• slider-pic22 quote1
  • slider-pic31 quote1
  • slider-pic41 quote1
  • slider-pic52 quote1

All Animals & Pets Deserve Respect

beagle 2Premier Pet Relocation takes a great amount of pride in the fact that we do not facilitate the transportation of research animals.  Research animals are usually rats, mice, cats, dogs (Beagles) and even monkeys, that are bound for vivisection.  They are most often “used” by chemical companies, pharmaceutical companies and universities for medical research.  Most people probably know that the testing of products, chemicals and medical procedures occurs using animals as test subjects before moving on to human trials.  Most people are probably unaware of the unnecessary suffering that is involved.

The typical dichotomy introduced by the animal testing debate involves two conflicting archetypes.  On one side, there are those well-intentioned individuals who place humanity’s advancement above any other animals.  On the other end are the animal rights “zealots”… seemingly discarding the opportunity for medical advancement due to a contrary belief that humans and animals deserve equal rights. 

However, an article from the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS) argues that animal testing is illogical beyond the stereotypically ethical debate due to some alarming facts about its effectiveness (benefit to humanity) and its costs.

Is Animal Vivisection Beneficial for Humanity?

A study from 2006 that reviewed animal research results found that, “patients and physicians should remain cautious about extrapolating the findings of prominent animal research to the care of human disease.”  The AAVS maintains that, “even high quality animal studies will replicate poorly in human clininical research.”  The AAVS cites several commonplace examples of the vast physiological differences between species, i.e. the toxicity of Tylenol in cats and the opposite effects on coagulation of contraceptives given to dogs versus humans.  Might animal research be counterproductive or at the very least, a waste of resources, if further testing is required to ensure that the results will remain consistent in humans?

In 2006, Health & Human Services Secretary, Mike Leavitt stated that, “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.”  A 2004 article further highlights the futility of relying on animal research to elevate medical care for humans, pointing out that Pfizer had spent $2 billion over 10 years on drugs that successfully passed animal trials but failed FDA approval (most often due to liver concerns). 

The FDA maintains that medical complications resulting from poorly understood drugs is the leading cause of preventable deaths in the US (perhaps costing Americans $17 billion per year).  According to the FDA, the true costs of the public’s false confidence in new medicines (due in large part to animal vivisection) exceed their monetary toll by also consisting of 100,000 lives lost per year.

What if a treatment were to fail initial animal testing, yet prove to be effective if or when it was tested on humans?  Lipitor, the highest selling pharmaceutical in history, failed every single animal trial involved.  The creators of the drug were only able to reach success after lobbying for a small, experimental trial in humans, ultimately resulting in a green light for a low risk cholesterol medication that helps millions of people around the world every day. 

Furthermore, the Surgeon General’s warning on cigarettes might have possibly been added 30 years earlier to boxes and cartons, had scientists been able to first prove carcinogenic results of cigarette inhalition in animals prior to human study (they could not, delaying human studies involving tobacco).

Different species can have very different responses to the same treatment or medication... thus, will humanity (or has humanity) ultimately miss(ed) some of its most profound medical breakthroughs simply because initial animal testing failed?

Is Animal Vivisection Ethical?

Premier Pet Relocation maintains the unwavering position that animal testing, whether for cosmetics, pharmaceuticals or medical research, is categorically unethical, regardless of the potential profit involved.  A simple Google search of “animal testing Beagle,” is enough to make the average pet owner nauseated. 

However, many pet relocation companies not only facilitate animal relocation for animal research, they make it the focus of their business models.  These companies profit from moving Beagles, monkeys, and cats from facility to facility, where they will undergo painful, tortuous, involuntary medical ordeals.  You would never know of these pet relocation companies' research contracts from their aesthetically sweet marketing efforts.  Where are these companies' pictures of the research animals that they transport?

Your Pet's Safety Is Our #1 Priority

Premier Pet Relocation conducts 100% of its business with pet owners and their pets, and has never, nor will never, be involved with the animal research market.  If you are need of pet relocation services, but are against animal testing of any kind, then there is one simple question to ask when gathering quotes from other pet relocation companies:


“Do you move research animals?”




Comments (0)

Leave a comment

You are commenting as guest.