NIH-Funded Nicotine Testing on Animals

by Stephanie Ernst · 2008-10-23 06:02:00 UTC
Topics:

Thimble, one of many victims of Spindel\'s nicotine tests at OHSUPerhaps you've noticed in the last few days that one of the actions currently featured in the sidebar is "Tell the NIH to Stop Testing Nicotine on Animals." For those of you who haven't read the summary there yet, I'll repeat my brief introduction to the action, sponsored by In Defense of Animals (IDA):

Researchers in the United States, with the help of millions of taxpayer dollars and the support of the federal government and National Institutes of Health (NIH), are still conducting cruel nicotine experiments on helpless animals—pregnant and newborn monkeys as well as rats and mice—even though the harmful effects of smoking are already well-known.

The first time I learned that the tobacco industry and federal government both are still funding nicotine and smoking experiments on animals (this campaign relates to just one area of such testing; there are more), I was stunned.

Many proponents of animal testing and medical research are fond of arguing that such testing and experiments are performed only when necessary—only when tests on animals are the supposedly best, most reliable option we have, only when the experiments' results could lead to significant human benefits, and only when the potential benefit to humans outweighs the harm to the nonhuman animals used in the tests.

What-the-hell-ever. IDA points out, "Animal experiments failed to demonstrate that exposure to cigarettes and tobacco smoke caused lung and other forms of cancer, which is now undisputed in humans." Yet conducting intensely cruel experiments on mother and newborn monkeys is our best, most reliable method of addressing the issue of smoking during pregnancy? How does the extreme harm to these monkeys not outweigh the potential benefit to humans when we already know that pregnant mothers should not smoke and when the ability of such experiments to predict results in humans has been disproven rather than proven?

For more details on what's happening to these monkeys and on what you can do to help, I direct you to the following pages, videos, and Web sites:

And finally, a (non-graphic) video on the OHSU research:

Stephanie Ernst wrote the original Animal Rights blog at Change.org until December 2009. She can now be found at Animal Rights & AntiOppression.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Oregon's Livestock "Rendering Crisis"
NEXT STORY:
Super Bowl Countdown: 5 Actions in 5 Days to Protest Skechers' Dog Racing Ad

COMMENTS (3)

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.