered, including Networking
Receptions, Q&A sessions with movement leaders, Industry Panel, intensive
4-hour communication seminars, and a March on Washington.
Nearly a hundred speakers have already signed up, including Carol Adams, Neal
Barnard, the Baustons, Alan Berger, Theo Capaldo, Robert Cohen, Karen Davis,
Michael Greger, Holly Hazard, Alex Hershaft, Steve Hindi, Elliot Katz, John
Kullberg, Howard Lyman, Mike Markarian, Jim Mason, Ingrid Newkirk, Wayne
Pacelle, Tom Regan, Tracy Reiman, Craig Rosebraugh, Peter Singer, Kim
Stallwood, Paul Watson, and Zoe Weil.
Major supporting organizations are American Anti-Vivisection Society, Animal
Legal Defense Fund, Animal Protection Institute, Doris Day Animal League, FARM,
Farm Sanctuary, Fund for Animals, HSUS, In Defense of Animals, National
Anti-Vivisection Society, New England Anti-Vivisection Society, PETA, PCRM,
United Poultry Concerns, and Veg News.
Sincerely, Alex Hershaft, National Chair, AR2002
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~5~
Pet Theft Awareness Day
I
am writing to invite you to join in the observance of National Pet Theft
Awareness Day, which will be held on February 14th. Last Chance for
Animals and activists across the country will be uniting to memorialize the
many animals taken each year. Unfortunately, the problem of pet theft
remains; up to two million animals are stolen annually, only to be victimized
by researchers, dogfighters, and sadistic individuals. In honor of those
animals, we will be setting up information tables, holding a press conference,
soliciting mayoral proclamations, and more.
If you would like to participate, please contact me at <campaigns@lcanimal.org>
or (310) 271-6096 ext. 25 and provide your full name and mailing address.
We will then send you an action pack containing posters, brochures, Pet Safety
and Protection Act petitions, sample letters, flyers, and more. Please
specify how many of each you'd like to receive.
Feel free to contact me at any time with comments, suggestions, or
questions. Your support is greatly appreciated.
Warmest Regards,
Lacey Levitt
Campaigns Director
Last Chance for Animals
8033 W. Sunset Blvd. #835
Los Angeles, CA 90046
(310) 271-6096 ext. 25
campaigns@lcanimal.org
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~6~
Drugstore.com
From Andy119@aol.com
I've just ordered three medications for my cats
from Drugstore.com This company is for "humans" but fills
prescriptions for animals (if it is a human medicine...three of the ones I
needed are). You just need your Vet to call in the prescriptions.... The
prices are unbelievably lower than getting them at your Vet's office.
For instance:
Prednisolone 5mg 180 tabs $10.98 free shipping
Amitriptaline 10mg 90 tabs $8.10
" "
Glipizide 10mg 180 tabs
$21 " "
Compared to the Vet: 15 tabs of Pred for $10.00 .. or Amitriplaline- quite a
difference.
Many of these meds come in the same doses you are giving the animals but they
also come in higher doses and often you can get a double strength and split
them in half to get even greater savings for very little more money. (10
mg doses don't cost much more than 5 mg doses to order)
Check them out at Drugstore.com You can enter in any
medication on the site and get prices for the different strengths and
quantities.
Also there is an online Pharmacy for Animal Medications only with very steep
discounts
Animal
Care Products from Omaha Vaccine
http://www.omahavaccine.com/
Happy shopping
Andy Glick
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~7~
Return From the Land of Denial
By Kerry Phillips - mikecat1@yahoo.com
Tradition is the exhausted shield,
Which covers the eyes
That will not see
Circus elephants beat.
Gluttony is the horrendous shield,
Which protects the nose
That will not smell
Slaughtered cows on the floor.
Apathy is the virulent shield,
Which covers the ears
That will not hear
The screams of lab monkeys.
Ignorance is the misconceived shield,
Which protects the mouth
That will not taste
Urine in Premarin.
Covetousness is the pompous shield,
Which covers the hands
That will not feel
The fear of leg-trapped lynx.
Empathy is the true caravan
Which brings one back
To become a shield
For the tortured beings.
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
~8~
Memorable Quote
"Until we have the courage to recognize
cruelty for what it is – whether its victim is human or animal – we cannot
expect things to be much better in this world…We cannot have peace among men
whose hearts delight in killing any living creature. By every act that
glorifies or even tolerates such moronic delight in killing we set back the
progress of humanity."
~ Rachel Carson
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
Susan Roghair - EnglandGal@aol.com
Animal Rights Online
P O Box 7053
Tampa, Fl 33673-7053
http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/1395/
-=Animal Rights Online=-
&
Advisory Board Member, Animal Rights Network Inc.,
not-for-profit publisher of The Animals' Agenda Magazine
http://www.animalsagenda.org/
The Animals' Agenda Magazine: WebEdition
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
(Permission Granted To Quote/Forward/Reprint/Repost This Newsletter In
Whole Or In Part with credit given to EnglandGal@aol.com)
* Please forward this to a
friend who you think
might be interested in subscribing to our newsletter.
* ARO
gratefully accepts and considers articles for publication
from subscribers on veg*anism and animal issues.
Send submissions to JJswans@aol.com
** Fair Use Notice**
This document may contain copyrighted material whose use has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
coprighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.