Activists claim victory after U. ends dog labs

After placing advertisements in area newspapers and holding a demonstration near campus, the American Anti-Vivisection Society is now claiming "victory" in the University's decision to stop demonstrating the harmful effects of narcotics on dogs. But University officials said last month that the decision to stop the demonstrations was made long before the AAVS launched its campaign against Medical School Professor Norig Ellison's use of dogs in laboratory classes. It was not until May 1, however, that the official termination papers were signed. University spokesperson Barbara Beck said she does not understand how the AAVS can take credit for the filing of these papers since the University had decided to end the dog laboratories in the fall. "They didn't win any victory. That's ridiculous," Beck said. But AAVS Outreach Director Andy Breslin said that although he had heard that there was talk of ending the labs earlier this year, "there is this kind of talk every year." It was only following the reaction from the society's advertisement, which provided Ellison's office phone number for those who wanted to complain about the labs, that the University decided to terminate the labs in writing, he said. Breslin said the ad, which ran in The Daily Pennsylvanian and City Paper, prompted Philadelphians to inundate Ellison's office with angry phone calls. "I had heard rumors that people made [bomb] threats," he added. "We didn't ever encourage anyone to make threats." Still, Breslin said, "that's what pushed them over the hill to cancel it." Breslin said AAVS contacted the University many times to find out if an official termination was in the works, and every time "we were hung up on – certified letters were ignored." Beck, however, said publicly in April that Ellison no longer used dogs in his class. "The University is constantly in search of new and different technology so animals don't have to be used at all," she said. But Breslin did not acknowledge Beck's statement. "Prior to our campaign, they would not make any official statement. I think they are trying to make us look like we are protesting a non-event," Breslin said. "I think they would strongly like to give the impression that it wasn't our victory." Beck said she wonders how the AAVS could use the word "victory" when human lives are in question. "The victory we are really talking about here is when animals are sometimes used and it results in a medical treatment that saves someone's life," she said. "We're not talking about the AAVS 'victory.' We're talking about the victory of medical research."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.