This web site is meant to provide information and documentation promoting a realistic view of vivisection (or animal experimentation). “Vivisection” is any invasive experiment on living animals and humans, which need not involve “cutting”.
Vivisection is the Trojan Horse by which ineffective and dangerous drugs are marketed, and toxic agents are introduced in the environment, in the food, and our lives, with official certifications of efficacy and safety which, in fact, have no scientific value.
Those who fight vivisection do not reject medicine. On the contrary, they want a reliable and evidence-based medicine.
They are not siding with animals against humans. On the contrary, they are fighting to save suffering to both animals and humans.
They are not involved in a merely theoretical issue. On the contrary, theirs is a political struggle, because huge profits are made by exploiting this pseudo-scientific methodology, and the groups thriving on it (first and foremost the petro-chemo-pharmaceutical corporations) have their representatives at the highest levels of governments, parties, universities – and animalist leagues, too.
● Swiss federal popular initiative: “Yes to the ban on animal and human experiments – Yes to research approaches with impulses for safety and progress”[18.VII.2019]
● J. Fischlin, Why Animal Experimentation Offends Common Sense [14.VII.2019-2.I.2021]
With animal experimentation one can prove everything and its opposite. Aspirin is one of the most innocuous pharmaceuticals for humans, but it is highly toxic for dogs and cats, and it causes malformations in mice and rats. [pdf; German pdf]
● M. Mamone Capria, Vivisection as a pseudoscience [6.III.2019]
Preface. This short piece requires an explanation. I had been invited to a meeting and debate on vivisection at an academic institution in German-speaking Switzerland, and I had accepted on condition that my allotted time should have been at least 20-25 minutes. I retired from the event when formally told that I would have got 10 minutes for presenting my case, like the other three speakers (one against, and two pro-vivisection), and apart from the moderated discussion session. [pdf]
I sent you the article by Prof. Dott. Marco Mamone Capria which appeared in Biologi Italiani, with a circulation of [40.000] copies. There, once again, animal experiments have been documented as a pseudo-scientific fraud and an egregious crime against humans and animals. [More]
Original video-talk by M. Mamone Capria: “The European Commission's response to Stop Vivisection violates the precautionary principle”:
(The whole conference, in Italian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTQfvbiHrns)
●Complaint on the European Commission to the European Ombudsman concerning Stop Vivisection [October 12, 2016]
A few days ago, on October 9, 2016, I sent a complaint on the European Commission to the European Ombudsman concerning the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) Stop Vivisection. I had to register and to fill a form (in Italian) provided for such complaints (https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/secured/loginform.faces), and I attached a letter. [More or see the pdf file]
● Antidote Europe's Interview with Marco Mamone Capria [April 1, 2015]
● “Protecting our health from the business of disease”, seminar by M. Mamone Capria, Thursday 16, 2014, 9a.m.-0.30 p.m., Bruxelles
(streaming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MenfCa61C7w ).
Here is the final video:
and here are the slides shown during the seminar, in three parts:
parte 1, parte 2, parte 3 [20 October 2014]
•END OF THE EUROPEAN INITIATIVE STOP VIVISECTION
LAST UPDATE: November 2, 2013, 0:00
TOTAL: 1.126.005/ 1.000.000 (112,60 %)
IT (Italia – Italy) 570.400 / 500.000 (114 %)
BE (Belgique - België) 29.495 / 16.500 (178 %)
BG (България – Bulgaria) 15.500 / 13.500 (115 %)
DE (Deutschland – Germany) 159.028 / 74.250 (214 %)
EE (Eesti – Estonia) 6.179 / 4.500 (137 %)
ES (España – Spain) 54.858 / 40.500 (135 %)
FI (Suomi - Finland) 12.734 / 9.750 (130 %)
FR (France) 71.659 / 55.500 (129 %)
HU (Magyarország – Hungary) 24.576 / 16.500 (149 %)
PL (Polska - Poland) 44.722 / 38.250 (117 %)
SL (Slovenija – Slovenia) 21.752 / 6.000 (362 %)
SK (Slovensko - Slovakia) 13.331 / 9.750 (137 %)
* * *
PT (Portugal) 13.716 / 16.500 (83 %)
AT (Österreich – Austria) 11.472 / 14.250 (80,5 %)
SE (Sverige - Sweden) 9.172 / 15.000 (61 %)
LT (Lietuva - Lithuania) 5.194 / 9.000 (58 %)
NL (Holland) 10.692 / 19.500 (54,5 %)
LV (Latvija – Latvia) 3.643 / 6.750 (54 %)
* * *
DK (Danmark - Denmark) 4.773 / 9.750 (49 %)
UK (United Kingdom = Gran Bretagna) 23.774 / 54.750 (43,5 %)
IE (Éire - Ireland) 3.377 / 9.000 (37,5 %)
HR (Hrvatska - Croatia) 3.122 / 9.000 (34,5%);
MT (Malta) 1.484 / 4.500 (33%);
CZ (Česká republika - Czech Republic) 5.172 / 16.500 (31 %)
And also: LU (Luxemburg – Luxembourg) 1.193 / 4.500 (26,5 %); CY (Κύπρος - Cyprus) 624 / 4.500 (14%); EL (Ελλάδα - Greece) 2.144 / 16.500 (13 %); RO (România – Romania) 2.219 / 24.750 (9 %).
CIVIS' COMMENTARY: As we had foreseen, also the new “cautionary” level of 1,1 million signatures has been exceeded, in the few days available, and the countries which have reached their minimum have become 12 (that is, 5 more than the strictly necessary number!). This is an historical result, a success for the citizens' Europe, and – let no one be mistaken – a ground for hope for the future of scientific research in the biomedical field.
Sign the European petition against vivisection
before November 1, 2013
LAST UPDATE: October 27, 2013
In the reference web site a warning has been issued, to the effect that 1.100.000 signatures (that is, 100.000 more than the strictly required million) are needed. The argument is that «[a]fter the deposit of the signatures (both electronic and paper), the European Commission will analyze them and part of them could be considered null: for this reason we must collect as many signatures as possible, more than one million!».
CIVIS' COMMENTARY: While recommending to achieve a bigger number of signatures may be reasonable in precautionary terms, the quantitative framing of this recommendation seems preposterous: why 100,000 rather than 10,000 or 200,000? What does guarantee that the new signatures collected by the usual, potentially faulty, means should add to the validity of the total?
Worse again, why the new precautionary level has been advertised not a month ago, not two weeks ago, but just 5 days before the expiry date?... We are sorry to have to raise these unpleasant questions, although we are confident that the new condition will be easily met.
LAST UPDATE: October 24, 2013 (8 a.m.) – ONLINE SIGNATURES
WE HAVE DONE IT!
...AND ONE WEEK EARLIER
TOTAL: 1.006.588 / 1.000.000 (100,65 %)
IT (Italia - Italy) 555.379 / 500.000 (111 %)
BE (Belgique - België) 27.256 / 16.500 (165 %)
BG (България – Bulgaria) 14.979 / 13.500 (111 %)
DE (Deutschland – Germany) 131.178 / 74.250 (176 %)
ES (España – Spain) 51.433 / 40.500 (127 %)
EE (Eesti – Estonia) 5.451 / 4.500 (121 %)
FR (France) 64.420 / 55.500 (116 %)
HU (Magyarország – Hungary) 20.488 / 16.500 (124 %)
SL (Slovenija – Slovenia) 17.547 / 6.000 (292 %)
SK (Slovensko - Slovakia) 12.215 / 9.750 (125 %)
* * *
PT (Portugal) 10.621 / 16.500 (64,5 %)
AT (Österreich – Austria) 9.057 / 14.250 (63,5 %)
SE (Sverige - Sweden) 8.498 / 15.000 (56,5 %)
PL (Polska - Poland) 19.725 / 38.250 (51,5 %)
NL (Holland) 9.900 / 19.500 (50,5 %)
* * *
LV (Latvija – Latvia) 3.171 / 6.750 (47 %)
LT (Lietuva - Lithuania) 4.012 / 9.000 (44,5 %)
FI (Suomi - Finland) 3.815 / 9.750 (38,5 %)
UK (United Kingdom) 20.391 / 54.750 (37 %)
DK (Danmark - Denmark) 3.392 / 9.750 (34,5 %)
IE (Éire - Ireland) 2.855 / 9.000 (31,5 %)
And then: MT (Malta) 1.156 / 4.500 (25,5 %); HR (Hrvatska - Croatia) 1.974 / 9.000 (22 %); CZ (Česká republika - Czech Republic) 3.295 / 16.500 (20 %); LU (Luxemburg – Luxembourg) 896 / 4.500 (20 %); EL (Ελλάδα - Greece) 1.368 / 16.500 (8 %); RO (România – Romania) 1.760 / 24.750 (7 %); CY (Κύπρος - Cyprus) 356 / 4.500 (7 %).
CIVIS' COMMENTARY: The European initiative Stop Vivisection has reached its goal: at least 7 countries above their minimum (they are in fact 10: Estonia, France, België, Germany, Spain, Italy, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary) and more than a million signatures!
An extraordinary result, obtained with very limited financial means, thanks first and foremost to the passionate engagement of thousands of activists, and notwithstanding the lobbying of the vivisectionist industry, and the boycott by the mainstream mass-media and also, alas, by some of the most influential and well-known “animal-rights” leagues (witness, for example, the very poor performance by UK).
The European Commission has three months to give a formal reply to our request.
This is the highest level of participatory democracy allowed by the present European legislation («The European citizens' initiative allows one million EU citizens to participate directly in the development of EU policies, by calling on the European Commission to make a legislative proposal», http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/welcome?lg=en).
– Anna Kyuregyan: Scientific Antivivisectionism on the Way to Russia
For more than one third of my life I’ve been taking part in the work of Vita Animal Rights Center. I consider it great honor to carry new humanitarian thought to my motherland. This mission becomes even more honorable and responsible if we take into consideration the fact that my native country occupies one sixth of earth, is inhabited by over 140 million people, and I am a translator into the Russian language of truly ground-breaking books by Hans Ruesch and other scientists showing the invalidity of animal experiments from the scientific point of view. [More or see the pdf file]
– At last vivisection for cosmetics is banned in EU! [11.3.2013]
Starting from today, a complete ban on testing and marketing animal tested cosmetics applies in all countries belonging to the European Community. In fact, according to article 43 of the Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products:
«The Commission established timetables of deadlines up to 11 March 2009 for prohibiting the marketing of cosmetic products, the final formulation, ingredients or combinations of ingredients which have been tested on animals, and for prohibiting each test currently carried out using animals. In view, however, of tests concerning repeated-dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity and toxicokinetics, it is appropriate for the final deadline for prohibiting the marketing of cosmetic products for which those tests are used to be 11 March 2013.»
This is an historical result, since it amounts to an official recognition of the fact that animal testing is not needed to ensure safety for consumers. And beware, as the mainstream media will do their best, or rather their worst, to misinform citizens: contrary to what happens with pharmaceutical drugs, cosmetics are typically used not by a small minority of people, for short time spans, and for acute health conditions, but they are used by very many people, during decades, and regularly. It follows that cosmetics are by no means less “risky” than drugs, either as regards their usage, or the number of people affected. In other words, if vivisection can be avoided for cosmetics, this means that its standard sanitary pseudo-justification is admitted to hold no water, i.e. what antivivisectionists have been claiming for a century has at last been officially vindicated (by the way, another nail in the coffin of vivisection has recently been published in an authoritative scientific magazine:
Seoka J., Shaw Warren H., Cuenca A. G. et al., “Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 11 febbraio 2013, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1222878110,
freely downloadable from here) .
– Slaughter of the Innocent at last translated also into Russian!
- The marketing ban on animal tested cosmetics must not be postponed again [More]
- Marco Mamone-Capria: On the new European Directive: an update
The time schedule of the EU Animals Directive 86/609/EEC concerning «the protection of animals used for scientific purposes» has it that on September 8 the second reading will take place at the European Parliament. «If passed by the second reading in September, the Directive will be formally “adopted” by all European member states towards the end of 2010». [More or see the pdf file]
- M. Mamone Capria: On the new European Directive on vivisection: a dangerous and cruel pseudoscience enforced against the will of the European citizens
The following account is meant as a partial remedy to a concerted attempt at stealing vital information from the European citizens. It will be revised periodically, in order to report new developments or add relevant information. Please use it and distribute it freely. Comments are welcome (email@example.com).
A proposal by the European Commission for revising the European Directive 86/609/EEC concerning «the protection of animals used for scientific purposes» is under examination at the European Parliament since its publication on the web in November 2008 (Proposal 2008). This is a topic European citizens know very little about, as the mainstream media are silencing the issue to the best of their ability. [More or see the pdf file]
– Slaughter of the Innocent at last translated also into Spanish:
Matanza de Inocentes - Los animales en la investigación médica
– Hans Ruesch (1989): A Nobel Prize Winner testifying against vivisection
The opponents of vivisection received quite unexpected help in 1985 from the notorious Dr. Hans-Joachim Cramer, who directs the Press and Information Department of the German Federal Association of the Pharmaceutical Industry ("Bundersverband der Pharmazeutischen Industrie e.V.") - an office which demands great inventive talent and strong nerves. [More]
– M. Mamone Capria: A che punto siamo con la lotta contro la vivisezione?
Questo intervento è dedicato alla problematica che ha occupato l’ultimo terzo della vita di Hans Ruesch: la lotta contro la vivisezione. Naturalmente non intendo fare un riassunto di Imperatrice nuda, il gran libro che ha fatto risorgere in tutto il mondo un movimento che sonnecchiava o dormiva. Vorrei invece concentrarmi sulla questione politica che era sempre al centro delle preoccupazioni di Ruesch, e che rendeva la sua conversazione al riguardo così antipatica a chi si aspettava dalla sua veneranda età parole pacate e ottimistiche. In breve: a che punto siamo nella lotta contro la vivisezione? [More]