State Proposition 71 - Likelihood of Testing on Animals...Pawpac Recommendations

[Guest guest]

Dear Voters for Animals:

 

Since at the last Vigil meeting the subject of Stem Cell Research came up - and its funding under Proposition 71, I decided to quote some of the proposed legislation itself from the California Voter Information Guide. So for your information, here is a small but significant part (there is a total of 8 pages of amendments) of the proposition.

 

"This initiative measure expressly amends the California Constitution by adding an article thereto....

Article XXXV. Medical Research

SECTION 1. There is hereby established the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

SEC. 2. The institute shall have the following purposes:

(a) To make grants and loans for stem cell research, for research facilities, and for other vital research opportunities to realize therapies, protocols, and/or medical procedures that will result in, as speedily as possible, the cure for, and/or substantial mitigation of, major diseases, injuries, and orphan diseases.

(b) To support all stages of the process of developing cures, from laboratory research through successful clinical trials."

 

I think the key term in the above quote is "laboratory research"; that term is practically synonymous with experiments on mice and rats, and occasionally other animals. Knowing that, and the great amount of money involved - up to $3 billion - and the great profits that will be made by companies associated with biotech industry, I am currently strongly inclined to vote no on this proposition.

 

Also, in case you did not know, here are Pawpac's* recommendations on several of the state propositions:

YES on Prop. 59

NO on Prop. 64

NO on Prop. 68

 

 

* Pawpac is a state political action committee advocating for animals.

 

Bob O'Brien

Mail – CNET Editors' Choice 2004. Tell them what you think.

[Guest guest]

On 10/27/04, Vigil for Animals <vigilforanimals wrote:

 

> I think the key term in the above quote is " laboratory research " ;

> that term is practically synonymous with experiments on mice and rats,

> and occasionally other animals. Knowing that, and the great amount of

> money involved - up to $3 billion - and the great profits that will be

> made by companies associated with biotech industry, I am currently

> strongly inclined to vote no on this proposition.

 

you're objecting that the phrase " laboratory research " *might* mean

animal testing, even though this research area is on human stell cells.

 

do you have any specific evidence that the proposed researach on human

stem cells will involve animals? otherwise, i'm unclear where else the

research is going to take place, if not in a laboratory.

 

if there is hard evidence that the research will increase the amount

of animal testing, then please post it so those who are on the fence

can make a more informed decision. otherwise, this is an historic

opportunity for the animal rights community and medical research to be

on the same side, and it would be a shame for speculation to cause

people to vote with their fears.

 

--

 

steve simitzis : /sim' - i - jees/

pala : saturn5 productions

www.steve.org : 415.282.9979

hath the daemon spawn no fire?