NEWSLETTER:
  • Animals, news

    This November 4, Californians should vote YES! on Prop 2

    10.03.08 |

    www.yesonprop2.com

  • Animals, news, press

    ‘Kentucky Fried Cruelty’ comes to an end

    06.03.08 |

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Canada/2008/06/01/5739946.html

    ‘Kentucky Fried Cruelty’ comes to an end
    Vegan `chicken’ on menu as KFC Canada pledges better animal welfare to end protest

    By COLIN PERKEL, The Canadian Press

    TORONTO — Following a five-year roasting by animal-rights activists, KFC Canada is promising improved welfare for the chickens it buys for its fast-food outlets in exchange for an end to a boycott campaign that will continue in the U.S. and elsewhere.

    The Canadian Press has learned that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has agreed to call off its Canadian “Kentucky Fried Cruelty� campaign, which featured high-profile actress Pamela Anderson among others, following a signed agreement with the company.

    Among other things, the deal obliges KFC Canada to begin buying from suppliers who use gas to kill their chickens painlessly, considered to be the least cruel method of slaughter.

    The company is also promising to insist on other “animal-welfare friendly� measures relating to how the birds are kept, including a maximum on crowding and phasing out non-essential growth-hormones and other drugs.

    Customers of the popular restaurant chain will also be able to order a vegan “chicken� item, according to the deal that followed almost seven months of at-times “sticky� closed-door negotiations.

    “It’s going to drastically reduce the suffering of chickens in slaughterhouses and also . . . improve the living conditions for animals while they’re on the farm,� Matt Prescott, PETA’s assistant director of corporate affairs, said from Norfolk, Va.

    KFC Canada President Steve Langford said he was delighted with the agreement.

    “It will be nice to put this behind us,� Langford said. “Our preference is to have nothing negative attached to our brand.�

    Langford said the Canadian operations, which are independent of those in the U.S., had chosen to take the situation into its own hands and talk to PETA about animal welfare.

    “Once I got involved and we actually met face to face, we found out that we had no differences of opinion about how animals should be treated,� Langford said.

    “We landed in a very good place.�

    PETA’s campaign, which garnered international attention, has included more than 12,000 protests at KFC restaurants and outside the homes of company senior executives.

    Demonstrators, who have included former “Playboy� pinup Lauren Anderson, have burned effigies of company icon, Col. Sanders. Other notables such as Paul McCartney, the Dalai Lama, and Chrissie Hynde have participated in the campaign.

    KFC Canada was also thrown on the defensive three years ago when PETA released horrific video showing poultry workers torturing chickens in the United States.

    The company is owned by Priszm Income Fund, based in Vaughan, Ont., which operates 465 outlets across the country. The fund has been struggling to stem a flow of red ink and shore up falling share values.

    Most of the 300 independent franchisees have agreed to abide by the agreement with PETA.

    “It appears as though our campaign affected the bottom line to the point where the company finally had enough,� Prescott said.

    “That said, I also believe that KFC in Canada is genuinely concerned about animal welfare.�

    While the anti-KFC campaign will now end in this country, PETA said it would continue in the U.S., the U.K. and other countries. However, it is hoping to persuade Yum Brands, which owns KFC outlets in the United States, to follow the Canadian lead.

    “With KFC Canada now doing exactly what we want KFC in the U.S. to do, our members and activists will be even more energetic and invigorated about going after KFC in other countries,� Prescott said.

    “All we want is for KFC worldwide to do what KFC Canada has done.�

  • Animals

    Washington Post: In U.S., Few Alternatives To Testing On Animals

    04.12.08 |

    In U.S., Few Alternatives To Testing On AnimalsPanel Has Produced 4 Options in 10 Years

    By Gilbert M. GaulWashington Post Staff WriterSaturday, April 12, 2008; A01

    Each year, American doctors inject more than 3 million doses of Botox to temporarily smooth their patients’ wrinkles and frown lines. But before each batch is shipped, the manufacturer puts it through one of the oldest and most controversial animal tests available.

    To check the potency of its product under federal safety rules, Allergan Inc. injects mice with Botox until it finds a dose at which half of the animals die — a rough gauge of potential harm to humans.

    Animal protection groups consider "lethal dose 50," as the test is known, to be "the poster child for everything that’s wrong with animal testing," said Martin Stephens, vice president for animal research issues at the Humane Society of the United States. "It’s as bad as it gets, poisoning animals to death."

    Allergan officials say they have no choice. Without a federally approved safety test that does not use animals, a company spokeswoman says, lethal dose 50 “is by default the required test.”

    The controversy over the Botox test highlights the slow pace of government efforts to replace or reduce the large numbers of animals used by pharmaceutical companies, chemical manufacturers and consumer firms to ensure that their products are safe for people. A decade after Congress created a panel to spur the development of non-animal tests, only four such tests have been approved out of 185 reviews, according to the panel’s records.

    Several of the panel’s original backers now consider the system broken. As a result, critics say, hundreds of thousands of mice, rabbits, hamsters and dogs continue to suffer and die unnecessarily in tests for pesticides, household cleaners, sunscreens and other products.

    "We were thrilled when the legislation was passed," said Sara Amundson, a former official with the Doris Day Animal League who was involved in creating the panel. "It’s shocking to look back and see how little we have accomplished."

    The federal panel is known as the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods, or ICCVAM. Representatives of 15 federal agencies make up the committee.

    Instead of acting as an advocate for companies and nonprofits proposing non-animal tests, the panel has become an obstacle, animal welfare groups say. They point to Europe, where a similar panel has approved 34 alternatives to animal tests and has another 170 in its pipeline. Critics say the U.S. panel is slow and favors older animal tests that have never gone through the same rigorous scientific review.

    The executive director of the U.S. panel, William S. Stokes, said in a statement that his group "has successfully reviewed over 185 test methods" and that the four alternatives it has endorsed "have significantly reduced the number of animals required for safety assessments, and provided for improved welfare of animals used in safety evaluations." One alternative has saved "at least 36,000 animals annually," Stokes said.

    Members of the panel also contend that it is unfair to compare Europe and the United States because the laws, rules and expectations are different. Europe has legislation mandating the use of non-animal tests. The United States only recommends their use.

    Nevertheless, some U.S. company officials and scientists said they have delayed or abandoned their proposals for non-animal tests because panel reviews are protracted and expensive. Others consider panel members biased in favor of animal tests that in some cases date back to the 1920s.

    "One should ask why after years of existence they have reviewed so few tests," said Neil Wilcox, a former Food and Drug Administration official involved in the creation of the committee.

    "The fundamental reason, in my opinion, is that the ICCVAM process has become recognized as an obstacle to getting tests validated as opposed to helping having tests validated," said Wilcox, …

  • Animals, news

    Help End the Seal Slaughter and Sign Pamela Anderson’s Seal Petition

    03.19.08 |

    Add your name to the petition urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper to end Canada’s cruel seal hunt. Please forward the petition to your friends and family.


    Every year in Canada, hundreds of thousands of baby harp seals are mercilessly slaughtered for their skins, and we want you to help get this cruel practice banned by signing Pamela Anderson’s seal petition. Watch the video to see more.


    Canadian-born Pamela joins PETA and animal activists worldwide in condemning the hunt.


    “As a proud Canadian who frequently travels abroad,” says Pamela, “I am alarmed that people are starting to see Canada as a country more beholden to a pack of greedy hunters and to the seal-skin ‘fashion’ whims of a few countries than to the massive international outcry against such a barbaric activity.”

    Please sign and forward the petition (click here) today.


  • I believe I’ve found the missing link between animal and civilized man.
    It is us.
    — Konrad Lorenz, Nobel Prize Physiology, 1973