Get involved for Primates

CAMPAIGN CALL TO ACTION: Write to your MEP

We urgently need your help, please write to your MEP who signed Written Declaration 40 TODAY and ask for them to consider the ADI recommendations on the amendment of the revision of Directive 86 609.

Every UK constituent has at least one MEP who signed this Declaration so in your letter please mention the following points:

1. Thank them for signing Written Declaration 40
2. Express disappointment that this has not been implemented by the Commission in the revision of Directive 86/609.
3. Ask that they contact the Agriculture Committee (who are reviewing the revision) and urge them to incorporate a ban on the use of wild caught primates and apes, without loopholes, and for a mechanism for a timetable to replace all primate experiments to be included.

Please send the letter to;

MEP, Altiero Spinelli Building,
European Parliament,
60 Rue Wiertz,
B-1047 Brussels,
Belgium.

Click here to find out which MEPs signed WD40.

Or alternatively simply call our office on 020 7630 3340 and we can give you the details or email our Supporter Relations team.

Time is of the essence, so please try and find time to write a letter TODAY. Feel free to call and discuss anything with our team here. Remember, every letter counts so please ask friends, family and work colleagues to write also!

Thank you so much for your support and for caring about the plight of laboratory animals.

Click here for a sample letter...

Or if you would like summary information on our recommendations to construct your own letter read our NEW briefing ‘A Vision for Europe’ giving a summary of our proposals which we believe would save many animals from unnecessary suffering, whilst at the same time, would bring Europe to the forefront of science through the increased use of modern non-animal research techniques.

ADI recommendations on the amendment of the revision of Directive 86 609

Our Written Declaration 40/2007 was adopted by the European Parliament calling for bans on the use of Great Apes and wild-caught monkeys in experiments and for a timetable to be set to end all experiments on nonhuman primates in Europe.
The Commission have responded to our campaign by proposing that the use of apes and wild caught primates will be banned and the use of primates of wild caught parents, but they have left loopholes and failed to establish a timetable to replace all primate experiments.
You can help laboratory animals across the whole of Europe by writing to one or more of your MEPs who signed Written Declaration 40 to end primate experiments, urging them to push for our following demands. Click here to find out who you MEP is and if they signed our declaration

Biannual/Regular review of the directive:

The proposal states that the directive will be reviewed within 10 years of it coming into force, to take into account the advances in non-animal (particularly primate) methods (Article 53)
The ADI manifesto recommends the creation of a two year national review mechanism for the designated authorities to revise specific regulations related to the use of animals, which will enable them to use their regulatory powers in order to make the necessary amendments. This will reflect the pace of scientific developments and changes in our understanding of animal use.

Primates

Ban on apes without exemptions
The proposal states that great apes shall not be used in procedures, (Article 8) subject to a clause which excuses their use if it is essential to preserve that species of great ape, or there is an unexpected outbreak of a life threatening of debilitating clinical condition in humans. (Article 50)
ADI manifesto states that the ban on Great Apes should not be undermined by any exemptions such as the one proposed by the European Commission. It is unreasonable and dangerous to leave the door open to laboratory experimentation on these highly endangered species

Ban on use of wild caught without exemptions
The proposal states that, although animals should not be taken from the wild to be used in procedures, exemptions may be granted if there is “scientific justification” that the purpose of the procedure cannot be met by using an animal, specifically bred for use in procedures (Article 9)

ADI manifesto states that we would like an immediate ban on all wild caught primate experiments.

Full implementation of F1 ban after 7 years
The proposal states that, for certain species of primate, 7 years after the transposition of the directive, only those animals bred for use in procedures may be used (Article 10)
ADI manifesto states the ban on wild-caught primates should be immediate and be implemented by a system of control of the lineage of the monkeys used in laboratories. It should be made mandatory for all breeding, supply centres and laboratories to be able to provide evidence that they only house purpose-bred second generation primates. Breeding centres should not be allowed to re-stock with wild-caught animals, even if they are viewed as pests in the habitat country.

Timetable to replace all primate experiments to be established by Bi-annual reviews
The proposal states that the directive will be reviewed within 10 years of the directive coming into force, to take into account the advances in non-animal (particularly primate) methods. (Article 53)
ADI manifesto states a review every two years should aim to set timetables and targets for the replacement of specific animal experiments including establishing a timetable for replacing the use of all primates in scientific experiments with alternatives.

Exemptions based on “scientific justification”
The proposal grants exemptions from humane killing (Article 6), a ban on the use of endangered species (Article 7) and animals bred for use in procedures (Article 10), on the basis of “scientific justification”
ADI believes that any benefit to animals brought about by these proposals are undermined by the exemptions, and that the exemptions should be deleted.

Prohibitions

Higher education and training
The proposal states procedures may be carried out for the purposes of “higher education or training” (Article 5)
ADI believes that due to the advanced and sophisticated non-animal methods available, there is no need for animal use in higher education.

Household product testing

The proposal does not specifically mention phasing out the testing of household products on animals

ADI manifesto states that there should be a ban on testing household products as these experiments cannot pass the ethical test since they do not aim at obtaining benefits for human health

Animal use for forensic investigations

The proposal states procedures may be carried out for the purposes of “forensic inquiries” (Article 5)
ADI believes that due to the advanced and sophisticated non-animal methods available, there is not a need for animal use in forensic enquiries.

Transparency and project authorisation

The Directive revision proposes that Member States shall only carry out projects with prior authorisation by the competent authority. The granting of authorisation shall also be subject to favourable ethical evaluation by the competent authority (Article 35).
ADI recommends that the principles of freedom of information be applied to an anonymised licensing system, allowing interested parties to recommend alternatives/replacements or highlight the potential for data sharing or alternative sources of the data, before a licence has been granted.

End Duplication / Data Sharing

The Directive proposal states that each Member State shall accept data that are required by law and generated by procedures recognised by Community legislation from another Member State. This is the case unless further procedures need to be carried out regarding that data for the protection of public health, safety or the environment.

Outside the area of testing required by law, subject to safeguarding confidential information, the Member States shall ensure the sharing of data generated by procedures. (Article 44)

In the field of chemical testing, the REACH Regulation provides for compulsory data sharing for tests involving animals. ADI believes that Directive 86/609/EEC should generalise this principle to all animal testing. Indeed, negative results in animal testing are rarely reported.

Centres of Excellence for Alternatives/Replacements

Each Member State is required to designate a national reference laboratory for the validation of alternative methods replacing, reducing and refining the use of animals. (Article 46)

ADI believes that these national reference laboratories (NRLs) should function as ‘spokes’ being funded from a central European centre of excellence for 3Rs research: reduction, refinement, replacement. The NRL should reduce the ECVAM bottleneck for validation, but also, promote and fund development. NRLs could oversee, with relevant regulatory bodies, the outsourcing of experiments to recognized centres of excellence / research hotels, where experiments which would otherwise be performed on animals can be outsourced. This would ensure alternatives are used and their availability increased.

Extension of scope to cover some invertebrates and foetal life forms

The revision includes the protection of embryonic or foetal forms as from the last third of their normal development and some live invertebrate animals (Article 2).
Animals become sentient at different levels of gestation depending on their species; it is therefore difficult to propose a clear point in the gestation at which foetuses should be protected. ADI propose that the cut off point for protection of foetal animals is species specific.

We propose that the scope of the Directive 86/609/EEC be extended to include all invertebrates on the grounds that they are sentient beings with cognitive abilities similar to those of vertebrates

Click here to see our full manifesto
Click here to read the full directive proposal from the European Commission

Save the Primates website is managed and sponsored by Animal Defenders International (ADI).