Categories

There seems to be a strong attitude among researchers that animal testing, both alive and dead, is considered a vital step toward the translation of lab work for the benefit of society. But what is controversial is whether or not animal research is done humanely to the benefit of the animal, with over 20 personal attacks on institutions like University of California at Berkeley researchers, along with many other institutions.

This issue has caused researchers and their families to become targets of terrorism and violence in several states—many are finding suspicions of animal cruelty a reason to warrant physical violence against humans. Because of this, the California governor has passed Assembly Bill 2296, the Researcher Protection Act of 2008, making it a misdemeanor to publish any personal information with the sole purpose of threatening or attacking a researcher. The bill was passed to enhance law enforcement´s ability to protect academic researchers and their families from anti-animal research extremists, and from acts of violence or intimidation.

According to the UC, these researchers engage in highly regulated research which involves laboratory animals such as zebra fish and mice, a small percentage of overall research that is done within the university. In 2006, an animal rights group and six of its members were convicted of terrorism and Internet stalking, according to the New York Times article by David Kocieniewski titled Six Animal Rights Advocates Are Convicted of Terrorism . The group was found guilty of inciting attacks on anyone who did business with or worked for a British company that runs an animal testing laboratory in New Jersey.

The case was important because it was the first for the Animal Enterprise Terror Act which had been enacted in the year 1992 to curb aggressive tactics used by activists. The real issue here may be lack of knowledge regarding the animal testing at universities and animal experimental labs, with images of caged and abused dogs, cats, monkeys, rabbits, and so on.

Refusing to look objectively at another side has its basis on where our society has moved toward in its treatment of animals. Right now, a major movement has been going on within the United States personifying our pets and using an anthropomorphic portrayal of them, particularly dogs and cats. They are dressed up like children and treated like family members, with dramatic changes in our attitudes toward our companion animals to the point it has become a drastically changing role, forming a rapidly changing social history of our time toward our pets.

By the 1970s, cartoons and books were beginning to portray dogs and cats with human traits and talking to each other, such as the Garfield and Snoopy. Recent surveys show that over 75% of pet owners consider their companions act like children, with 92% of owners considering their pets as family members—not an animal, and over 50% of women stated they rely more on their dog or cat for affection than their children or spouse. For example, the city of Berkley,CA, has changed their 2001 ordinance to call people animal guardians instead of simply a pet´s owner.

All of this has occurred over the past couple of decades, with a 40% growth of dog ownership since 1988. Overall, it is almost impossible to view an animal being tested and remain objective for the whys and how-comes, even if it were to save our own life or our child´s in the long run, as we view that animal as our baby--our child--our best friend. They are our companion, our healer, and our confidant in a world that has become so much smaller and colder to many of us. To justify this, we tend to over-react in a matter that is violent.