Drug Experiments on animals revealed at the University of Nottingham

Animal Justice Project has revealed through a freedom of information request that universities have been found to be using taxpayer’s money to fund animal testing using recreational drugs.

They have revealed details of experiments inside the University of Nottingham as part of the ‘Deadly Doses’ campaign.

The campaign uncovered that during 2013 almost 30,000 animals were used for experiments at the University of Nottingham. Of the 30,000 over 12,000 were used in ‘curiosity-driven research’ and over 13,000 animals used as breeding ‘stock’.

“We challenge the University of Nottingham to defend their use of animals for recreational drug research by holding a public scientific debate”

It has been revealed that the university had injected rats with class A and B drugs during a series of experiments. 204 procedures involving different amphetamines were carried out between 2012 and 2013 and a total of 48 procedures were carried out on rats using ecstasy in 2012.

Claire Palmer, spokesperson for Animal Justice Project, stated that, “The extent of the University of Nottingham’s drug testing on animals was among the worst we found. We believe these sorts of experiments shouldn’t be taking place at all”.

She added, “Non-animal studies are by far the most accurate way of investigating the effects. These type of experiments cause immense suffering for the animals involved. The Home Office should only allow animal experiments if an alternative way of testing doesn’t exist”.

“I think animal testing is cruel and other viable alternatives should always be sought out, even if the testing is within home office guidelines”

Yiota Papouridou, a first year History and Politics student commented, “I think animal testing is cruel and other viable alternatives should always be sought out, even if the testing is within home office guidelines”.

However, the University has defended its position on animal testing by stating that all experiments were carried out in line with Home Office guidelines.

A spokesperson for the University of Nottingham argued that, “The animal studies were conducted under strict Home Office legislation, approved under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and reviewed in advance by the University Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body”.

The investigation revealed that the laboratory-bred rodents had been injected with the drugs to test the toxic effects on the brain and that some were given electric foot shocks to test their responses before their necks were broken to kill them.

Animal Justice Project science adviser Dr Andre Menache stated, “We challenge the University of Nottingham to defend their use of animals for recreational drug research by holding a public scientific debate, with experts for and against. Then let the public be the judge of whether such research should be allowed to continue”.

Hannah Eves

Image: flickr

Follow Impact News on Facebook and Twitter

3 Comments on this post.
  • Jordan lane
    5 July 2015 at 09:16
    Leave a Reply

    This piece of journalism is very poor and you should feel ashamed and pull it from the website and magazine.

    Drug testing animals is the ONLY way to look at how drugs are metabolised and in living systems allows scientists to gauge the impact of the drug for safety and fundamental processes that happen in the body such as the affects on the mind of physcoactive drugs. The classification of such drugs are tested in animal models to look at deadly dosage etc.

    You then used a 1st year History students opinion, instead of the hundreds of postgraduate or academic staff in the School of Life sciences that would say the same as me.

  • Cameron
    5 July 2015 at 16:50
    Leave a Reply

    Isn’t it a bit telling that the comment condemning current practice of medical research comes from a first year history student?

  • Patricia Zambrano
    27 August 2015 at 23:10
    Leave a Reply

    Jordan Lane and Cameron: How arrogant of you to try to dismiss the views from a first year history student. You seem to think and imply that all scientists hold the view that animal experiments are a necessary evil to “protect” humans. I take this opportunity to point out that firstly there are many highly qualified and reputable scientists who are experienced enough to know that the animal model does not predict human reactions and therefore it is a failure. One such example is the eminent Ray Greek. Secondly, I applaud this first year history student because even if she is not a “scientist” she is representing the views of a great many people who want animal experiments to end on the grounds of the suffering that is being caused to animals which is a matter of ethics. It is shameful that many “scientists” should defend the practice of inflicting pain on innocent animals (rats included) and dress it up as altruism. For those who know better, the universe works in such a way that there will never be anything good coming out of abuse and cruelty against living beings and the human death statistics due to bad reactions from medicines prove it. The fourth largest killer in the western world is adverse reactions from medicines safely passed on animals. There is only ONE reason why this abhorrent practice continues and it’s called “profitmaking”. I am seriously worried that people like you wil be in positions of care towards humanity because you clearly lack the most important ingredient: compassion.

  • Leave a Reply