If the automated email did not work for you, follow the steps below.
- Look up your local MP’s email address and copy it.
- Open a new email and paste the MP’s email address into the ‘To’ box.
- Type ‘Petition Debate’ in the ‘Subject’ box.
- Use the grey button below to copy the entire letter.
- Paste it into your email’s message area
- Don’t forget to fill in the blanks!
- Click Send.
Dear _________ _________ MP,
I am writing, as your constituent:
Name: _________ _________
House Number: ______
to request that you attend and participate in support of the aims of the Parliamentary debate below.
Petition: Ban commercial breeding for laboratories & Implement reform to approve & use NAMs (New Approach Methodologies/Non Animal Methods)
Created by Maria Iriart, contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
Monday 16th January 2023 at 4.30pm
Westminster Halls, Grand Committee Room
A summary of the petition aims are listed below, and a link to the full briefing document is also included – I do not expect that you research, read or speak on all of them, but please select just one or two points.
Change is coming; the US with the enactment of the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 is leading the way. This bill removes the 83 year old mandate to use animals in drug development and biosimilars and instead use superior, human relevant, cost savings NAMS which represent better science.
FULL DEBATE BRIEFING:
1. For scientific, ethical, commercial and financial reasons review and cease the outdated/unnecessary use of animals.
2. ASPA 1986, section 2A refers to replacement being “scientifically satisfactory” in practice for regulatory testing this is interpreted as one that has undergone approval and validation. UK Law is thus being routinely overridden by a global regulator expectation. For basic research carried out in universities, scientists are generally free to use entirely non-animal approaches, yet animals use is still widespread.
3. Incorporate an advisory, independent, NAMs specialist committee within the Animal in Science Regulatory Unit (ASRU) project licence application process. Redirect funding to properly fulfil the Secretary of State obligations under the ASPA 1986 Section 20B to “support the development and validation of alternative strategies.”
4. Annually, publish statistics for non-GA animals bred for scientific procedures killed/died without being used in regulated procedures.
5. The regulators, ASRU, are not protecting laboratory animals and as such they are not fit for purpose. Huge conflicts of interest exist in the funding by the bioscience sector of the Regulator, ASRU, and also with the personal work/interests of the advisory body, the Animals in Science committee (ASC).
6. To publish the results of the consultation completed in June 2014 on Section 24, ASPA 1986, that investigated whether to revoke, revise or retain this secrecy clause.
7. Close laboratory animal commercial breeding facilities – they have global animal welfare indictments. Their priority is profit, not animal care.
Below is a list of experts in their field who are keen to assist with any questions that you may have. I urge you to contact them and/or the petition creator, Maria Iriart, at email@example.com
I would very much appreciate confirmation of receipt of this letter and your intention to attend and participate in the debate on my behalf.
With thanks for your time.
Dr Jarrod Bailey
Director of Science, Animal Free Research UK
Tel. 020 8054 9700
For any questions on animal use and New Approach Methodologies (NAMS).
Director of Public Affairs, Animal Free Research UK
Tel. 020 8054 9700
For any questions regarding the regulations.
Head of R&D Unilever, Safety & Environmental Assurance Centre (SEAC)
Tel. please request
For any questions regarding the testing of chemicals.
Co-Founder and CEO XCellR8,
Tel. 01925 607 134
For any questions on the commercial opportunities of NAMS.
Animal welfare campaigner & broadcaster
firstname.lastname@example.org for contact details
For general questions regarding use of animals in testing.