Parliament debate reiterates archaic argument that animal testing is a necessity

On Monday the 1st of February, Parliament debated the Animals in Science Regulation Unit annual report 2024. Not for the first time in the history of debating testing on animals, it was heard how it was a necessity for animals to be sacrificed at the alter of human supremacy. 

Photo from We Animals

Listening to Lord Hanson of Flint talk about the 350, 000 people employed in  the "Life Sciences" sector - 350, 000 employed to participate in the torture of more than 2.5 million animals per year - one could not help but despair at the complete indifference to the suffering of non human species, the belief that the production of "safe" pharmaceuticals is top priority. 

Lord Winston bemoaned his own sense of safety  when he was a scientist testing on animals, claiming he felt threatened in his own home. The hypocrisy was stark. What thought had he ever given to the sense of safety for the animals subjected to heinous tests and experiments?

Our thanks goes out to Baroness Bennet, for standing up and speaking out against the preposterous and highly questionable move to label "Life Sciences" as part of the National Infrastructure, and to Baroness Grender and Baroness Jones for calling out the oppressive legislation and violation of public rights to protest, for pointing out that if a jury can not find those who broke into MBR guilty, it shows public loss of trust in this government.