SfN outlines strategies to counter animal extremists

The recommendations are a welcome step in the right direction providing practical security, communications, and advocacy actions that universities can take to protect colleagues and laboratory staff. Experiments on animals have proved a highly controversial and emotionally charged issue. So much so that activists are having to resort to desperate measures, resorting to violent and intimidating acts to get their message across. Past incidents have included a number of threatening letters being sent to a chain of children's nurseries that at the time had links with Huntingdon; a physical attack on the home of a senior executive of GSK; and the waging of a terror campaign against a family who bred guinea pigs for research purposes, which bizarrely included digging up their grandmother's grave and removing her remains. The recommendations, drawn up by The Society for Neuroscience (SfN), are primarily designed to provide an appropriate and safe environment for researchers working at universities and institutions. Central to these policies are three key objectives that allow scientists to pursue research within established regulatory and animal-care frameworks. The objectives aim to:

• Provide public leadership and public commitment to researchers and the research enterprise.

• Develop and implement security protocols and relationships in advance of attacks; and

• Support policy and public communication solutions at the federal, state, and local levels.

"The continuing intimidation and threats of violence to which researchers have been subjected are beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse and debate​," said Jeffrey Kordower, Chair of the SfN Committee on Animals in Research. "In recognition of that fact, the US Congress passed the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act to prohibit such action, and we now urge universities to add their efforts to ensure that researchers have a safe environment in which to pursue their vital work.​" The UK has similarly followed suit introducing new legislation in 2005 outlawing the targeting of companies who supply goods and services to companies involved in animal testing. Statistics published by the BIA in January 2007, indicate there has been a consistent fall in the number of 'home visits' where protestors would gather outside a family home and cause a civil disturbance, from the peak of 259 in 2003 down to 20 in 2006. In 2006 there were 50 cases of property damage compared with 86 instances the year before. Other crimes such as personal assaults and abusive and threatening messages have also nosedived. Most encouragingly for UK biomedical scientific research, the number of companies and organisations succumbing to pressure not to work with those involved with animal research has also dropped sharply from 103 in 2005 to only 39 in 2006. However, in the US, SfN figures paint a different picture as its members reported more attacks in the first six months of 2007 than in the five year period from 1999 to 2003. "Responsible biomedical research is essential to improve human health and save lives. Continued progress requires that institutions ensure the health and safety of researchers and their families,​" said Eve Marder, President of SfN. "At a time when reasoned debate has turned into illegal harassment, trespass, and threat of violence, universities have an obligation to provide an appropriate and safe environment for their researchers. Today's document provides steps that universities can take to protect their colleagues.​"