Categories: Animal Testing

Making it obligatory to adopt out cats from animal testing laboratories

Why do animal testing laboratories have to be forced to adopt out the cats that they have abused? The norm is to kill (euphemism: euthanize) cats after they have been tested upon. I don’t understand it. Most of the time (nearly all of the time?) the cats are still healthy after being tested upon. So why can’t the default procedure be to let someone adopt them?

It would be a simple matter to make arrangements with local animal shelters to where the cats could be transported when released from the research facility. Or staff at the facility could adopt a cat. There are other outlets.

I suspect that the reason why research facilities don’t normally allow their cats (and dogs) to be adopted is because (1) their attitude towards cats is less than sensitive (2) they want to keep things in-house to avoid publicising their disagreeable activities. There are a lot of people who vehemently disagree with animal testing. I’m one of them. These facilities like to remain ‘under the radar’.

In lieu of allowing cats to be adopted, laws have been introduced to force them to do the humane thing. NAVS.org tells us that Minnesota introduced such laws in 2014. The law requires that publicly funded institutions of higher learning (does that include research laboratories?) must adopt out their cats and dogs when no longer needed. California, Connecticut, Illinois, New York and Nevada have similar laws.

In the news recently is a bill (draft legislation) going through the Massachusetts senate which requires that research laboratory animals should not be euthanised but adopted out through animal rescue organisations.

The bill was sponsored by Senator Bruce Tarr I am told by boston.com. However, my research indicates it was instigated by Ms DuBois of Brockton. It is bill no H.3232 as I understand it.

Here is the opening section:

“Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b), a research institution or product testing facility that intends to euthanize or destroy a dog or cat for any purpose other than scientific, medical or educational research shall, before euthanizing or destroying the dog or cat, offer the dog or cat to an animal shelter or rescue organization for adoption. A research institution or product testing facility may enter into a collaborative agreement with an animal shelter or rescue organization for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this subsection.”

If you wish you can read the full text by clicking on the following link: Massachusetts bill making it mandatory to adopt out cats used in testing labs.

USDA spends $650,000 of taxpayer’s money annually to toxoplasma-infect 100 kittens and kill them

Boston.com say that 80,000 cats and dogs are used (abused in my book) annually in research facilities. Having been forced against their will to be the victims of legalised abuse in service to the public these animals deserve a decent life in a nice home rather than being killed off and their bodies dumped in trash dumpsters at the back of the facility or incinerated. Why does it take legislators to force research facility management to do the decent thing?

[weaver_show_posts cats=”Animal-Testing” tags=”” author=”” author_id=”” single_post=”” post_type=” orderby=”date” sort=”ASC” number=”2″ show=”full” hide_title=”” hide_top_info=”1″ hide_bottom_info=”1″ show_featured_image=”1″ hide_featured_image=”” show_avatar=”” show_bio=”” excerpt_length=”” style=”background-color:HoneyDew; border:2px dotted darkgrey; padding:12px” class=”” header=”Associated pages (this is a selection. Please search for more):” header_style=”color:Indigo; font-size:130%;” header_class=”” more_msg=”” left=0 right=0 clear=0]

Please comment here using either Facebook or WordPress (when available).
Michael Broad

Hi, I am 70-years-of-age at 2019. For 14 years before I retired at 57, I worked as a solicitor in general law specialising in family law. Before that I worked in a number of different jobs including professional photography. I have a longstanding girlfriend, Michelle. We like to walk in Richmond Park which is near my home because I love nature and the landscape (as well as cats and all animals).

Leave a Comment

View Comments

  • It may be that the abuse leave too much evidence. Many tests leave permanent physical scars of the torture inflicted on the cat. All tests will leave permanent mental scars. In order for the testers to be absolved of any wrongdoing, they have to leave no evidence of their evils. Adoption will expose them. Poor animals!

    There is no reason for animal testing today. Technology had made it obsolete. Proof that the testers are sadistic and take pleasure in their "works."

Recent Posts

Are purebred cats inbred?

My belief is that the whole purpose of cat breeding is to selectively breed cats…

2 hours ago

Joe Exotic gives his zoo to Carole Baskin

It is the ultimate humiliation for Mr Joe Exotic. His zoo has been given to…

4 hours ago

Do cats have a sense of time passing?

The question is specific, do cats feel time passing? Do they reflect on it? We…

7 hours ago

New South Wales: two lions maul female zookeeper. Fate of lions to be decided.

This is another story of a zookeeper being attacked by a lion or lions and…

8 hours ago

Are winged cats real?

Domestic cats with appendages that look like wings are real but domestic cats with genuine…

22 hours ago

My cat does nothing all day…

When searching for something to write about today I notice that people are typing into…

1 day ago