Posted: Dec 23, 2011 10:14 am
Mick wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:Mick wrote:The Research Extension Act in 1985 does cover mice and the sort, but it's just for federally funded programs. Privately funded programs can safely ignore it. I'll have to examine the others, though I bet I'll find a limited scope if any at all.
It covers those funded by the National Institutes of Health, which accounts for over half of all animal research in the US. So whilst that single law does not cover all animal research, that single law out of many accounts for a technical majority of all animal research. As far as I know, all research facilities are covered by the Animal Welfare Regulations though - which extra federal and local laws that provide even more stringent guidelines.
Your AWR doesn't seem to help you much here. It respects the legal distinction between animals and birds, mice and rats bred for lab use. I don't see anything in particular which is noteworthy here.
Well feel free to browse through the laws yourself to find the ones that are applicable.
Mick wrote:It's my understanding that NIH does fund a lot of animal research, though whether this is covered by the Act or 50% of all animal experimentation does not sway me. It'd still be 50% which are not covered, and I find that unacceptable.
I found another resource which claimed that NIH actually funds 95% of animal research, which would change things a bit. And yes, the excluded percentage would be troubling, if they weren't covered already by various other federal and state laws.
Mick wrote:Of course any animal experimentation is unacceptable for me, so this is hardly surprising.
That seems like a strong statement. "ALL" animal experimentation? Even behavioral tests?