The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 273 No 7316 p346
11 September 2004

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 80K, Acrobat Reader

· Personal control
· Shipman
· Animal testing
· Charter
· Statins
· Cholesterol testing
· Media scrutiny
· Retention fee
· Enhanced services

Letters to the Editor

Animal testing

Pharmacists should be able to discuss animal testing authoritatively

From Mr S. Malcolm, MRPharmS

Those who use violence and intimidation to halt animal testing have had notable successes in both Oxford and Cambridge Universities but the animal rights movement has a more subtle weapon in its armoury than the baseball bat. This is the constant and insidious suggestion that the use of animals in safety testing and biomedical research is both useless and dangerously misleading. This denial of the evidence is not confined to the extremists. Even Shelly Willetts,vivisection spokesperson of the Green Party, recently made the astounding claim that “... the examples of animal tests advancing medical progress are anecdotal and dubious”.

A MORI poll conducted four years ago showed that the majority of people support the need for animal testing in principle; however, it was noted that most of those who are inclined to support the use of animals in research have not firmly made up their mind, and most people notice the absence of balanced, reliable information.

Pharmacists are in a unique position to make sure that the argument for the continued use of animals in medical research does not fail by default. Colin Blakemore, Waynflete professor of physiology, Oxford University, has proposed that there should be a disclaimer at the bottom of every prescription, stating: “The treatment you are receiving was developed through the use of animals and was safety-tested on animals.” This may not be practical but a simple leaflet explaining the role of animal testing in medicines research could be distributed with dispensed medicines. The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry has produced an informative booklet for schools on the role of animal testing. It would be a useful basis for such a leaflet. Pharmacists should also acquaint themselves with the subject so that they are able to discuss it authoritatively.

The moral debate over this topic is one that we should all be prepared to engage but it should take place against a background of an understanding of the contribution that animal testing makes to medical progress.

Stewart Malcolm
Bures, Suffolk

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Shipman)
Next Topic (Charter)