New Publication
Homeopathy in Intensive Care
and Emergency Medicine
Homeopathy First Magazine
Best Vitamin C Drink 
Learn More With Caralyn 


Homeopathy World Community

Creating Waves of Awareness

Here a report on events in the UK.

Upward jump in lab animal tests
By Victoria Gill
Science reporter, BBC News

Rodents were used in 77% of animal experiments

The number of animals used in UK laboratories for scientific experiments has risen again.

Home Office figures show that in 2008, 3.7 million procedures using animals were carried out in England, Wales and Scotland - an increase of 14% on 2007.

This represents a spike in the year-on-year trend, although numbers have been increasing for several years.

More than three-quarters of procedures were carried out on rodents. Most of the remainder involved birds and fish.

The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

Dogs, cats, horses and non-human primates receive special protection under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. These were used in less than 1% of all procedures.

Most experiments were for research and drug development; safety testing accounts for much of the rest.

Animal welfare groups have strongly criticised the increase, with the RSPCA calling the figures "disappointing".

But Lord Drayson, science and innovation minister, said it was "critical to the development of new medicines and increasing the level of understanding of diseases".

'The three Rs'

In 2004, the government established a national centre dedicated to replacing, refining and reducing the use of animals in tests that are licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act.

This increase has caused critics to question whether policy-makers are failing to uphold this "three Rs" strategy.

But Dr Judy MacArthur Clark, chief inspector of the Home Office Animals (Scientific Procedures) Inspectorate, said the strategy was working, and that the numbers were a reflection of "an increase in fully ethically justified, high quality research taking place in the UK".

Scientific Logic

Simon Festing, executive director of Understanding Animal Research, said the three Rs were not just about reducing numbers.

"Improving animal welfare by refining procedures and replacing 'higher' animals with 'lower' animals are also important," he said.

"Using more animals does not mean more suffering. Many mice and fish are only used to breed better models of serious illnesses such as cancer or Alzheimer's, or to replace higher animals such as monkeys or dogs."

So far the report. However, those that are testing on animals have not yet entered the school of scientific logic: are animals more like humans than humans?

Scientifically sound, they say, for it carries no danger. They do not even contemplate using a medicine on people, before they have tested it extensively in vitro in the laboratory and in vivo on animals.
It is not methodical, let alone scientifically sound, for in a proper method you use equal entities for both your tests as for your treatment. The danger lies in the extrapolation of certainties in regards to people. It is a non-method, which compares the incomparable; which tests on incomparable entities and extrapolates compatibility between entities that are incompatible.

Views: 307

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hi Kaviraj
Good subject for discussion
it is not possible to transfer the probability predictions from animals to humans.
At present, therefore, there exists no possibility at all of a scientifically based prediction.

In this respect, the situation is even less favourable than a game of chance.

Even the most widely respected textbook on animal experimentation states:
"Uncritical reliance on the results of animal tests can be dangerously misleading and has cost the health and lives of tens of thousands of humans."

The best-known example of this is thalidomide.

Mothers who took this drug to ameliorate morning sickness gave birth to children with shocking deformities, with most lacking developed limbs.

Animal tests had not predicted this.
The first recorded case of side effects occurred on Christmas Day 1956, but in 1957 the drug was released anyway!
This is just One example........................................................
I fear that we have just been left out of the game. Why?
If results obtained in one species are not applicable to others, we are living in a mistake, because I do not know of pure experimentation in animals. Veterinary Medicine should be out of homeopathy and it is not. I don't know that Arsenicum album, Phosphorus or Lycopodium have been tested for signs and symptoms in animals. Besides of this is the symptom problem. We work without them. Nevertheless, homeopathy works, even though some people believe that it is a medicine for humans.
I was once head of the animal production facility at the Cell Physiology Institute of the National Autonomous University of Mexico. We sent thousands of rats a year to the Institute’s laboratories. Maybe there was a reason God had to withdraw me from there, maybe there wasn’t any.
We think that we are something very special, but I rather prefer to judge us by a phrase I heard in a movie. “Humans?”, a dog asked, “Oh yeah, they are big dogs that walk queerly, “ answered an older one.
I taught anatomy at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnia of the same university. That was a long trail. There I realized that there are very much more similarities than differences between the animals and us.
About thalidomide, I can say it a criminal blunder. I knew a Girl in Mexico City. The offense against her was double. First she was a victim of thalidomide, second, her parents abandoned her, and she was recovered by Sister Keller in Mexico City. I was a kid then. She was always shy and a little retracted, but managed to feed herself with her feet. Around thirty years later I saw once her being pushed by two teenagers, in the same neighborhood where the orphanage was. An absolute beauty, no arms.
But thalidomide was a mathematical blunder. It is a classical example of an incomplete statistical analysis. If you go into further statistical testing, with the same results obtained in animals you will get a menace alarm on congenital malformations. Something I wonder is if they really skipped the test or if they just sold it to in spite of the results. We know the labs.

Greetings from Mexico,

Nacho Cabrera
Hi Nacho,

Why should animals be excluded from homoeopathy?
They also have personalities and the remedies used for people are applicable to them too.
I was talking about testing drugs on animals to determine what they should do in humans as an invalid means.

Clarke's MM says that "Arsenic is the horse's remedy, as Pulsatilla is the sheep's and Antimonium crudum the pig's."

Pulsatilla is ultimated in the Kangaroo - supremely cuddly, with the joey 2 years in the pouch!
Animals respond to homoeopathy often better than humans - they do not antidote, either on purpose or by accident and have the best response to the vet who gives it. They always come and thank you. I once treated a dog who was very fearful with Arsenicum. She always barked at me when i came to visit, but after that remedy, she never did that again. Just came and licked my hands and be enthusiastic to see me.
Nacho posted:"I wonder is if they really skipped the test or if they just sold it to in spite of the results.................................................."

My reply:
More often than not the "negative test results" are nOT published for public viewing.
Many many allopathic drugs are released with horrific adverse effects buried deep in the test results."MONEY TALKS".
Not only money talks, the revolving door is used by industry people, who then get in the FDA and then approve their own reports.
Hi KAviraj,

It is always nice to hear from you.
I understand that principles learned in man can be applies to animals?
I have been making living from it the last ten years. It is astounding how well homeopathy works.
By the way, I do not agree in species remedies. Not as a Veterinarian, but as a horseman, I´ve known many kinds of horses who had nothing to do with arsenicum.
Anyway, the chat is another; so principles learned in a species can be applied to another?

Greetings from Mexico,

Nacho Cabrera
Hi Nacho,

Yes, the same principles apply, just as in plants too. Agro-homoeopathy is proof positive of the fact that the Law of Similars applies to all - regardless whether man, animal, or plant and even to Mother Earth. Thirty years of experience with man and animals and 22 years with plants have taught me that the Law of Similars is universally applicable.
I suggest you read Clarke's description. I have used it with great success on Australian race horses.
Maybe it is also time to read Catherine Coulter's description of Arsenicum. She gives some excellent indications for it as a horse's remedy.
That said, i agree there are not many remedies that fit a species, but the cuddliness of the Kangaroo is well-known and i have seen brilliant results in joeys, rescued by Animal Rescue after the mother gets run over by a truck - which is a daily occurrence over there.
Pulsatilla gets them over their grief and seldom do they also need Silica, the chronic of Puls. While not eating or drinking for quite some time and thus risking their own lives, Puls always gets them back on their feet and after that, it is hard to shake them off - they take you to be their mother! They also remember you, even after 1 year! They immediately come and stay by your side, once you return for some other joey in the same situation.

And yes, there are horses that are bossy and full of gas where Lycopodium is the remedy, or sad horses where Nat.mur will do the trick. Also, Bryonia can do good if there are colics, and other remedies may also be indicated according to individuality. Nonetheless, Arsenicum is the main remedy.
Dogs may need Lycopodium or any other remedy, all when truly indicated, but hey, I am not a vet. I have treated many animals, from dogs and cats to birds and lions, monkeys and seals to elephants (In Perth Zoo) I see them as not much different from people - personality-wise and they may require any remedy we use for people.

How are things in Mex? Swine flue gone?

I agree with Gina. The labs invest great sums of money in some drugs, and then want their money back no matter who can be dmaged, of course, they want it WITH profits.
more on this horrid deception see links;
scientists pushing dangerous prescription drugs-blatant deception in medical journals
fda approval of harmfull drugs funded by lobbyist working for big pharma
shows conflicts of interest,html
fda supressing negative drug info
propaganda writen in medical journals
patients are easily influenced
Hello Kaviraj,

Mexico is going pretty well for a broken country and importing almost everyting from China (I believe the China Syndrome is killing economies the world over), but the flu is gone from the States where it began. Now we have some problems in the States that hadn´t have it (as always). For instance, the most affected State now is Chiapas (my poor, and believe me they are, poor chiapanecos). I think things have been controled. BAsic Hygiene was capital to it. People began washing hands and even the intestinal diseases diminished their usual pre-summer spread.
Something I was taught at the veterinary school was that "the best disinfection is cleanliness". No doubt about it.
Greetings and many thanks,



HWC Partners


© 2019   Created by Debby Bruck.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...