Gill Langley

Last updated

Gill Langley
Born (1952-08-10) 10 August 1952 (age 70)
NationalityBritish
EducationMA (physiology, cell biology, and zoology), PhD (neurochemistry)
Alma mater University of Cambridge
OccupationAnimal rights scientist & writer
Known for Alternatives to animal testing, animal rights

Gillian Rose Langley (born 10 August 1952) [1] is a British scientist and writer who specialises in alternatives to animal testing and animal rights. She was, from 1981 until 2009, the science director of the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research, a medical research charity developing non-animal research techniques. [2] She was an anti-vivisection member of the British government's Animal Procedures Committee for eight years, and has worked as a consultant on non-animal techniques for the European Commission, and for animal protection organizations in Europe and the United States. [3] Between 2010 and 2016 she was a consultant for Humane Society International.

Contents

Langley is the author of Vegan Nutrition (1988), and editor of Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes (1990). She has written a number of reports for the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection and the European Coalition to End Animal Experiments, including Faith, Hope & Charity? An Enquiry into Charity-Funded Research (1988), and Next of Kin (2006), an examination of primate experimentation. She has also published articles and reviews in scientific journals about human species-specific research approaches.

Education

Langley obtained an MA in physiology, cell biology, and zoology at the University of Cambridge, then earned her PhD in neurochemistry, also from Cambridge. She took up a position as a research fellow at the University of Nottingham, specialising in neurochemistry using human cell cultures.

Involvement in animal protection

Langley was trained as an animal researcher but after reading Peter Singer's Animal Liberation she became a vegan and an animal rights activist, and campaigned professionally against animal experiments. [4] She was a member of the Animal Procedures Committee for eight years, which advises the British Home Office on issues related to animal testing, and has acted as an advisor to the government on the introduction of the new European Union chemicals legislation, REACH. She has served as a specialist consultant for the European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). [5] She was called as an expert witness in 2001 by the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures during its inquiry into animal experimentation in the UK. [6]

In April 2006, she was a member of the panel at the Oxford Union that debated whether "This house would not test on animals." Opposing the motion were Laurie Pycroft—who founded Pro-Test, which organised the debate—Sir Colin Blakemore, Professor John Stein, and Professor Lord Robert Winston. [7] Supporting the motion, along with Langley, were Dr Andrew Knight, Uri Geller and BUAV campaigns director Alistair Currie. [8] The motion was defeated by 273 to 48.

Position on animal research

Langley is an anti-vivisectionist and vegan. She told The Guardian that she "would never claim that all animal experiments are without scientific value. " [9] She argues that the ethical case against animal research is absolute and that medical progress will benefit from 21st-century, human-relevant tools being used in place of animal experiments. This transition urgently requires funding and policy changes. She told the BBC: "When you know that other animals can feel pain and distress in the same ways that humans do, it is unethical to experiment on them." [10]

She has campaigned against the use of non-human primates in xenotransplantation, where pig organs were grafted onto the necks of primates to test anti-rejection drugs. She told medical journalists Jenny Bryan and John Clare that the primates used in xenotransplantation research are subjected to major surgery; internal haemorrhages; isolation in small cages; repeated blood sampling; wound infections; nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea because of immunosuppressant drugs; kidney or heart failure, and eventually death. She said:

"It's not just the suffering they endure in the laboratories and research establishments. Just getting there can be torture. Studies of primates show them to have complex mental abilities which may increase their capacity to suffer. Supplying the laboratories in the UK imposes huge suffering on the animals... They're then contained in small, single cages, and transported for very long distances causing deaths, distress and suffering." [4]

Next of Kin

Langley's report against primate experimentation, Next of Kin (2006), [5] was published simultaneously with the publication by the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust in favor of primate experimentation. The New Scientist wrote that her report cited studies suggesting that macaques and other small monkeys are more conscious of themselves and others than was previously believed, giving them a moral status equivalent to that of great apes, who are currently not used in experiments in the UK. [11] David Morton, professor of Biomedical Science & Ethics at the University of Birmingham, said the report was "a wake-up call to scientists to raise their game in their justification and ways they use non-human primates in research." [12]

Publications

See also

Notes

  1. "Weekend birthdays". The Guardian . 9 August 2014. p. 45.
  2. "Gill Langley: Profile", The Guardian, accessed 9 June 2010.
  3. Levinson, Ralph and Reiss, Michael J. (eds) Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers. RoutledgeFalmer, p. 175.
  4. 1 2 Bryan, Jenny & Clare, John. Organ Farms. Carlton, 2001. excerpt
  5. 1 2 Langley, Gill. "Next of Kin: A Report on the Use of Primates in Experiments", British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, June 2006, accessed 9 June 2010.
  6. "Examination of Witnesses (Questions 382–399)", Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, United Kingdom Parliament, retrieved 15 July 2006.
  7. Asthana, Anushka. "Pro-Test in support of animal experiments", The Observer, 30 April 2006.
  8. Alistair Currie's speech to the Oxford Union Archived 16 July 2006 at the Wayback Machine , BUAV, retrieved 15 July 2006.
  9. Burch, Druin. "The sceptic", The Guardian, 2 March 2006.
  10. "Reduce animal testing, Lords urge", BBC News, 24 July 2002.
  11. Coghlan, Andy. "Report claims experiments on monkeys are vital", New Scientist, 2 June 2006. Also see "Primates in Medical Research", Medical Research Council.
  12. "MP to chair BUAV / Pro-Test debate on primate testing" Archived 7 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine , 31 May 2006.

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal testing</span> Use of nonhuman animals in experiments

Animal testing, also known as animal experimentation, animal research, and in vivo testing, is the use of non-human animals in experiments that seek to control the variables that affect the behavior or biological system under study. This approach can be contrasted with field studies in which animals are observed in their natural environments or habitats. Experimental research with animals is usually conducted in universities, medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, defense establishments, and commercial facilities that provide animal-testing services to the industry. The focus of animal testing varies on a continuum from pure research, focusing on developing fundamental knowledge of an organism, to applied research, which may focus on answering some questions of great practical importance, such as finding a cure for a disease. Examples of applied research include testing disease treatments, breeding, defense research, and toxicology, including cosmetics testing. In education, animal testing is sometimes a component of biology or psychology courses. The practice is regulated to varying degrees in different countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vivisection</span> Experimental surgery

Vivisection is surgery conducted for experimental purposes on a living organism, typically animals with a central nervous system, to view living internal structure. The word is, more broadly, used as a pejorative catch-all term for experimentation on live animals by organizations opposed to animal experimentation, but the term is rarely used by practising scientists. Human vivisection, such as live organ procurement, has been perpetrated as a form of torture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cruelty-free</span>

In the animal rights movement, cruelty-free is a label for products or activities that do not harm or kill animals anywhere in the world. Products tested on animals or made from animals are not considered cruelty-free, since these tests are often painful and cause the suffering and death of millions of animals every year.

Cruelty Free International is an animal protection and advocacy group that campaigns for the abolition of all animal experiments. They organise certification of cruelty-free products which are marked with the symbol of a leaping bunny.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Animals Act 1986, sometimes referred to as ASPA, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed in 1986, which regulates the use of animals used for research in the UK. The Act permits studies to be conducted using animals for procedures such as breeding genetically modified animals, medical and veterinary advances, education, environmental toxicology and includes procedures requiring vivisection, if certain criteria are met. Revised legislation came into force on 1 January 2013. The original act related to the 1986 EU Directive 86/609/EEC which was updated and replaced by EU Directive 2010/63/EU

Shamrock Farm was the United Kingdom's only non-human primate importation and quarantine centre, located in Small Dole, near Henfield in West Sussex. The centre, owned by Bausch and Lomb and run by Charles River Laboratories, Inc. for Shamrock (GB) Ltd, provided animals to various laboratories and universities for use in animal testing. It was Europe's largest supplier of primates to laboratories, and held up to 350 monkeys at a time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cambridge University primates</span> Primate experiments

Cambridge University primate experiments came to public attention in 2002 after the publication that year of material from a ten-month undercover investigation in 1998 by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV). The experiments were being conducted on marmosets, and included the removal of parts of their brains intended to simulate the symptoms of stroke or Parkinson's disease. Some of the research was theoretical, aimed at advancing knowledge of the brain, while some of it was applied.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International primate trade</span>

The international trade in primates sees 32,000 wild non-human primates (NHPs) trapped and sold on the international market every year. They are sold mostly for use in animal testing, but also for food, for exhibition in zoos and circuses, and for private use as companion animals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Anti-Vivisection Society</span> Animal protection organization

The National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) is an international not-for-profit animal protection group, based in London, working to end animal testing, and focused on the replacement of animals in research with advanced, scientific techniques. Since 2006, the NAVS has operated its international campaigns under the working name Animal Defenders International (ADI), and the two groups now work together under the ADI name.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foundation for Biomedical Research</span> American animal welfare organization

The Foundation for Biomedical Research (FBR) is an American nonprofit organization, 501(c)(3), located in Washington, DC. Established in 1981, the organization is dedicated to informing the news media, teachers, and other groups about the need for lab animals in medical and scientific research. The organization, together with its partner, the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR), argues that promoting animal research leads to improved health for both humans and animals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of animal testing</span>

The history of animal testing goes back to the writings of the Ancient Greeks in the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE, with Aristotle and Erasistratus one of the first documented to perform experiments on nonhuman animals. Galen, a physician in 2nd-century Rome, dissected pigs and goats, and is known as the "Father of Vivisection." Avenzoar, an Arabic physician in 12th-century Moorish Spain who also practiced dissection, introduced animal testing as an experimental method of testing surgical procedures before applying them to human patients. Although the exact purpose of the procedure was unclear, a Neolithic surgeon performed trepanation on a cow in 3400-3000 BCE. This is the earliest known surgery to have been performed on an animal, and it is possible that the procedure was done on a dead cow in order for the surgeon to practice their skills.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal testing on non-human primates</span> Experimentation using other primate animals

Experiments involving non-human primates (NHPs) include toxicity testing for medical and non-medical substances; studies of infectious disease, such as HIV and hepatitis; neurological studies; behavior and cognition; reproduction; genetics; and xenotransplantation. Around 65,000 NHPs are used every year in the United States, and around 7,000 across the European Union. Most are purpose-bred, while some are caught in the wild.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alternatives to animal testing</span> Test methods that avoid the use of animals

Alternatives to animal testing are the development and implementation of test methods that avoid the use of live animals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boyd Group</span> British think tank

The Boyd Group is a Britain-based, independent think tank considering issues relating to animal testing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nafovanny</span> Vietnamese captive-breeding primate facility

Nafovanny in Vietnam is the largest captive-breeding primate facility in the world, supplying long-tailed macaques to animal testing laboratories, including Huntingdon Life Sciences in the UK and Covance in Germany.

Uncaged Campaigns is a Sheffield, UK, based anti-vivisection, not-for-profit organisation and a registered company limited by guarantee.

Daniel Louis Lyons is the chief executive officer of the Centre for Animals and Social Justice, a British animal protection charity. He is an honorary research fellow at the University of Sheffield and the author of The Politics of Animal Experimentation (2013).

Women have played a central role in animal advocacy since the 19th century. The animal advocacy movement – embracing animal rights, animal welfare, and anti-vivisectionism – has been disproportionately initiated and led by women, particularly in the United Kingdom. Women are more likely to support animal rights than men. A 1996 study of adolescents by Linda Pifer suggested that factors that may partially explain this discrepancy include attitudes towards feminism and science, scientific literacy, and the presence of a greater emphasis on "nurturance or compassion" amongst women. Although vegetarianism does not necessarily imply animal advocacy, a 1992 market research study conducted by the Yankelovich research organization concluded that "of the 12.4 million people [in the US] who call themselves vegetarian, 68% are female, while only 32% are male".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harlan (company)</span> Laboratory supplier

Harlan Sprague Dawley Inc. was a supplier of animals and other services to laboratories for the purpose of animal testing. It provided pre-clinical research tools and services for the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, agrochemicals, industrial chemical, and food industries.

The New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS) is a national, registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization "dedicated to ending the use of animals in research, testing, and science education" and replacing them with "modern alternatives that are ethically, humanely, and scientifically superior."