Ricky Gervais urges Eric Pickles to block beagle farm

 
Ricky Gervais Ricky Gervais has spoken out against proposals to build a dog breeding farm in East Yorkshire

Comedian Ricky Gervais has spoken out against proposals to build a dog breeding farm in East Yorkshire, which would supply beagles for scientific research.

The star of The Office and Extras is supporting a campaign by the anti-vivisection group, BUAV, which is trying to prevent the expansion of a centre in the village of Grimston.

Plans to extend the site owned by B&K Universal were originally rejected by East Riding of Yorkshire Council in June.

The company has appealed against the planning verdict, and the matter now rests with the Communities Secretary Eric Pickles, with a decision due in the next few weeks.

Online petition

In a statement released by the BUAV, Ricky Gervais said: "I am disgusted to learn of these plans to breed beagles for experiments. It is unacceptable that these gentle and trusting dogs should be treated as commodities.

Beagle An online petition has attracted more than 28,000 signatures

"If B&K's plans go ahead, thousands of dogs will be born to spend the rest of their short lives in a laboratory cage, where they will suffer in cruel experiments."

An online petition against the proposals has attracted more than 28,000 signatures.

The BUAV chief executive, Michelle Thew, said: "We are delighted to receive the support of Ricky Gervais on this important issue."

She added: "There are a range of modern, humane, non-animal research techniques available to scientists which should be used instead of inflicting suffering on dogs and other animals in laboratories."

Medical research

B&K Universal has not commented directly on the latest proposals to build a dog breeding facility, but on the company's website it states:

Start Quote

I am disgusted to learn of these plans to breed beagles for experiments.”

End Quote Ricky Gervais

"B&K Universal strongly believes in the promotion of environmental enrichment for the well-being of laboratory animals and will always continue to set standards of best practice in the pursuit of this objective."

The use of dogs in medical research remains controversial.

According to government figures, in 2005 more than 7,400 beagles were used in experiments - less than half of 1% of the total number of animals used in scientific procedures.

 
Tim Iredale Article written by Tim Iredale Tim Iredale Political editor, Yorkshire & Lincolnshire

Odds slashed on UKIP getting first MP in Lincolnshire

UKIP's latest by-election victory has prompted a flurry of bets on the party securing more MPs at Westminster.

Read full article

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 19.

    RE. 18 davecheale. If you think that there in vitro testing can ever be a complete replacement for in vivo you are wrong. I won't explain why because to someone with a science background it is completely obvious.
    My suggestion is that you learn basic biology and then correct your post.

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 18.

    another 140 million pumped into the research world last month, a billion last year, with promises of life saving drugs, the pro vivisectors will lie to protect their profits, playing with people fears, your time is over, the time is now here to move onto methods that are 50% more accurate, no more animals/humans have to suffer through adverse drug reactions or wasted costs to the NHS £1 BILLION

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 17.

    Should new surgical techniques be tried out on sick children or on dogs? Back in the 80s I did many tests on dogs (and pigs) that had been given liver and kidney transplants to make these procedures safer for humans. I'm proud to say hundreds of human lives have since been saved using the techniques and drugs developed then. There is a place for properly controlled humane animal experimentation.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 16.

    It is deemed acceptable by most that breeding animals for food is fine. Let's, for arguments sake, say that 1 cow would keep one man alive for 1 week. Let's now consider the life of an animal used in medical testing. One animal may contribute to developement of a drug to keep hundreds of people alive for many years. There are double standards by most in terms of eating meat and medical testing.

  • rate this
    -3

    Comment number 15.

    "Safety" testing is undertaken, as is medical research. Both are questionable, but cetainly make a lot of money. You do, of course, have to be aware of the source of your information. Even if testing worked, it does not mean it is acceptable to torture and murder others. No suffering is obviously nonsense - and the law is to minimise.

    "Open your eyes - DON'T believe the lies."

 

Comments 5 of 19

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.