Animal Experimentation Spoof Speech

Asked to provide a pro-animal experimentation viewpoint for an Animal Experimentation discussion, I wrote a speech to be presented at an imaginary Animal Experimentation conference, from the point of view of one of the experimenters/managers. While I can’t disagree with some of the points made, I have to say the ethos as a whole horrifies me and does not represent my opinion in any way!

The speech follows:

Animal Experimentation – Getting Real Results

Good evening. Since we all work in the field of animal experimentation and we’re all concerned about the protests continually inhibiting our work, I’d like to discuss the future of animal experimentation from my extremely experienced perspective. You may find my perspective somewhat shocking in some instances. But I’m sure, when you’ve heard me out, you’ll realise I’m right. But we will need to consider the marketing of my ideas very carefully.

There are two main points I’d like to raise tonight.

1. Morality: Animal Experimentation, Factory Farming and Purchasing Power

Without even looking at the moral issues within our own field, I’d like to address the morality of the rightists that hound us, looking at only two areas: Factory Farming and Purchasing Power. The point I intend to make is – if we can discredit their morality, they will have no say over us.

Firstly, as we all know, the quantities of animals tortured and destroyed by the meat industry is far greater than those involved in our own industry – several billion animals are killed every year to provide food for the hungry masses – while we entertain piddling millions in comparison. (Note too that, despite this, we are the most regulated industry of all when it comes to animal welfare.)

Certainly in Ireland, very few animal welfare and rights individuals are, in fact, vegan or subscribe to other forms of meat- and dairy-free diets. As meat eaters and vegetarians support the factory farming industry implicitly with their diet, I see no way to reconcile this fact with their protests over our own work. I think our first line of resistance is to discredit these hypocrites. How can they complain about our own work when their diet supports and encourages the enormous cruelty and death involved in factory farming? It’s laughable.


Secondly, and in a similar vein, these individuals also support our own work through their non-food purchases. I’d love to know how many of them actually check the labels of their purchases, or do any research into their own consumption patterns. Mention companies like Colgate, L’Oreal, Boots, Asda and Lidl (all involved in animal experimentation, or profiting from products involved in animal experimentation) – and you’ll not fail to find their products on the shelves of these people. Again I say hypocrites!

While these people actively and passively support animal cruelty I see no reason why we should listen to their nonsense. The way forward is simply to point out their hypocrisy and get on with our work.


Their own arguments are baffling anyway – on the one hand they say, for example, it is barbaric and cruel to experiment on animals in the cosmetic industry. And yet if their granny’s unwell they have no problem with the same barbarism and cruelty being used to seek a cure – even though granny will be long gone by the time we’ve figured such a thing out, if we ever do. Either animal experimentation is morally wrong or it’s not. And these people should really make up their minds. After all, their consumption patterns would suggest, at the end of the day, that they really don’t have a problem with animal experimentation at all!


Which brings me to my second point:

2. Human experimentation

It might surprise you to know that I think we should be listening to, and learning from, some of the arguments these activist people put forward. They say that if animals are similar enough to humans to allow us to use results from experimenting on them to understand our own medical conditions – are these animals not also so similar that they suffer stress and pain from our experiments in the same way humans would? And, of course, we all know this to be true – of course the animals suffer. And I hope I’ve already proved that these hypocrites really don’t care about that at the end of the day.

However, what I would do is take this argument and use it to further our experiments with human animals. Of course experimenting on humans will give us more meaningful results than experimenting on other animals. People seem to forget that the Nazi’s and the Japanese made huge leaps forward in medical understanding through their experiments on human animals. So why aren’t we experimenting more on humans?

I’ve already shown that the protesters don’t maintain cruelty free lifestyles themselves when it comes to animals – I don’t believe they’ll behave any more morally when we increase our human experimentation programme (because we all know it’s happening already – human organ traffiking, etc). We just have to market it correctly.

Let’s start with convicted paedophiles, let’s experiment on them – no-one will care. Then maybe travellers, no-one likes travellers. In no time at all we’ll have access to the third world. The huge human overpopulation problem is the cause of most of this world’s miseries – let’s address that problem through experimental programmes – we already have the population to experiment on – there’s no need to breed it! Though in time, of course, with our genetics work, we can produce humans primarily for experimentation purposes and dispose of them when their usefulness is over. Who could object to that?

In this way we’ll get more meaningful research results, faster, more economically. And we can implement Russell & Burch’s “3 R’s” – replacement, reduction, refinement – of our animal subjects. And that’ll keep the rightists happy, won’t it?


Lastly I just want to reassure any of you that are worried we may solve the world’s medical and other problems through human experimentation – and thus put ourselves out of work! With the mistakes we’ll be making in genetic research I can foresee animal and human experimentation being a necessity well into the 22nd century. There will always be work for us – never doubt it!!!


To conclude, the way forward is exposure of the hypocrites and human experimentation. We just have to work on the marketing a bit.

Thank you!



1. Waldau, Paul (2011), Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs To Know, New York: OUP

Number of animals used in experiments annually:

… in 2008 the Hadwen Trust and British Union Against Vivisection published an estimate in the journal Alternatives to Laboratory Animals suggesting that 115 million animals are used annually around the world in laboratory experiments …

  • dogs >130K
  • cats > 35K
  • primates > 90K
  • rabbits > 1 million

Estimated daily slaughter in the US for Nov 11 2009:

  • 122K cattle, 433K pigs, 10K sheep, 3K veal calves
  • 27 million chickens

2. From Uncaged

Chemical-producing companies that test on animals themselves or pay researchers to carry out animal tests on their behalf e.g.

  • Beiersdorf
  • Colgate
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • L’Oreal
  • PZ Cussons
  • Procter & Gamble
  • Reckitt Benckiser
  • Unilever

The second category are cosmetics companies that tend not to test on animals themselves but continue to buy, use and benefit financially from chemical ingredients that have recently been tested on animals by their suppliers. Many cosmetic brands fall into this category e.g.

  • Avon
  • Boots brands
  • Chanel
  • Clarins
  • Clinique
  • Estee Lauder
  • Givenchy
  • Revlon
  • Tresemme


  • Asda
  • Lidl
  • Morrisons



Posted in Animal Experimentation.

One Comment

  1. Pingback: What Kind of Animal are You? - Animal Advocacy

Leave a comment - we'd love to hear from you!