Sav e The Primates A study of the use of primates in experiments G G Where they come from G Life and death in a typical laboratory G The experiments The alternatives All primate species are intelligent, some use Snatched from the wild The monkey suppliers tools, others show self-awareness and all are good at problem-solving. Most live in family groups, in organised social structures. We are primates. In order to distance ourselves from our closest relatives, we refer to them as the “non-human primates”, which helps us to justify their use in laboratory experiments. Yet our primate cousins have proved themselves capable of learning rudimentary arithmetic; they have demonstrated reasoning; some can speak in human sign language. They also display similar emotions to us, such as affection, anger and sorrow – even empathy. However to argue that our similarities justify their use in laboratories is to ignore at our peril the fundamental differences A third of primate species are threatened with at the cellular, genetic and immune system level – differences extinction. As governments in primate home ranges which are so important to experimental results. make desperate efforts to prevent the poor and Humans share more than 90% of our DNA with most non- hungry eating some species to oblivion, the western human primates, but nature shows us what a difference this research community demands the right to take small percentage can make. However, whilst our fellow these species for unnecessary and unreliable primates differ in their reactions to chemicals and drugs, we experiments, when alternatives are available. are similar enough to comprehend their suffering. In the South American forests trappers hunt for owl monkeys, When they are snatched from the wild, caged, confined, to sell for malaria experiments in Colombia. The frightened transported; restrained, injected with drugs, monkeys are torn from the trees, their freedom, and families. force-fed chemicals, deliberately brain Their forest is replaced by the barren factory-type conditions of damaged - we know they suffer. a laboratory; some are isolated – torture for a monkey. Yet despite this, and that The unethical and short-sighted nature of snatching animals more sophisticated from the wild, as well as the suffering it causes, was alternatives to the acknowledged in EU Directive 86/609/EEC on animal use of primates are experiments, over twenty years ago. Nevertheless, an available than ever estimated 10% of primates in EU labs still come from the before, the numbers wild. Good intent has not been enough. A clear end to being used around this trade is needed. the world is rising. We welcome the fact that the European Commission, in their Over 10,000 new proposed Directive to replace 86/609, initially laid out a primates will die clear policy that animals from the wild should not be used in in European laboratories. However these good intentions have been laboratories fatally weakened, by allowing unjustified and species this year. “exceptions” to the rule. This is unacceptable. It is of concern that up to now, the scientific debate on the use of primates in research has been defensive, generalised and dominated by inadequate evaluation and support for scientifically advanced replacement techniques. Europe must establish a clear policy to end the use of apes Introduction and wild-caught primates, with a phase-out of all primate use, setting a standard for the world to follow. The monkey suppliers The journeys that monkeys endure before they reach European laboratories or holding centres are extremely long and frequently mean the animals are confined in transport crates for 30 hours at a time. Left: A monkey peers from a small cage at lab monkey supplier Nafovanny in Vietnam. modern standards of accommodation and care on a foreign supplier. For example, Nafovanny in Vietnam is a huge exporter of monkeys to Europe and the USA. It is, of course, well outside Whether wild-caught or captive-bred, the majority of the jurisdiction of the European Parliament or Member States. monkeys used in Europe are imported from China, Behind an initially smart exterior and whitewashed office Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Mauritius, Kenya, buildings, in 2008 ADI found monkeys in small wire mesh pens Israel and Guyana. The monkeys endure long, with concrete floors and little enrichment. This would fall well arduous journeys, isolated, trapped in small boxes, below modern zoo standards. fearful. At the rear of the facility, monkeys were kept alone, in rusty The cynomolgus macaque, the most commonly used species cages under a metre tall - the animals could barely stand up. of lab monkey in Europe, has been described as the macaque Some cages were in a state of collapse – leaning at species least able to respond satisfactorily to transport. uncomfortable, extreme angles. Yet this facility is approved by Supply facilities in Europe are mainly holding centres for the UK’s Home Office as an official laboratory monkey supplier. monkeys who come from thousands of miles away. For example, the Noveprim facility in Spain is a doorway to Europe Nafovanny, Vietnam: Small rusting cages have for monkeys from Mauritius, where the supplier is known to fallen over - with monkeys living inside them. supplement its breeding stock with wild-caught animals. Indeed, the vast majority of primates feeding Europe’s laboratories are offspring born of wild-caught parents (referred to as “F1”). Only the prohibition of the F1 animals will put pressure on suppliers not to regard the world’s wild monkeys as their own resource to harvest. The seven year phase out of the use of F1 primates in Europe in the proposed Directive to replace 86/609 must be fully implemented without loopholes; it would be preferable for this to be brought forward. In addition to the long journeys, consideration should be given The UK’s Animal Procedures Committee has concluded: to the standards of care and accommodation for these animals “The inspectorate has no jurisdiction outside the UK, and at the supply source, and whether it is possible to impose therefore, where animals are supplied from outside the UK, any site visits by the Chimpanzees are so close to us genetically that some In its new Directive on animal research, the Inspectorate depends scientists have suggested they be reclassified European Commission proposed an end to on negotiation and alongside humans. However comparisons of genes apes in laboratories, but this has been cooperation” . and immune systems has shown that this close family eroded by an “exception”. Those with a In 2005 the UK’s connection is not close enough for us to rely on the vested interest have argued that they may Home Office stated results of chimpanzee experiments for human safety. want to use apes in the future, citing for “before primates can example, preservation of endangered The US rushed to use chimpanzees for AIDS research in be acquired from an the 1980s; it was unsuccessful, research followed a species. overseas breeding different course. This left a huge financial burden and a This is a specious argument, it centre it is necessary chimpanzee welfare crisis. is not practical, nor is it a for the Home Office to The world has steadily abandoned the use of apes in scientifically sound concept. have appraised and laboratories; in the UK and elsewhere, use of apes has There would be no point of accepted the use of been banned for many years and currently no apes are comparison for that centre in order to used in Europe. This leaves only the USA with apes in laboratory apes; ensure compliance laboratories. In 2007 the US NIH ended the breeding of conservation takes place in with the section of the chimpanzees for research. the environment, and the Home Office Code of main threats to Practice for the Apes in experiments endangered apes Housing and Care of come from human activity. Animals in designated Breeding and Supplying Establishments (1995 HC 125) pertaining to the import of primates” , and: “In effect we will only allow the use of animals from overseas centres we believe produce purpose- bred animals to acceptable welfare standards” . Group housing in the stock unit of HLS. This is as good as it gets for the monkeys who will be In March 2005 an inspection of the Nafovanny facility in Long transferred to another unit (right and below) for Thanh identified, “shortcomings in animal accommodation and experimentation. It looks like an impoverished, unregulated zoo, yet these monkeys will be used care” and the centre was notified that its “status as an for products for multi-billion Euro clients by a approved centre would cease” once all existing orders for company that has announced annual sales of primates had been filled. By the end of 2005 however, the €137million with profits of €31.5million. Home Office had received “reassurances and evidence that scrutinised in advance by regulators. The reports of the tests significant improvements had been made” , and concluded that are the property of the customer. Such experiments are rarely, Nafovanny could meet the required standard. Permission was if ever, published. given for them to continue to supply to the UK. The evidence upon which this decision was based, was “unedited video Between 2006 and 2008 an ADI/NAVS investigator studied the footage, photographs and reports” . use of primates at HLS, which has a capacity for around 500 macaque monkeys. This study provides a rare insight into how The evidence of our 2008 inspection of Nafovanny would these monkeys live and die behind closed doors. indicate that assertions of government control over standards of welfare at foreign suppliers are more of a public relations On arrival monkeys are placed in a stock colony, with up to exercise, than enforcement of measures to uphold scientific fifteen animals in a room little more than two metres wide and standards and animal welfare.