{"id":777371,"date":"2025-01-17T08:37:04","date_gmt":"2025-01-17T13:37:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=777371"},"modified":"2025-01-17T09:25:06","modified_gmt":"2025-01-17T14:25:06","slug":"animal-rights-advocates-are-ready-for-trumps-war-on-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=777371","title":{"rendered":"‘In the Crosshairs’: Animal rights advocates are ready for Trump\u2019s funding of animal testing"},"content":{"rendered":"\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Animal rights groups like the White Coat Waste Project believe they can convince the new Trump administration to get animals out of labs. During the first Trump administration, White Coat Waste, a bipartisan anti-animal testing nonprofit, gained traction by harnessing the tension between left-leaning researchers and anti-establishment conservatives. Their strategy: appeal to conservatives by framing animal testing as a waste of taxpayer money, while still engaging more liberal activists motivated by compassion for animals. It\u2019s proven to be remarkably effective, and they\u2019ve successfully shut down over 114 labs and experiments, including the FDA\u2019s largest primate lab.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/blockquote>\n\n

CELLA FORD:<\/strong> People across the political spectrum agree on animal testing. Or, more accurately, no one knows what to think: About half of each party supports the use of animals in scientific research, while the other half opposes it… Distrust of health care systems, federal science agencies, and pharmaceutical companies crosses party lines and runs deep.<\/em><\/p>\n

Acting on this distrust, Trump 2.0 is promising to deprioritize research on infectious diseases and overhaul the nation\u2019s science agencies. Trump has picked a handful of anti-establishment leaders such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya, who aim to slash federal science funding, for health positions in his administration. Given the widespread use of lab animals in biomedical research, animal testing could get caught \u201cin the crosshairs\u201d of these changes, Emily Trunnell, director of science advancement and outreach at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), told me…<\/em><\/p>\n

Less federal science funding could, as a side effect, mean less animal testing. Animal advocates… welcome these potential changes. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, so the lives of millions of animals depend on what happens to it.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the long run, forcing scientists to shift away from animal models by drying up existing funding sources could not just benefit animals used in experiments, but also make science better… Looking back at Trump\u2019s first four years gives us some sense of what his next term could look like for animal experimentation…<\/em><\/p>\n

During the first Trump administration, White Coat Waste, a bipartisan anti-animal testing nonprofit, gained traction by harnessing the tension between left-leaning researchers and anti-establishment conservatives that had been growing during the Covid pandemic. Their strategy: appeal to conservatives by framing animal testing as a waste of taxpayer money, while still engaging more liberal activists motivated by compassion for animals. It\u2019s proven to be remarkably effective, and they\u2019ve successfully shut down over 114 labs and experiments, including the FDA\u2019s largest primate lab.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cBased on our success with the first Trump administration, we\u2019re very excited to make even more progress under Trump 2.0,\u201d Justin Goodman, senior vice president of advocacy and public policy at White Coat Waste,… Groups like White Coat Waste believe they can convince the Trump administration to get animals out of labs, and aren\u2019t concerned that their agenda is also supported by, say, pharmaceutical corporations that want a fast track to market approval, or hardline MAGA science skeptics.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the world of lab animal welfare, the converging interests of progressive animal rights activists and conservative government skeptics make policy reform possible. Across the political spectrum, the goal is the same: get animals out of labs. Organizations like White Coat Waste are embracing it. \u201cI\u2019m not particularly concerned with why people oppose animal testing or want to cut it,\u201d Goodman told me. \u201cI\u2019m just concerned that it will happen at all.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

From this perspective, whether Trump truly cares about animals or not is irrelevant, as long as he commits to defunding and deregulating science. \u201cThat\u2019s where the interests of animal advocates and the incoming administration align,\u201d said Delcianna Winders, director of the Animal Law and Policy Institute at Vermont Law and Graduate School. \u201cThey both care about excessive government spending on animal experimentation.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Some of Trump\u2019s appointees \u2014 including nominated heads of the NIH and the FDA, Bhattacharya and Marty Makary, respectively \u2014 have spoken out against animal testing, with Bhattacharya calling White Coat Waste \u201cabsolute heroes.\u201d RFK Jr., chosen to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, has a strange relationship with animals that includes leaving a dead bear in Central Park for laughs and keeping a pet emu. Regardless, his track record of confronting bastions of biomedical research makes animal advocates hopeful. \u201cWe are extremely excited that an administration that is skeptical of science and also skeptical of federal spending is coming into power,\u201d Goodman said.<\/em><\/p>\n

Winders is also optimistic that cutting funding for animal experimentation will save animal lives in the long run. Without grant money from federal funding agencies, scientists who currently rely on animal methods will be forced to figure something else out. Optimistically, this could give the biomedical research industry a much-needed kick in the pants to innovate human-centered replacements for animal models. Scientists are unlikely to change their tried-and-true research methods unless there\u2019s an exceptionally strong incentive like sweeping shifts in government funding \u2014 the pull of inertia, and the fear of invalidating their existing body of work, are too powerful.<\/em><\/p>\n

This week, White Coat Waste published a Trump 2.0 wish list, asking the new administration to defund dog and cat experiments, cut off NIH-funded labs in China, phase animal testing out of the EPA, and axe the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, whose funded projects include gain-of-function experiments on animals, entirely. The plan, they hope, \u201cwould cut billions in wasteful government spending annually and Make America Greater for Animals.\u201d With support from key Trump allies, their wishes could be granted.<\/em><\/p>\n

While some lab animals benefitted from the shutdowns, the vast majority did not. Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, which sets basic standards for the treatment and housing of certain lab and farm animals, fell sharply during Trump\u2019s first term as federal officers were reportedly directed to emphasize education for violators rather than enforcement, allowing animal suffering to go largely unchecked. Just two weeks after Trump\u2019s first inauguration, the USDA suddenly deleted inspection reports and records of enforcement actions against violators of the Animal Welfare Act \u2014 crucial documents for journalists and animal welfare advocates. While the reports were restored three years later in response to pressure from lawmakers and animal welfare groups, their removal serves as a powerful reminder that unchecked abuse is a common side effect of deregulation. SOURCE…<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

RELATED VIDEO:<\/strong><\/p>\n