Medindia

X

PETA Hails McCartney for Boycotting Animal-testing Charities

by VR Sreeraman on  July 19, 2007 at 7:59 PM General Health News   - G J E 4
PETA Hails McCartney for Boycotting Animal-testing Charities
Animal rights group PETA has commended Sir Paul McCartney for his decision to boycott cancer charities that test on animals.
Advertisement

The former Beatle, who has supported cancer charities since his first wife Linda died of the disease in 1998, recently revealed that he is planning to decline financial support to organisations that practice vivisection.

Advertisement
McCartney said that he took the decision after discovering that a number of charities close to his heart promote the practice.

"When Linda died I said I would support cancer charities. Animal rights groups wrote to me pointing out that many were heavily into vivisection - and it's true," Contactmusic quoted him, as saying.

"A doctor we knew out in America just admitted it as a matter of fact, innocently, like 'Well, sure we do.' What he doesn't realise is that he won't get a donation out of me for that very fact. There are better alternatives but you're not allowed to challenge the status quo," he added.

And the vegan legend's pronouncement has been highly praised by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

"Animal testing charities don't just miss out on big money; they miss out on medical progress. Animals are not furry little humans and their bodies cannot reliably predict results for human conditions," Alistair Currie, Senior Research and Campaigns Co-ordinator of PETA, said.

"Thankfully, there are plenty of charities that go for the triple win: they don't cause animal suffering; they do support modern non-animal research that increases the chance of finding cures for humans; and they get the money of smart, compassionate donors," Currie added.

Source: ANI
SRM/M
Advertisement

Post your Comments

Comments should be on the topic and should not be abusive. The editorial team reserves the right to review and moderate the comments posted on the site.
User Avatar
* Your comment can be maximum of 2500 characters
Notify me when reply is posted I agree to the terms and conditions
Three cheers to Paul. He is correct that many scientists insist that if we expended the same amount of time and money on alternative research methods, we would get better results. In fact, in a USDA press release January 12, 2006, Health & Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said: "Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies." More importantly, you do not settle whether experimentation is justified by merely showing that it is of some value to humans.
guest Sunday, July 22, 2007

You May Also Like

Advertisement
View All