DOCSLIB.ORG

A Study of the Use of Primates in Experiments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Study of the Use of Primates in Experiments 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cow Care in Hindu Animal Ethics Kenneth R
    THE PALGRAVE MACMILLAN ANIMAL ETHICS SERIES Cow Care in Hindu Animal Ethics Kenneth R. Valpey The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series Series Editors Andrew Linzey Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics Oxford, UK Priscilla N. Cohn Pennsylvania State University Villanova, PA, USA Associate Editor Clair Linzey Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics Oxford, UK In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the ethics of our treatment of animals. Philosophers have led the way, and now a range of other scholars have followed from historians to social scientists. From being a marginal issue, animals have become an emerging issue in ethics and in multidisciplinary inquiry. Tis series will explore the challenges that Animal Ethics poses, both conceptually and practically, to traditional understandings of human-animal relations. Specifcally, the Series will: • provide a range of key introductory and advanced texts that map out ethical positions on animals • publish pioneering work written by new, as well as accomplished, scholars; • produce texts from a variety of disciplines that are multidisciplinary in character or have multidisciplinary relevance. More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14421 Kenneth R. Valpey Cow Care in Hindu Animal Ethics Kenneth R. Valpey Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies Oxford, UK Te Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series ISBN 978-3-030-28407-7 ISBN 978-3-030-28408-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28408-4 © Te Editor(s) (if applicable) and Te Author(s) 2020. Tis book is an open access publication. Open Access Tis book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Nose Ringing and Stocking Rate of Pregnant and Lactating Outdoor Sows on Exploratory Behaviour, Grass Cover and Nutrient Loss Potential
    Livestock Science 104 (2006) 91–102 www.elsevier.com/locate/livsci Effect of nose ringing and stocking rate of pregnant and lactating outdoor sows on exploratory behaviour, grass cover and nutrient loss potential J. Eriksen a,*, M. Studnitz b, K. Strudsholm a, A.G. Kongsted a, J.E. Hermansen a a Department of Agroecology, Research Centre Foulum, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark b Department of Animal Health, Welfare and Nutrition, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark Received 6 December 2005; received in revised form 3 March 2006; accepted 13 March 2006 Abstract Nose ringing of outdoor sows is practiced to reduce grass sward damage for environmental reasons but conflicts with natural behaviour considerations. We investigated effects of ringing pregnant and lactating outdoor sows on foraging and explorative behaviour, grass cover and nutrient deposition. The experiment included both ringed and unringed sows. For unringed sows the paddocks were either used continuously throughout the experiment or divided into two and sows were moved half way through the experimental period leaving the first used paddock for regrowth. Ringing did not prevent the sow’s rooting, but rooting was less pronounced, when sows were ringed. On average, ringing increased grass cover from 14% to 38% and from 64% to 81% in paddocks with pregnant and lactating sows, respectively. In paddocks with unringed sows kept at a double density and followed by a resting period, the grass cover in autumn was restored to a high degree in paddocks with pregnant sows. In lactating sow paddocks the level of inorganic N was high but with no significant relation to extent of grass cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Articles on Illicit Wildlife Trading in Asia
    Articles on Illicit Wildlife Trading in Southeast Asia A Trans-border Wildlife Trade Network Unmasked - Part I HOANG QUOC DUNG Tien Phong Newspaper, Hanoi, Viet Nam [email protected] Translation by Do Oanh, Nguyen Thu Trang and Vu Thi Kim Oanh Located near the remote Ka Tum border gate, connecting Viet Nam’s south western Tay Ninh province with Cambodia, a wildlife breeding farm owned by Tan Hoi Dong Co. Ltd. is well known as one of the country’s first farms to obtain CITES1 certification. However, most people not know that it is also an essential transit site for the most sophisticated and largest trans-border wildlife trafficking network in Viet Nam to date. This network involves forged CITES permits from Lao and inaccurate reporting of macaques actually caught in Cambodia, a country with weak wildlife protection enforcement. According to descriptions in some Vietnamese newspapers, the Tan Hoi Dong’s wildlife farm applies modern technology and scientific processes in their efforts to raise and breed snakes, turtles, and monkeys for use in medical testing and research of vaccines. There has been widespread reporting about the farm after the chairman of an American biological company said in a report on the June 1, 2007 that a group of specialists would go to the Ka Tum border gate to inspect the Tan Hoi Dong farm. Unfortunately, as this series of articles will document, the Tan Hoi Dong company and its associates have long used false documents to import wild animals with their breeding program as a cover for allegedly illegal imports.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Experimentation in India
    Animal Defenders International ● National Anti-Vivisection Society Animal Experimentation in India Unfettered science: How lack of accountability and control has led to animal abuse and poor science “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. Vivisection is the blackest of all the black crimes that man is at present committing against God and His fair creation. It ill becomes us to invoke in our daily prayers the blessings of God, the Compassionate, if we in turn will not practise elementary compassion towards our fellow creatures.” And, “I abhor vivisection with my whole soul. All the scientific discoveries stained with the innocent blood I count as of no consequence.” Mahatma Gandhi Thanks With thanks to Maneka Gandhi and the Committee for the Purpose of Control and Supervision of Experiments on Animals (CPCSEA) of India for their report on the use of animals in laboratories, which has been used for this critique of the state of scientific and medical research in India. Animal Defenders International and the National Anti-Vivisection Society UK fully support and encourage the efforts of the members of India’s CPCSEA to enforce standards and controls over the use of animals in laboratories in India, and their recommendation that facilities and practices in India’s research laboratories be brought up to international standards of good laboratory practice, good animal welfare, and good science. Contributors Jan Creamer Tim Phillips Chris Brock Robert Martin ©2003 Animal Defenders International & National Anti-Vivisection Society ISBN: Animal Defenders International 261 Goldhawk Road, London W12 9PE, UK tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Laboratory Animals and the Art of Empathy D Thomas
    197 RESEARCH ETHICS J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.2003.006387 on 30 March 2005. Downloaded from Laboratory animals and the art of empathy D Thomas ............................................................................................................................... J Med Ethics 2005;31:197–204. doi: 10.1136/jme.2003.006387 Consistency is the hallmark of a coherent ethical take a big leap of imagination to empathise with the victims of animal experiments as well. In philosophy. When considering the morality of particular short: if we would not want done to ourselves behaviour, one should look to identify comparable what we do to laboratory animals, we should not situations and test one’s approach to the former against do it to them. one’s approach to the latter. The obvious comparator for Animals suffer animal experiments is non-consensual experiments on Crucially for the debate about the morality of people. In both cases, suffering and perhaps death is animal experiments, non-human animals suffer knowingly caused to the victim, the intended beneficiary is just as human ones do. Descartes may have described animals as ‘‘these mechanical robots someone else, and the victim does not consent. Animals [who] could give such a realistic illusion of suffer just as people do. As we condemn non-consensual agony’’ (my emphasis) but no serious scientist experiments on people, we should, if we are to be today doubts that the manifestation of agony is real, not illusory. Indeed, the whole pro-vivisec- consistent, condemn non-consensual experiments on tion case is based on the premise that animals animals. The alleged differences between the two practices are sufficiently similar to us physiologically, and often put forward do not stand up to scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Swiss Federal Act on Animal Protection of March 9, 1978 (State As Per July 1, 1995) And
    Swiss Federal Act on Animal Protection of March 9, 1978 (State as per July 1, 1995) and Swiss Animal Protection Ordinance of May 27, 1981 (State as per November 1, 1998) Please take notice that this is not an official translation. For legal issues the original versions (in German, French, and Italian) must be referred to. http://www.admin.ch/bvet 1 Act on Animal Protection Act on Animal Protection Swiss Federal Act of March 9, 1978 (State as per July 1, 1995) The Federal Assembly of the Swiss Confederation, based on the Articles 25bis, 27sexies and 64bis of the Federal Constitution, after consideration of a report submitted by the Federal Council, dated February 9, 1977 resolves: Section 1: General Provisions Article 1 Purpose and Scope 1 This Act prescribes rules of conduct to be observed in dealing with animals; it is designed to ensure their protection and welfare. 2 The Act applies to vertebrates only. The Federal Council shall decide for which invertebrates and to which extent the Act shall apply to such animals. 3 The following are reserved: Federal Act of June 10, 1925 on the Hunting and Protection of Birds, Federal Act of July 1, 1966 on Nature and Landscape Conservation, Federal Act of December 14, 1973 on Fishing, and the Federal Act of July, 1 1966 on Epizootic Diseases. Article 2 Principles 1 Animals shall be treated in the manner which best complies with their needs. 2 Anyone who is concerned with animals shall, insofar as circumstances permit, safeguard their welfare. 3 No one shall unjustifiably expose animals to pain, suffering, physical injury or fear.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovative Delivery of Sirna to Solid Tumors by Super Carbonate Apatite
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Innovative Delivery of siRNA to Solid Tumors by Super Carbonate Apatite Xin Wu1,2, Hirofumi Yamamoto1*, Hiroyuki Nakanishi3, Yuki Yamamoto3, Akira Inoue1, Mitsuyoshi Tei1, Hajime Hirose1, Mamoru Uemura1, Junichi Nishimura1, Taishi Hata1, Ichiro Takemasa1, Tsunekazu Mizushima1, Sharif Hossain4,5, Toshihiro Akaike4,5, Nariaki Matsuura6, Yuichiro Doki1, Masaki Mori1 1 Department of Surgery, Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan, 2 Research Fellow of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Tokyo, Japan, 3 Nakanishi Gastroenterological Research Institute, Sakai, Japan, 4 Department of Biomolecular Engineering, Graduate School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan, 5 Biomaterials Center for Regenerative Medical Engineering, Foundation for Advancement of International Science, Tsukuba, Japan, 6 Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan * [email protected] Abstract RNA interference (RNAi) technology is currently being tested in clinical trials for a limited OPEN ACCESS number of diseases. However, systemic delivery of small interfering RNA (siRNA) to solid tumors has not yet been achieved in clinics. Here, we introduce an in vivo pH-sensitive de- Citation: Wu X, Yamamoto H, Nakanishi H, livery system for siRNA using super carbonate apatite (sCA) nanoparticles, which is the Yamamoto Y, Inoue A, Tei M, et al. (2015) Innovative Delivery of siRNA to Solid Tumors by Super smallest class of nanocarrier. These carriers consist simply of inorganic ions and accumu- Carbonate Apatite. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0116022. late specifically in tumors, yet they cause no serious adverse events in mice and monkeys. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116022 Intravenously administered sCA-siRNA abundantly accumulated in the cytoplasm of tumor Academic Editor: Sung Wan Kim, University of cells at 4 h, indicating quick achievement of endosomal escape.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Maasai Cultural Practices on the Welfare of Domestic Animals: a Case of Kajiado Central District, Kenya
    THE EFFECT OF MAASAI CULTURAL PRACTICES ON THE WELFARE OF DOMESTIC ANIMALS: A CASE OF KAJIADO CENTRAL DISTRICT, KENYA BY MAINA ISAAC GITHAIGA A RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AWARD OF DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI 2014 DECLARATION This research project report is my original work and has not been presented for academic purposes in any other university. Signature……........................................ Date: ……................................…… Maina Isaac Githaiga L50/64015/2010 This research project report has been submitted for Examination with my approval as university supervisor. Signature……........................................ Date: ……................................…… Dr. Ndunge D. Kyalo Senior Lecturer, School of Continuing and Distance Education, University of Nairobi ii DEDICATION This project is dedicated to my dear wife Cecilia and my two sons Alvin and Brian for their continued support, love and understanding whenever I work until late hours. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge with gratitude the input I received from various people. My sincere gratitude and appreciation goes to my supervisor Dr. Ndunge D. Kyalo who used her precious time to ensure that the research conforms with professional research techniques and principles. Secondly, I wish to thank all my lecturers who took me through the course and particularly to Professor Christopher Gakuo and Professor Ganesh Pokhariyal for coaching me on research and statistical methods. n the same breadth, I thank my friends and colleagues at work who shared with me ideas and offered encouragement while I was pursuing the program. Many thanks to my sister, Mary, for her constant encouragement, Kate and my nephew Duncan who helped to proofread and edit the project.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Against Animal Experiments
    The Case Against Animal Experiments Animal experiments are both unethical and unscientific. Animals in laboratories endure appalling suffering, such as being deliberately poisoned, brain-damaged and subjected to inescapable electric shocks. The pain and misery inflicted on the victims is enough, on its own, to make vivisection worthy of public condemnation. But animal “ “ experiments are also bad science, since the results they produce cannot be reliably translated to humans. They therefore offer little hope of advancing medical progress. The Case Against Animal Experiments outlines the suffering of animals used in research, before providing a clear, non-technical description of the scientific problems S E with vivisection. L I www.animalaid.org.uk C I N I M O D © How animals are used Contents Each year around four million How animals are used .......................... 1 animals are experimented on inside British laboratories. The suffering of animals in Dogs, cats, horses, monkeys, laboratories ........................................ 2 rats, rabbits and other animals Cruel experiments .................................... 2 are used, as well as hundreds A failing inspection regime ........................ 3 of thousands of genetically Secrecy and misinformation ...................... 4 modified mice. The most The GM mouse myth ................................ 4 common types of experiment The scientific case against either attempt to test how animal experiments .............................. 5 safe a substance is (toxicity Summary ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Speciesism: a Form of Bigotry Or a Justified View? Evelyn Pluhar
    -------~------------ - SPECIESISM: A FORM OF BIGOTRY OR A JUSTIFIED VIEW? EVELYN PLUHAR Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Fayette Campuscampus Editor's Note: An abridgedabridged version of this paper and thethe commentary on it by Prof.Prof. Sapontzis were delivered atat the December, 1987, meetingmeeting of the Society for the StudyStudy of Ethics and Animals held inin New York City.City. g~;~~~:Fr:iiil~~JmoDs. He ..... York: Dover, 1979 We humans tend to view ourselves as the paradigms of morally considerable beings. Humans, it is often claimed, are the most morally valuable (perhaps the ~ morally PHILOSOPHY valuable) beings on this planet. It is commonly assumed that "lesser" beings 83 BRIWEENBEIWEEN THE SPECIES should be sacrificed for our benefit. When For those who continue to think that it is not pressed to provide a rational defense for the wrong to eat and vivisect non humans, but belief in human pre-eminence, philosophers indefensible to do so to even less well have argued that our autonomous, richly mentally endowed humans, the issue should complex lives warrant our special status. be very pressing indeed. They stand accused Few, however, have argued that humans who of moral inconsistency by two very are incapable of autonomy may properly be different groups. Those who have become sacrificed to further the interests of normal convinced that moral considerability is not humans. restricted to humanity are urging that we cease even the painless exploitation of It was inevitable that this prima facie non humans. According to quite another, inconsistency would be challenged. Writers very disturbing view, we should consider like Peter Singer and Tom Regan advanced exploiting mentally defective humans in the argument from marginal cases to show addition to nonhumans.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacrim Update Winter 2020
    Pacific Rim Update, Winter 2020 AAALAC INTERNATIONAL continued from page 3... Pacific Winter 2020 • Nonclinical Research Institute ChemOn Inc., • Sai Life Science Limited, Hinjewadi, Pune, Singapore (5) Rim Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-Do (2009) Maharashtra (2011) • A-Star Research Entities (2009) • Orientbio Gapyeong Breeding Center • Shantha Biotechnics Private Limited, Issue! (ORI-GBC), Gapyeong-Gun, Gyeonggi-Do Hyderabad, Telangana (2017) • InVivos Pte Ltd (2014) (2011) • Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company • National University of Singapore (2010) 203 programs in 12 Pacific • OSONG Medical Innovation Foundation Ltd., Gujarat (2009) • Philip Morris International Research (KBIO), Ministry of Health and Welfare, • Syngene International Ltd., Bangalore Laboratories Pte. Ltd. (2012) Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do (2015) Rim countries are accredited (2009) • SingHealth Experimental Medicine Centre, • Research Institute for Future Medicine, • TheraIndx Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore (2006) There are now more than 1,000 AAALAC International accredited programs in 49 countries Samsung Medical Center Seoul, Seoul (2018) (2001) around the globe. Interest in the AAALAC International accreditation program continues to • Vanta Bioscience, Gummidipundi, Tamil Cambodia (3) • Yonsei University College of Medicine, Nadu (2011) flourish in the Pacific Rim Region. Currently 203 accredited institutions are located in 12 Seoul (2004) • Orient Cam Co. Ltd/Cambodia Primate • Vimta Labs Limited, Hyderabad, Andhra and Research Center (OCC-CPRC), Phnom Pacific Rim
    [Show full text]
  • Captive Breeding of Selected Taxa in Cambodia and Viet Nam: a Reference Manual for Farm Operators and Cites Authorities
    CAPTIVE BREEDING OF SELECTED TAXA IN CAMBODIA AND VIET NAM: A REFERENCE MANUAL FOR FARM OPERATORS AND CITES AUTHORITIES J. THOMSON A TRAFFIC SOUTHEAST ASIA REPORT This report was published with the kind support of Published by TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Greater Mekong Programme, Ha Noi, Viet Nam © 2008 TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Greater Mekong Programme, Ha Noi, Viet Nam All rights reserved. All material appearing in this publication is copyrighted and may be reproduced with permission. Any reproduction in full or in part of this publication must credit TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Greater Mekong Programme as the copyright owner. The views of the authors expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the TRAFFIC network, WWF or IUCN. The designations of geographical entities in this publication, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of TRAFFIC or its supporting organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The TRAFFIC symbol copyright and Registered Trademark ownership is held by WWF. TRAFFIC is a joint programme of WWF and IUCN. Suggested citation: Thomson, Julie (2008). Captive breeding of selected taxa in Cambodia and Viet Nam: A reference manual for farm operators and CITES authorities. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Greater Mekong Programme, Ha Noi, Viet Nam. ISBN: 978-1-85850-245-8 Cover photo: © Nguyen Dao Ngoc Van, TRAFFIC Southeast Asia - GMP CAPTIVE BREEDING OF SELECTED TAXA IN CAMBODIA AND VIET NAM: A REFERENCE MANUAL FOR FARM OPERATORS AND CITES AUTHORITIES By J.
    [Show full text]