UofT labs—empty promises of openness

by Rosemary Amey
November 28, 1994

Vivisection—the barbaric and archaic tradition of injuring, and often killing, animals for experimental purposes. UofT is a leader in this infamous practice, experimenting on more animals than any other institution in Canada-- 46,968 vertebrate animals and about 20,000 invertebrates were "used" in 1993 alone.

The Canadian Council on Animal Care's Categories of Invasiveness give some idea of the suffering laboratory animals endure. Animal advocates are particularly concerned about the most invasive categories, D and E. Category D, "Experiments which cause moderate to severe distress or discomfort," includes prolonged confinement in restraining devices, maternal deprivation, radiation sickness, inescapable pain, and damage caused by drugs or chemicals. Category E, "Procedures which cause severe pain near, at, or above the pain tolerance threshold of unanesthetized conscious animals," includes inflicting severe pain or extreme distress via drugs or chemicals, and burning or otherwise injuring an unanesthetized animal. Experiments in any of the categories, A through E, can involve murdering animals, a violation of their right to live.

UofT officials have so far refused to tell animal activists how many experiments are done in each category, let alone the exact nature of the experiments done.

Previous visits to other labs by animal rightists have revealed vivisectors committing gross violations against nonhuman animals. For example, in 1981, Alex Pacheco secured a volunteer position working for Edward Taub at the Institute for Behavioural Research in Silver Spring, Maryland. Taub surgically crippled monkeys, subjecting them to pain and paralysis. This is horrible enough, but filthy conditions multiplied the animals' suffering. Excrement piled high in the cages until the monkeys themselves threw it to the floor. Cockroaches were everywhere. Bandages on the monkeys' wounds were never changed. One monkey, Billy, had an arm broken in two places. Taub ignored Pacheco's repeated requests to have a veterinarian treat him.

Shockingly, when these conditions were revealed to the public, other vivisectors leapt to defend Taub. University of Pennsylvania researcher Adrian Morrison claimed the cockroach infestation was "a good source of ambient protein." Morrison is now director of laboratory animal care at the National Institutes of Health. Morrison's colleague, Peter Hand, defended the filthy conditions, saying that monkeys are "[n]ot much more than defecating machines!"

Note that Taub's lab had passed inspection by the U. S. Department of Agriculture.

Horror stories like these fuel our concern about the welfare of laboratory animals at UofT. That is why the Animal Rights Networking Coalition, consisting of UofT Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (SETA), OPIRG, UofT Animal Rights Advocates, Ark II, and Action Volunteers for Animals, is requesting guided tours of the animal labs at UofT, in the hope of finding out what is really happening to these animals and making it public.

In August, the vice-dean of research at the faculty of medicine, Cecil Yip, told a Globe and Mail reporter that anyone can visit "any facility" if she or he makes a formal request in advance. Yet on October 31, protesters from UofT SETA and UofT Animal Rights Advocates were forbidden to even walk in the halls outside the labs, even though we had a police escort, even though these halls are open to other members of the university public, and even though our right to nondisruptive protest is protected by the Code of Student Conduct. It is hard to believe that we will ever be allowed into the labs, when we are not even allowed into public hallways.

Recently the Coalition received an application form to visit UofT's animal facilities from the Office of the Vice-President -- Research and International Relations. Even if our application were approved, we would not be allowed to bring in any kind of recording device, or make public anything we might learn about the experiments without UofT's permission. So much for the university's claims to "openness"! What is UofT trying to hide?

Update: We did not apply to visit the labs, as we would have had to sign away our rights to criticize the University's practices, or risk being barred from the campus if we did so. Recently, a member of faculty who had been offered a chance to visit the labs a few years ago, and couldn't at that time, was told that the offer had been withdrawn and now no one may visit the labs.

At the time this article was written, Rosemary Amey was president of UofT Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

This article originally appeared in a slightly different form in the November 28, 1994 issue of The Varsity, a student newspaper at the University of Toronto.

Get rid of these ads!