Behind closed doors

1125:

Some activists break into vivisection laboratories to rescue the animals there.  Judging by what they have to do to get in and what they find when they get inside, their actions seem both commendable and brave.  They not only want to rescue the animals but want to film what they see and show it.  But people don’t like to look.  We consumers don’t want to know, mainly because we give tacit approval for what goes on in these places.  We want the products, medicines, cosmetics, etc., but don’t want to be involved in much else.  Most people are not willing to boycott products involved in animal testing and aren’t willing to search out non-animal tested items.

We are led to believe scientists will discover cures for major diseases by way of animal research.  The public like to think of vivisectors as being altruistically determined to rid the world of the scourge of disease, and some may be doing just that, but it can never be justified if innocent creatures are tortured and sacrificed in the process.

Whether you agree or disagree, that human life is more important than an animal’s life, there is an element of cover-up in these places, which should raise our worst suspicions.  Even if there is some good intention there, it steps over into deception when the scientists talk about their ‘work with animals’, as if they have some sort of cooperation from them.  It’s as if the animals volunteer for testing to help humans with their problems.

         

If the public are sold on the idea that pharmaceutical safety must involve animal testing, then it’s no surprise that they condemn the animal rescuers and praise the vivisectors.  By giving scientists the go-ahead to use animals to ‘fight disease’ or safety-test shampoos on rabbits’ eyes, the consumer is giving approval for their work.  But always, the details of this work remain hidden, the public is never told what goes on behind the laboratory doors.  Details of experiments, concerning how many animals are injured or killed, are not published.  It isn’t surprising that laboratories are closed to the public.  They claim that the need for bio-security prevents them letting people in to see what they’re doing.  But they know that if we saw and filmed and publicised what they do, their laboratories would have to be shut down.  These days the public are not allowed into intensive farms or abattoirs, for the same reasons.  Obviously there’s a lot to hide in these places

         

I find it hard to accept the lack of support we get from the public.  Certainly, it is disgusting, the cruelty of farmers and scientists, but all the time there is no documentary proof being shown, nothing will register in people’s minds.  Is it possible that we don’t want to know because it would interfere with the smooth supply of those pharmaceuticals or foods or toiletries which depend on a good supply of compliant animals?

It’s infuriating when people don’t respond to the stories they hear about animal treatment, whether in abattoirs or farms or in animal research centres.  It’s as if what we tell them is unbelievable, as if the white-coated scientist is too pure to ‘be like that’, as if such terrible things couldn’t happen down on the farm.

The public’s indifference makes them appear both hard hearted and selfish.