Jan Creamer - Animal Defenders International

Question: What is the the Lord Dowding Fund for Humane Research, and why was it set up?

Jan Creamer: The Lord Dowding Fund was set up in the early 1970’s by the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), so that we could allocate funds specifically for non-animal scientific and medical research. 

It is named after Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, of Battle of Britain fame, who was a great president of ours for many years.  The Lord Dowding Fund now spends about £300,000 a year on funding scientists conducting research on a whole range of diseases, for example Parkinson's, cancer, infertility, brain research, cot deaths etc. All without using animals.

Question: What is the most recent donation the fund has made?

Jan Creamer: We have donated an fMRI brain imaging unit and a complete scanning facility at Aston University. All through the Lord Dowding Fund.

One of the reasons this is so important to us is because of the use of animals, especially primates, in research.  It has been suggested by some in the scientific community that the way to look for cures to diseases such as Alzheimers, Parkinson’s and other diseases of the central nervous system and brain is to look at primates.  

The point we make however is that they are different from human beings, and if we want to discover what is going on in the human brain then it is far better to use scanning technology to scan what happens in humans. So that’s why we are proud to have donated this facility to Aston University

Question: Are you sending out a message to scientists who do experiment with animals that there is an alternative?

Jan Creamer: Yes we certainly are, what we need to do is not just argue the case on animal experiments but to use our money to show scientists that there are better ways to conduct scientific and medical research. The kind of techniques we are talking about now are considered to be very advanced techniques, they are at the cutting edge of medical scientific research.

We are talking about highly sophisticated computer technology, the use of human tissues and combinations of data studies. When you think about disease and where disease starts, it is right down at the cellular level; and with the brain and nervous system and this is where we have to do conduct the research with advanced technology.

Question: What will be the impact of the EU environment committee’s vote on the Reach legislation?

Jan Creamer: We were really pleased, we certainly got more than we expected. 

We have got an agreement that as soon as alternatives to the use of animals are available they will automatically be replaced.

We also have mandatory data sharing – the chemical companies will have to share data they already have on chemicals, preventing unnecessary tests – and a new committee specifically on alternatives at the EU chemicals agency. 

In two of the annexes, all animal testing has been replaced.  Which is a lot of progress towards ending the use of animals in chemicals testing.

NAVS and the Lord Dowding Fund, together with Animal Defenders International, put forward a strategy for REACH completely free of animal testing.

We also described how if we use animal test on these chemicals we have very little safety data, we won’t actually know a lot more about them because of the differences between humans and animals.

Also with a lot of these tests that were being suggested they were the wrong kind of tests to produce the answers that are being sought, about effects on humans and the environment.

We are very pleased because a lot of what was in our strategy has been carried through. So we just wait now for the plenary session of the Parliament in November, when we have the full vote.

Question: Can you quantify the improvement in welfare for animals?

Jan Creamer: I don’t think anyone has actually sat down and done the calculations yet, because the estimates of how many extra animals Reach was going to use has varied wildly.

The most consistent estimate was approximately four million extra animals, now we have made some progress by replacing animal tests with non-animal ones, but of course there are still tests within the Reach legislation.

It’s difficult at this stage, therefore,  to accurately estimate how many animals have been saved – we have certainly saved some. But most importantly we have laid down a path for future development of non-animal strategies. I think that this is just the first step. Now that this has been accepted by the environment committee we can begin to look at other proposals for animal tests and replace them.

Question: What would your message be to UK MEPs when they face a vote on this legislation?

Jan Creamer: Our message to the UK MEPs would be to support the non-animal testing strategy that’s been put forward. We have been working closely with Caroline Lucas the MEP who has been sponsoring a lot of these amendments, and all MEPs should support these proposals and those to replace the use of animals in the other areas of Reach.

The public are already there – it is clear the public do not want to see animals used in tests, especially when there are alternatives available. It is time for governments to make their move on this.

Question: Finally, how can the UK government and MPs help push this legislation forward?

Jan Creamer: British MPs can help by lobbying Defra and the UK government to push for a non-animal strategy when they are talking at EU level.

Of course while the UK has the presidency of the EU until December, now is the time for MPs to lean hard on Defra to get as much as we possibly can out of this process, and keep animals out of Reach.