"Many people are not even aware that it still occurs in Australia …". How many? These sweeping statements about 'many', ' most', 'all Australians' etc are just conjecture; unsupported blah that's supposed to fool us into thinking we are dealing with an 'expert'. 'I'm the only one who understands' and cares about the cuddly-wuddlies. The rest of you don't know and don't care'.

"No one likes the notion of using animals in such a way …". Is that so? They would rather die of all manner of disease and sickness than have animals used to save their lives? Perhaps they would prefer that humans were used; perhaps these 'good' people would offer themselves up for testing?

It doesn't take three pages to express opposition to the use of animals to test drugs and procedures that could save the lives of people. It takes even less to disagree.

Piffle.

We can do better? In fact, these poor dumb animals could be put down so this practice can be completely stopped and the animals replaced with unwanted abandoned humans?

Who could volunteer? As opposed to living rough on streets and in sewers etc? Some in 3rd world countries, emaciated so they look like WW11 PO.W's. Given their hardships/enforced lifestyles?

We are, after all, all primates! And the surgical procedures identified, would be quite commonplace in many hospitals around the globe! In fact, some of the (thump, bang chop, drill) orthopedic surgery would seem more in place in a workshop or sculptor's studio!

Clearly, there is a calloused indifference to the plight of primates, some of them in the human genre, all around the globe!

And we the so-called civilised (primate) species can lift our (shoot on sight) game, alleged Christian values and ethos!

Worry about and fix the often horrific deaths at the hands of a partner! Of one woman a week first! At least the animals were anesthetized.

Others abandoned single mums all but deserted by an alleged caring society and forced to live as less than humans and in conditions, no caged monkey might envy!?

As they struggle on and often against bureaucratic absolutism to raise their abandoned kids on their own!

Walk a mile in my shoes before you start hyperventilating over experimental medicine and alleged cruelty to dumb animals. If the surgery was to remove a life-threatening tumour, would this author know or care, given the object of this barely veiled exercise, I believe, was to sensationalise!?

Worry about homeless older women betrayed by an allegedly caring Christian based/inspired system first? Before you worry about/prioritise, who's monkeying around with monkeys.

Q: What is the definition of a jungle gentleman?
A: A monkey that doesn't monkey around with another monkey's monkey!
Alan B.

Given that the human population is growing at an out of control rate and we shall soon well and truly have eaten ourselves of house and home why not experiment on such as habitual crims, habitual druggies who kill others, domestic violence bastards and the many who are wasting oxygen by breathing it.
Plenty of them about and the world may be a better place without them.

Hi Ateday,

Population growth out of control ? Well, no: in Europe, Russia and Japan, populations are either falling or stagnant, and would probably be falling faster ithi-out immigration. China's birth rate is about to stabilise and then decline, with population only 'rising' because people there are living longer. India's birth rate is expected to decline around 2030-2040, while its population will keep 'growing' due to people living longer, and then start to decline later this century.

See: http://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth

So who do you mean ? Africa ? You do realise that Africa is around four times as big as australia, and much of it is very sparsely populated ? That as people develop their productive technology there, the capacity of the continent to sustain much higher populations will grow rapidly ?

We've been over this many times, but world population is set to stabilise and start to decline soon after 2100, if not before. A major factor will be the improvements in education opportunities for women: that does wonders for population control.

Joe

I would think that if Helen & her mates are serious, they would be volunteering to replace the monkeys rather than bleating about it.

when Helen shows concern about the tens of thousand butchered unborn babies in this country she might have some authority to speak on animals.

It seems to me that these two essays provide sufficient reasons which support the authors thesis.

http://www.fnmzoo.org/wisdom-teaching/observe-the-non-humans-and-learn-from-them
http://www.fnmzoo.org/wisdom-teaching/the-personality-in-the-face

I am a tragic animal lover. If there are ways of using science, cell cultures, stemcell research then that's the way to go.

If its critical human testing like liver, kidney, heart,etc there maybe a case for animal testing.. BUT!

Everyone is aware of the population crisis so why do we keep investing in complex experimental technologies for saving people (and I include myself) who choose to drink wine, do silly things like riding cycles on main roads, and take risks.... that we know. Humans have a choice, animals don't.

I am a proud meat eater, we were designed that way and the animals we kill for food are natural, and thankfully (hopefully) oblivious of their intended use. I have been the owner of numerous golden retreivers which are loveable... until they see a rabbit, bird, mouse... then its game on. Animals certainly deserve respectful treatment. BUT when it come to animal testing... we do it on them because only the NAZI's (among many others less exposed) did it on humans... so what is the justification?

Me thinks that the drug companies and governments have too easy a control over this stuff and the example of this animal escape should have more attention... certainly much more than that spoilt, ignorant little brat Greta!

Animals are cheap, but do we have the right to experiment on them for silly things like cosmetics.

Its about time our education went back to the fundamentals

1. The three R's
2. basic science
3. philosophy and ethics

Maybe that way, citizens might have some capacity to judge for themselves, rather than take the "newspeak" as gospel.. predicted by George Orwell over 100 years ago.!

Jolly good idea, Hasbeen. I can't see it happening. All virtue signallers see things only in theory.