People are fed up with protesters' thuggery (UK)

[hop 0]

People are fed up with protesters' thuggery

By Prof Colin Blakemore
(Filed: 29/05/2006)



Sonny, an animal rights activist, opposes the building of a new laboratory at the local university. His sister, a research student, will be working there. Their father died from cancer. After an emergency hospital admission, Sonny decides to use an inhaler to manage his asthma, even though he knows that its development involved the use of animals. He argues that it is OK because it helps him to continue his fight against animal research.

This is the tangled plot of Every Breath, a morality play by Judith Johnson, aimed at schoolchildren of 14-plus, which I saw a few days ago at the Wellcome Trust. The actors of the Y-Touring Theatre company described how they stay in character for a debate after each school performance. I was astounded to hear them say that sometimes no pupils will take the animal rights side in these debates.

I first gave talks in schools in 1987, as part of my response to a campaign of criticism, harassment, and eventually bombs, bricks and paint-stripper, directed against me and my family. I walked down school corridors completely wall-papered with ghastly animal rights posters. I remember the overwhelming hostility of the audiences - teachers as well as pupils.

What a change in 20 years. Today's YouGov/Daily Telegraph poll is the latest evidence of a radical shift of national opinion. In a poll for New Scientist in 1999, only 23 per cent agreed in response to the question "Do you agree or disagree that scientists should be allowed to conduct any experiments on live animals?" But polls for the Coalition for Medical Progress in 2002 and 2005 found that about three quarters of the public agreed, and 90 per cent accepted, as long as suffering is minimised and there are no alternatives (exactly as required by law).

Correlated with this growing acceptance is increasing trust in the regulations. In 1999, 65 per cent said they did not trust the regulatory system; in 2002, 50 per cent; in 2005, 36 per cent. What is remarkable about today's poll is that the questions are about the routine safety-testing of drugs on animals, before they are first tried out on people - the kind of testing done by Huntingdon Life Sciences, which has been a target of activists for years. Roughly three quarters of the public accept such testing, and they realise that there are no alternatives. They have not been fooled by the assertions that testing is unnecessary or positively dangerous for humans.

The fact is that more than 60 per cent of potential drugs fail at the animal testing stage, and without these safeguards the terrible events of the recent clinical trial at Northwick Park Hospital could be a weekly event. The poll reveals a balanced attitude to freedom of expression. Holding placards at peaceful demonstrations is acceptable. Death threats, vandalism, posting names on the internet, even shouting abuse, are not.

The fiercest disapproval - virtually unanimous - is for the desecration of graves. The disinterment of Gladys Hammond, a relative of the Hall family, who ran the besieged guinea pig breeding farm in Staffordshire, was a turning point in the animal rights debate - a signal of the depths to which a handful of thugs are prepared to stoop to force their views on society. I have hesitated in the past to use the word "terrorists" to describe such people but today's poll shows that only 15 per cent of the public think that it is unfair to use that word.

For too long the extremists have dictated the agenda. But the Government, charities, universities, drug companies and research funders are now far more open in their support for animal use and their engagement in debate. More and more researchers are opening their doors to the press and public.

The new legislation is starting to bite. The police and the courts are finding and convicting extremists, and today's poll shows public support for exemplary prison sentences. People are fed up with thuggery and are prepared to say so. Almost 20,000, including Tony Blair, have signed the People's Petition in support of medical research using animals.

The Pro-Test movement, inspired by 16-year-old Laurie Pycroft, which campaigns for the new Oxford medical research lab, symbolises the views of ordinary people, who recognise that medical researchers deserve gratitude, not denigration.

The courage of the public must be matched by a greater openness by researchers, who must continue to explain what they do and the benefits that result. And we must work to replace animals wherever possible. Terrorist movements cannot survive without a foundation of public sympathy. Today's poll tells us that there is no such foundation.

• Prof Colin Blakemore is the chief executive of the Medical Research Council.


Public turns on animal terrorists


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=HJTLQRWO031XNQFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/05/29/nanim229.xml