I felt this way even before I understood why eating and wearing dead animals was wrong. I even thought that vegetarianism was kind of weird. Luckily, a local animal rights group recognizing that I got it on vivisection gave me some good literature explaining why we also shouldn’t eat animals.

As you pointed out, it’s not a zero sum game. Abolishing the use animals in experiments compliments promoting veganism. Interestingly, I’ve heard on several occasions, activists state that if we treated cats and dogs the way we treated factory farmed animals, it would be illegal. On the contrary, it is completely legal to treat cats and dogs that way behind the walls in a laboratory.

I feel that we should oppose vivisection on all of the following grounds:

1. It’s intense cruelty to animals.
2. It’s unscientific and useless. A drug may react one way in a nonhuman and completely differently in a human.
3. It has caused harm to human health.

Here are some reasons that I believe the animal rights movement has shied away from vivisection:

1. A lot of the current government repression has focused on anti-vivisection activists.
2. Proponents of vivisection are pretty clever at intimidating activists: they have PhD. or Dr. as part of their name; they constantly say “a rat or a child;” they are really good debaters; etc.
3. Even activists take prescription drugs which been tested on animals leading them to feel hypocritical about speaking out.
4. The percentage of animals suffering in laboratories is minuscule compared to those suffering on animal farms. They feel we’ll save more animals by only promoting veganism only.
5. Some activists felt that they put in a lot themselves through protests and civil disobedience but did not see a return on their investment.
6. Some of the welfare reform bills specifically state exemptions for vivisection.
7. Some activists really aren’t convinced that vivisection is unnecessary and harmful.

My purpose of the above list is twofold: I’d like to provide ideas on how to handle these roadblocks. In all honesty, I certainly suffer from some of those roadblocks too; I’m not saying that I have all the answers, but I’m hoping that other activists will read them and start thinking of solutions.

For point #1, we need to be really smart about having effective protests. We should be aware of government repression but we shouldn’t let it intimidate us. We need to learn our legal rights and have legal observers.

Points #2 and #7 can be addressed by educating ourselves. Groups such as PCRM, American Anti-Vivisection Society, In Defense of Animals, and Eastern Shore Sanctuary have great resources about vivisection’s uselessness. I also recommend the book Slaughter of the Innocent by Hans Reusch.

I have always been disappointed that #4 has been used as a reason to not stand up for animals in laboratories. We need to take a holistic view of animal liberation and look at changing the whole world’s attitude about animals in addition to the number of animals that we have to save. Yes, it would be true that if we abolished vivisection before converting the world to veganism, it would be a small percentage. However, the number is still pretty large and it would be meaningful to each individual animal who does not suffer. Lastly, even if vivisection did end before the other atrocities, I believe a fundamental shift in society’s attitude toward animals will have taken place. We could take advantage of this attitude to end other atrocities.

I understand that proponents of welfarist laws are sincere in wanting to reduce the suffering of the individual animals on animal farms. However, #6 needs to be addressed by really thinking over what we might be supporting if a bill makes exemptions for the use of animals in research.

Regarding #3, we have no excuse not to buy cosmetics, household cleaners, shampoos, etc. that are tested on animals. I do feel that we should look for holistic methods of preventing and treating illnesses. However, I understand that in some circumstances, individuals need to take prescription drugs that were by law tested on animals. That doesn’t mean that the tests were necessary or even guaranteed to be protect humans. Groups including PCRM are pressuring the industry to use viable alternatives.

I’m going to address #5 by ending in a positive note. Those who sacrificed their freedom for laboratory animals are starting to see a return on their investment. In the 1980’s, a student who refused to dissect an animal faced failing grades and ridicule from other students. There are now more state laws on the books allowing students to refuse. A few years ago, I had the honor of meeting Rooshin Dalal who was instrumental in ending animal experimentation at UVA around 2002. Sure, he deserves praise for his hard work, however, he stood on the shoulders of those who tried before him and failed. UVA has joined a growing list of schools that no longer experiment on animals.