text
stringlengths 7
894
| category
stringclasses 16
values | url
stringlengths 38
44
| title
stringlengths 3
158
|
|---|---|---|---|
Rape When rape results in pregnancy, abortion pills can be safely and effectively used to end a pregnancy up to 10 weeks from the last menstrual period. In the US, federal funding is available to cover the cost of abortion services for pregnancies that occur as a result of rape, even in states that do not offer public-funding for abortion services. An internal pelvic exam is not recommended for sexually immature or prepubescent girls due to the probability that internal injuries do not exist in this age group. An internal exam may be recommended if significant bloody discharge is observed, though. A complete pelvic exam for rape (anal or vaginal) is conducted. An oral exam is done if there have been injuries to the mouth, teeth, gums or pharynx | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Though the patient may have no complaints about genital pain signs of trauma can still be assessed. Prior to the complete bodily and genital exam, the patient is asked to undress, standing on a white sheet that collects any debris that may be in the clothing. The clothing and sheet are properly bagged and labeled along with other samples that can be removed from the body or clothing of the patient. Samples of fibers, mud, hair, leaves are gathered if present. Samples of fluids are collected to determine the presence of the perpetrator's saliva and semen that may be present in the patients mouth, vagina or rectum. Sometimes the victim has scratched the perpetrator in defense and fingernail scrapings can be collected | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Injuries to the genital areas can be swelling, lacerations, and bruising. Common genital injuries are anal injury, labial abrasions, hymenal bruising, tears of the posterior fourchette and fossa. Bruises, tears, abrasions, inflammation and lacerations may be visible. If a foreign object was used during the assault, x-ray visualization will identify retained fragments. Genital injuries are more prevalent in post-menopausal women and prepubescent girls. Internal injuries to the cervix and vagina can be visualized using colposcopy. Using colposcopy has increased the detection of internal trauma from six percent to fifty-three percent | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Genital injuries to children who have been raped or sexually assaulted differ in that the abuse may be on-going or it happened in the past after the injuries heal. Scarring is one sign of the sexual abuse of children. Several studies have explored the association between skin color and genital injury among rape victims. Many studies found a difference in rape-related injury based on race, with more injuries being reported for white females and males than for black females and males. This may be because the dark skin color of some victims obscures bruising. Examiners paying attention to victims with darker skin, especially the thighs, labia majora, posterior fourchette, and fossa navicularis, can help remedy this | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape The presence of a sexually contracted infection can not be confirmed after rape because it cannot be detected until 72 hours afterwards. The person who was raped may already have a sexually transmitted bacterial, viral and other infections and if diagnosed, it is treated. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment for vaginitis, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis and chlamydia may be done. Chlamydial and gonococcal infections in women are of particular concern due to the possibility of ascending infection. Immunization against hepatitis B is often considered. After prophylactic treatment is initiated, further testing is done to determine what other treatments may be necessary for other infections transmitted during the assault | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape These are: Treatment may include the administration of zidovudine/lamivudine, tenofovir/emtricitabine, ritonavir/lopinavir. Information regarding other treatment options are available from the CDC. The transmission of HIV is frequently a major concern of the patient. Prophylactic treatment for HIV is not necessarily administered. Routine treatment for HIV after rape or sexual assault is controversial due to the low risk of infection after one sexual assault. Transmission of HIV after one exposure to penetrative anal sex is estimated to be 0.5 to 3.2 percent. Transmission of HIV after one exposure to penetrative vaginal intercourse is 0.05 to 0.15 percent. HIV can also be contracted through the oral route but is considered rare | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Other recommendations are that the patient be treated prophylactically for HIV if the perpetrator is found to be infected. Testing at the time of the initial exam does not typically have forensic value if patients are sexually active and have an STI since it could have been acquired prior to the assault. shield laws protect the person who was raped and who has positive test results. These laws prevent having such evidence used against someone who was raped. Someone who was raped may be concerned that a prior infection may suggest sexual promiscuity. There may, however, be situations in which testing has the legal purpose, as in cases where the threat of transmission or actual transmission of an STI was part of the crime | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In nonsexually active patients, an initial, baseline negative test that is followed by a subsequent STI could be used as evidence, if the perpetrator also had an STI. Treatment failure is possible due to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains of pathogens. Psychiatric and emotional consequences can be apparent immediately after rape and it may be necessary to treat these very early in the evaluation and treatment. Other treatable emotional and psychiatric disorders may not become evident until some time after the rape | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape These can be eating disorders, anxiety, fear, intrusive thoughts, fear of crowds, avoidance, anger, depression, humiliation, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) hyperarousal, sexual disorders (including fear of engaging in sexual activity), mood disorders, suicidal ideation, borderline personality disorder, nightmares, fear of situations that remind the patient of the rape and fear of being alone, agitation, numbness and emotional distance. Victims are able to receive help by using a telephone hotline, counseling, or shelters. Recovery from sexual assault is a complicated and controversial concept, but support groups, usually accessed by organizations are available to help in recovery | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Professional counseling and on-going treatment by trained health care providers is often sought by the victim. There are clinicians who are specially trained in the treatment of those who have experienced rape and sexual assault/abuse. Treatment can be lengthy and be challenging for both the counselor and the patient. Several treatment options exist and vary by accessibility, cost, or whether or not insurance coverage exists for the treatment. Treatment also varies dependent upon the expertise of the counselor—some have more experience and or have specialized in the treatment of sexual trauma and rape. To be the most effective, a treatment plan should developed based upon the struggles of the patient and not necessarily based upon the traumatic experience | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape An effective treatment plan will take the following into consideration: current stressors, coping skills, physical health, interpersonal conflicts, self-esteem, family issues, involvement of the guardian, and the presence of mental health symptoms. The degree of success for emotional and psychiatric treatments is often dependent upon the terminology used in the treatment, i.e. redefining the event and experience. Labels used like "rape victim" and "rape survivor" to describe the new identities of women who have been raped suggest that the event is the dominant and controlling influence on her life. These may have an effect on supportive personnel. The consequences of using these labels needs to be assessed | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Positive outcomes of emotional and psychiatric treatment for rape exist; these can be an improved self-concept, the recognition of growth, and implementing new coping styles. A perpetrator found guilty by the court is often required to receive treatment. There are many options for treatment, some more successful than others. The psychological factors that motivated the convicted perpetrator are complex but treatment can still be effective. A counselor will typically evaluate disorders that are currently present in the offender. Investigating the developmental background of the offender can help explain the origins of the abusive behavior occurred in the first place | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Emotional and psychological treatment has the purpose of identifying predictors of recidivism, or the potential that the offender will commit rape again. In some instances neurological abnormalities have been identified in the perpetrators, and in some cases they have themselves experienced past trauma. Adolescents and other children can be the perpetrators of rape, although this is uncommon. In this instance, appropriate counseling and evaluation are usually conducted | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Short-term treatment with a benzodiazepine may help with anxiety (although caution is recommended with use of these medications as people can become addicted and develop withdrawal symptoms after regular use) and antidepressants may be helpful for symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, depression and panic attacks. As sexual violence affects all parts of society, the response to sexual violence is comprehensive. The responses can be categorized as: individual approaches, health care responses, community-based efforts and actions to prevent other forms of sexual violence. Sexual assault may be prevented by secondary school, college, and workplace education programs. At least one program for fraternity men produced "sustained behavioral change | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape " With regard to campus sexual assault, nearly two thirds of students reported knowing victims of rape and over half reported knowing perpetrators of sexual assault in one study; one in ten reported knowing a victim of rape and nearly one in four reported knowing a victim of alcohol-facilitated rape. International Crime on Statistics and Justice by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) find that worldwide, most victims of rape are women and most perpetrators male. Rapes against women are rarely reported to the police and the number of female rape victims is significantly underestimated. Southern Africa, Oceania and North America report the highest numbers of rape. Most rape is committed by someone the victim knows | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape By contrast, rape committed by strangers is relatively uncommon. Statistics reported by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) indicate that 7 out of 10 cases of sexual assault involved a perpetrator known to the victim. The humanitarian news organization IRIN claims that an estimated "500,000 rapes are committed annually in South Africa once called 'the world's rape capital.' The country has some of the highest incidences of child sexual abuse in the world with more than 67,000 cases of rape and sexual assaults against children reported in 2000, with welfare groups believing that unreported incidents could be up to 10 times higher. Current data suggest that the incidence of rape has risen significantly in India | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Most rape research and reports of rape are limited to male–female forms of rape. Research on male-on-male and female-on-male rape is rare. Fewer than one in ten male-male rapes are reported. As a group, males who have been raped by either gender often get little services and support, and legal systems are often ill-equipped to deal with this type of crime. Instances in which the perpetrator is female, are not clear and lead to the denial of women being sexual aggressors. This could obscure the dimensions of the problem. Research also suggests that men with sexually aggressive peers have a higher chance of reporting coercive or forced sexual intercourse outside gang circles than men without such sexually aggressive peers | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape FBI sex offense victims in 2012: FBI convicted sex offenders in 2012: Statistics maintained by the CDC include: Risk factors vary among different ethnicities. About one third of African American adolescent females report encountering some form of sexual assault including rape. One in three Native American women will experience sexual assault, more than twice the national average for American women. More than 250,000 cases of rape or attempted rape were recorded by police annually in 65 countries in 2001 through 2002. In 2007, 40% of the 90,427 forcible rapes reported were cleared by arrest or "exceptional means | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape " Exceptional refers to situations where the person refuses to provide information or assistance necessary to obtain an arrest, the defendant dies before being arrested, or the defendant cannot be extradited from another state. Forty-three percent of high school and young college men reported being coerced into sexual behavior and, of those, 95% reported that a female was the aggressor. In 2005, sexual violence, and rape in particular, was considered the most under-reported violent crime in Great Britain. The number of reported rapes in Great Britain is lower than both incidence and prevalence rates | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Victims who do not act in an expected or stereotypical way may not be believed, as happened in the case of a Washington state woman raped in 2008 who withdrew her report after facing police skepticism. Her rapist went on to assault several more women before being identified. The legal requirements for reporting rape vary by jurisdiction—each US state may have different requirements. New Zealand has less stringent limits. In Italy, a 2006 National Statistic Institute survey on sexual violence against women found that 91.6% of women who suffered this did not report it to the police | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In the United Kingdom, In 1970 there was a 33% rate of conviction, while by 1985 there was a 24 per cent conviction rate for rape trials in the UK, by 2004 the conviction rate reached 5%. At that time the government report has expressed documented the year-on-year increase in attrition of reported rape cases, and pledged to address this "justice gap". According to Amnesty International Ireland had the lowest rate of conviction for rape, (1%) among 21 European states, in 2003. In America as of 2012, there exists a noticeable discrepancy in conviction rates among women of various ethnic identities; an arrest was made in just 13% of the sexual assaults reported by American Indian women, compared with 35% for black women and 32% for whites | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Judicial bias due to rape myths and preconceived notions about rape is a salient issue in rape conviction, but "voir dire" intervention may be used to curb such bias. A false accusation of rape is the reporting of a rape where no rape has occurred. It is difficult to assess the true prevalence of false rape allegations, but it is generally agreed by scholars that rape accusations are false about 2% to 10% of the time. In most cases, a false accusation will not name a specific suspect. Eight percent of 2,643 sexual assault cases were classified as false reports by the police in one study | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape The researchers noted that much of these classifications were based on the personal judgments and biases of the police investigators and were made in violation of official criteria for establishing a false allegation. Closer analysis of this category applying the Home Office counting rules for establishing a false allegation, which requires "strong evidential grounds" of a false allegation or a "clear and credible" retraction by the complainant, reduced the percentage of false reports to 3%. The researchers concluded that "one cannot take all police designations at face value" and that "[t]here is an over-estimation of the scale of false allegations by both police officers and prosecutors" | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Another large-scale study was conducted in Australia, with the 850 rapes reported to the Victoria police between 2000 and 2003 (Heenan & Murray, 2006). Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, the researchers examined 812 cases and found 15.1% of complaints were withdrawn, 46.4% were marked "no further police action", and 2.1% of the total were "clearly" classified by police as false reports. The researchers noted that where the police found a case to be a false allegation but didn't want to pursue charges against the accuser, they marked it as "no further police action" instead. All of these complainants were then charged or threatened with charges for filing a false police report | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In the United Kingdom, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) analyzed every rape complaint made over a 17-month period and found that "the indication is that it is therefore extremely rare that a suspect deliberately makes a false allegation of rape or domestic violence purely out of malice.". FBI reports consistently put the number of "unfounded" rape accusations around 8%. The unfounded rate is higher for forcible rape than for any other Index crime. The average rate of unfounded reports for Index crimes is 2%. "Unfounded" is not synonymous with false allegation | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Bruce Gross of the Forensic Examiner described it as meaningless, saying a report could be marked as unfounded if there is no physical evidence or the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries. Other studies have suggested that the rate of false allegations in America may be higher. A nine-year study by Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University in a small metropolitan area in the Midwestern United States claimed that 41% of rape accusations were false | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape However David Lisak, an associate professor of psychology and director of the Men's Sexual Trauma Research Project at the University of Massachusetts Boston states that "Kanin's 1994 article on false allegations is a provocative opinion piece, but it is not a scientific study of the issue of false reporting of rape". He further states that Kanin's study has significantly poor systematic methodology and had no independent definition of a false report. Instead, Kanin classified reports that the police department classified as false also as false. The criterion for falsehood was simply a denial of a polygraph test of the accuser | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape A 1998 report by the National Institute of Justice found that DNA evidence excluded the primary suspect in 26% of rape cases and concluded that this "strongly suggests that postarrest and postconviction DNA exonerations are tied to some strong, underlying systemic problems that generate erroneous accusations and convictions". However, this study also noted that analyzed samples involved a specific subset of rape cases (e.g. those where "there is no consent defense"). A 2010 study by David Lisak, Lori Gardinier and other researchers published in the journal of "Violence against Women" found that out of 136 cases reported in a ten-year period, 5.9% were found likely to be false. Virtually all societies have had a concept of the crime of rape | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Although what constituted this crime has varied by historical period and culture, the definitions tended to focus around an act of forced vaginal intercourse perpetrated through physical violence or imminent threat of death or severe bodily injury, by a man, on a woman or a girl, not his wife. The actus reus of the crime, was, in most societies, the insertion of the penis into the vagina. The way sexuality was conceptualized in many societies rejected the very notion that a woman could force a man into sex — women were often seen as passive while men were deemed to be assertive and aggressive. Sexual penetration of a male by another male fell under the legal domain of sodomy. laws existed to protect virginal daughters from rape | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In these cases, a rape done to a woman was seen as an attack on the estate of her father because she was his property and a woman's virginity being taken before marriage lessened her value; if the woman was married, the rape was an attack on the husband because it violated his property. The rapist was either subject to payment (see wreath money) or severe punishment. The father could rape or keep the rapist's wife or make the rapist marry his daughter. A man could not be charged with raping his wife since she was his property. Thus, marital rape was allowed. Author Winnie Tomm stated, "By contrast, rape of a single woman without strong ties to a father or husband caused no great concern | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape " An incident could be excluded from the definition of rape due to the relation between the parties, such as marriage, or due to the background of the victim. In many cultures forced sex on a prostitute, slave, war enemy, member of a racial minority, etc., was not rape. From the classical antiquity of Greece and Rome into the Colonial period, rape along with arson, treason and murder was a capital offense. "Those committing rape were subject to a wide range of capital punishments that were seemingly brutal, frequently bloody, and at times spectacular." In the 12th century, kinsmen of the victim were given the option of executing the punishment themselves | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape "In England in the early fourteenth century, a victim of rape might be expected to gouge out the eyes and/or sever the offender's testicles herself." Despite the harshness of these laws, actual punishments were usually far less severe: in late Medieval Europe, cases concerning rapes of marriageable women, wives, widows, or members of the lower class were rarely brought forward, and usually ended with only a small monetary fine or a marriage between the victim and the rapist. In ancient Greece and Rome, both male-on-female and male-on-male concepts of rape existed | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Roman laws allowed three distinct charges for the crime: "stuprum", unsanctioned sexual intercourse (which, in the early times, also included adultery); "vis", a physical assault for purpose of lust; and "iniuria", a general charge denoting any type of assault upon person. Aforementioned "Lex Iulia" specifically criminalized "per vim stuprum", unsanctioned sexual intercourse by force. The former two were public criminal charges which could be brought whenever the victim was a woman or a child of either gender, but only if the victim was a freeborn Roman citizen ("ingenuus"), and carried potential sentence of death or exile | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape "Iniuria" was a civil charge that demanded monetary compensation, and had a wider application (for example, it could have been brought in case of sexual assault on a slave by a person other than their owner.) Augustus Caesar enacted reforms for the crime of rape under the assault statute "Lex Iulia de vi publica", which bears his family name, "Iulia". It was under this statute rather than the adultery statute of "Lex Iulia de adulteriis" that Rome prosecuted this crime. was made into a "public wrong" ("iniuria publica") by the Roman Emperor Constantine | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In contrast to the modern understanding of the subject, Romans drew clear distinctions between "active" (penetrative) and "passive" (receptive) partners, and all these charges implied penetration by the assailant (which necessarily ruled out the possibility of female-on-male or female-on-female rape.) It is not clear which (if any) of these charges applied to assaults upon an adult male, though such an assault upon a citizen was definitely seen as a grave insult (within Roman culture, an adult male citizen could not possibly consent to the receptive role in a sexual intercourse without a severe loss of status | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape ) The law known as Lex Scantinia covered at least some forms of male-on-male "stuprum", and Quintillian mentions a fine of 10,000 sesterces – about 10 years worth of a Roman legionnaire's pay – as a normal penalty for "stuprum" upon an "ingenuus". However, its text is lost and its exact provisions are no longer known. Emperor Justinian continued the use of the statute to prosecute rape during the sixth century in the Eastern Roman Empire. By late antiquity, the general term "raptus" had referred to abduction, elopement, robbery, or rape in its modern meaning. Confusion over the term led ecclesiastical commentators on the law to differentiate it into "raptus seductionis" (elopement without parental consent) and "raptus violentiae" (ravishment) | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Both of these forms of "raptus" had a civil penalty and possible excommunication for the family and village receiving the abducted woman, although "raptus violentiae" also incurred punishments of mutilation or death. In the United States, a husband could not be charged with raping his wife until 1979. In the 1950s, in some states in the US, a white woman having consensual sex with a black man was considered rape. Prior to the 1930s, rape was considered a sex crime that was always committed by men and always done to women. From 1935 to 1965, a shift from labeling rapists as criminals to believing them to be mentally ill "sexual psychopaths" began making its way into popular opinion | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Men caught for committing rape were no longer sentenced to prison but admitted to mental health hospitals where they would be given medication for their illness. Because only men deemed insane were the ones considered to have committed rape, no one considered the everyday person to be capable of such violence. Transitions in women's roles in society were also shifting, causing alarm and blame towards rape victims. Because women were becoming more involved in the public (i.e. searching for jobs rather than being a housewife), some people claimed that these women were "loose" and looking for trouble | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Giving up the gender roles of mother and wife was seen as defiant against traditional values while immersing themselves within society created the excuse that women would "not [be] entitled to protection under the traditional guidelines for male-female relationships". Until the 19th century, many jurisdictions required ejaculation for the act to constitute the offense of rape. Acts other than vaginal intercourse did not constitute rape in common law countries and in many other societies. In many cultures, such acts were illegal, even if they were consensual and performed between married couples (see sodomy laws). In England, for example, the Buggery Act 1533, which remained in force until 1828, provided for the death penalty for "buggery" | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Many countries criminalized "non-traditional" forms of sexual activity well into the modern era: notably, in the US state of Idaho, sodomy between consensual partners was punishable by a term of five years to life in prison as late as 2003, and this law was only ruled to be inapplicable to married couples in 1995. Today, in many countries, the definition of the actus reus has been extended to all forms of penetration of the vagina and anus (e.g. penetration with objects, fingers or other body parts) as well as insertion of the penis in the mouth. In the United States, before and during the American Civil War when chattel slavery was widespread, the law focused primarily on rape as it pertained to black men raping white women | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape The penalty for such a crime in many jurisdictions was death or castration. The rape of a black woman, by any man, was considered legal. As early as the 19th century, American women were criticized if they "stray[ed] out of a [dependent] position...fought off [an] attacker...[or] behaved in too self reliant a manner..." in which case "the term rape no longer applied". In 1998, Judge Navanethem Pillay of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda said: "From time immemorial, rape has been regarded as spoils of war. Now it will be considered a war crime. We want to send out a strong message that rape is no longer a trophy of war | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape " In "Aydin v Turkey", the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled for the first time that rape amounts to torture, thus violating article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It stated, "of a detainee by an official of the State must be considered to be an especially grave and abhorrent form of ill-treatment given the ease with which the offender can exploit the vulnerability and weakened resistance of his victim." In "M.C. v Bulgaria", the Court found that the use of violence on the part of the perpetrator is not a necessary condition for a sexual act to be qualified as rape. It stated, "Indeed, rapists often employ subtle coercion or bullying when this is sufficient to overcome their victims | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In most cases of rape against children, violence is not necessary to obtain submission. Courts are also recognizing that some women become frozen with fear at the onset of a sexual attack and thus cannot resist." Rape, in the course of war, dates back to antiquity, ancient enough to have been mentioned in the Bible. The Israelite, Persian, Greek and Roman armies reportedly engaged in war rape. The Mongols, who established the Mongol Empire across much of Eurasia, caused much destruction during their invasions. Historian Jack Weatherford said that the earliest incident of mass rape attributed to Mongols took place after Ogodei Khan sent an army of 25,000 soldiers to North China, where they defeated an army 100,000 | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape The Mongols were said to have raped the surviving soldiers at the command of their leader. Ogodei Khan was also said to have ordered mass rapes of the Oirat. According to Rogerius of Apulia, a monk who survived the Mongol invasion of Hungary, the Mongol warriors "found pleasure" in humiliating local women. The systematic rape of as many as 80,000 women by the Japanese soldiers during the six weeks of the Nanking Massacre is an example of such atrocities. During World War II an estimated 200,000 Korean and Chinese women were forced into prostitution in Japanese military brothels, as so-called "comfort women". French Moroccan troops known as Goumiers committed rapes and other war crimes after the Battle of Monte Cassino. "(See Marocchinate | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape )" French women in Normandy complained about rapes during the liberation of Normandy. Rapes were committed by Wehrmacht forces on Jewish women and girls during the Invasion of Poland in September 1939; they were also committed against Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian and Russian women and girls during mass executions which were primarily carried out by the Selbstschutz units, with the assistance of Wehrmacht soldiers who were stationed in territory that was under the administration of the German military; the rapes were committed against female captives before they were shot | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape Only one case of rape was prosecuted by a German court during the military campaign in Poland, and even then the German judge found the perpetrator guilty of "Rassenschande" (committing a shameful act against his race as defined by the racial policy of Nazi Germany), rather than rape. Jewish women were particularly vulnerable to rape during The Holocaust. Rapes were also committed by German forces stationed on the Eastern Front, where they were largely unpunished (as opposed to rapes committed in Western Europe) Wehrmacht also established a system of military brothels, in which young women and girls from occupied territories were forced into prostitution under harsh conditions | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape In the Soviet Union women were kidnapped by German forces for prostitution as well; one report by the International Military Tribunal writes ""in the city of Smolensk the German Command opened a brothel for officers in one of the hotels into which hundreds of women and girls were driven; they were mercilessly dragged down the street by their arms and hair"." Rapes happened under occupied territories by the Red Army. A female Soviet war correspondent described what she had witnessed: "The Russian soldiers were raping every German female from eight to eighty. It was an army of rapists." According to German historian Miriam Gebhardt, as many as 190,000 women were raped by U.S. soldiers in Germany | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Rape According to researcher and author Krisztián Ungváry, some 38,000 civilians were killed during the Siege of Budapest: about 13,000 from military action and 25,000 from starvation, disease and other causes. Included in the latter figure are about 15,000 Jews, largely victims of executions by Hungarian Arrow Cross Party militia. When the Soviets finally claimed victory, they initiated an orgy of violence, including the wholesale theft of anything they could lay their hands on, random executions and mass rape. An estimated 50,000 women and girls were raped, although estimates vary from 5,000 to 200,000. Hungarian girls were kidnapped and taken to Red Army quarters, where they were imprisoned, repeatedly raped and sometimes murdered. | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7980471 | Rape |
Concept Foundation The is a non-profit foundation which was established by the UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/WB Special program in Reproductive Health (WHO/HRP), PATH, the World Bank in 1989 in Bangkok, Thailand, "as a mechanism through which WHO’s rights associated with an injectable contraceptive, Cyclofem, could be licensed to potential producers in developing countries". Estradiol cypionate/medroxyprogesterone acetate (brand names Cyclofem, Lunelle; code name Cyclo-Provera), is a once-a-month combined injectable contraceptive which contains 25 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate—the same ingredient in Depo Provera—and 5 mg of estradiol cypionate. Since its inception in 1989, more than 120 million doses of Cyclofem have been manufactured and sold worldwide | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7986129 | Concept Foundation |
Concept Foundation products have been manufactured in 8 different countries and are made available in more than 30 developing countries. Medabon is another product developed by the which induces medical abortion. Medabon combines mifepristone and misoprostol, two abortifacients which health organizations had already deemed safe and effective. Implementation and initial research of the Medabon regimen was done by PATH and Ipas. | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=7986129 | Concept Foundation |
Animal testing on non-human primates Experiments involving non-human primates (NHPs) include toxicity testing for medical and non-medical substances; studies of infectious disease, such as HIV and hepatitis; neurological studies; behavior and cognition; reproduction; genetics; and xenotransplantation. Around 65,000 NHPs are used every year in the United States, and around 7,000 across the European Union. Most are purpose-bred, while some are caught in the wild. Their use is controversial | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates According to the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, NHPs are used because their brains share structural and functional features with human brains, but "while this similarity has scientific advantages, it poses some difficult ethical problems, because of an increased likelihood that primates experience pain and suffering in ways that are similar to humans." Some of the most publicized attacks on animal research facilities by animal rights groups have occurred because of primate research. Some primate researchers have abandoned their studies because of threats or attacks | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In December 2006, an inquiry chaired by Sir David Weatherall, emeritus professor of medicine at Oxford University, concluded that there is a "strong scientific and moral case" for using primates in some research. The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection argues that the Weatherall report failed to address "the welfare needs and moral case for subjecting these sensitive, intelligent creatures to a lifetime of suffering in UK labs". Human beings are recognized as persons and protected in law by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and by all governments to varying degrees. Non-human primates are not classified as persons in most jurisdictions, which largely means their individual interests have no formal recognition or protection | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The status of non-human primates has generated much debate, particularly through the Great Ape Project (GAP), which argues that great apes (gorillas, orangutans, chimpanzees, bonobos) should be given limited legal status and the protection of three basic interests: the right to live, the protection of individual liberty, and the prohibition of torture. In 1997, the United Kingdom announced a policy of no longer granting licenses for research involving great apes, the first ever measure to ban primate use in research. Announcing the UK’s ban, the British Home Secretary said: "[T]his is a matter of morality. The cognitive and behavioural characteristics and qualities of these animals mean it is unethical to treat them as expendable for research | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates " Britain continues to use other primates in laboratories, such as macaques and marmosets. In 2006 the permanency of the UK ban was questioned by Colin Blakemore, head of the Medical Research Council. Blakemore, while stressing he saw no "immediate need" to lift the ban, argued "that under certain circumstances, such as the emergence of a lethal pandemic virus that only affected the great apes, including man, then experiments on chimps, orang-utans and even gorillas may become necessary." The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection described Blakemore's stance as "backward-looking." In 1999, New Zealand was the first country to ban experimentation on great apes by law | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates On June 25, 2008, Spain became the first country to announce that it will extend rights to the great apes in accordance with GAP's proposals. An all-party parliamentary group advised the government to write legislation giving chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans the right to life, to liberty, and the right not to be used in experiments. "The New York Times" reported that the legislation will make it illegal to kill apes, except in self-defense. Torture, which will include medical experiments, will be not allowed, as will arbitrary imprisonment, such as for circuses or films. An increasing number of other governments are enacting bans | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates As of 2006, Austria, New Zealand (restrictions on great apes only and not a complete ban), the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom had introduced either "de jure" or "de facto" bans. The ban in Sweden does not extend to non-invasive behavioral studies, and graduate work on great ape cognition in Sweden continues to be carried out on zoo gorillas, and supplemented by studies of chimpanzees held in the U.S. Sweden's legislation also bans invasive experiments on gibbons. In December 2005, Austria outlawed experiments on any apes, unless it is conducted in the interests of the individual animal | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In 2002, Belgium announced that it was working toward a ban on all primate use, and in the UK, 103 MPs signed an Early Day Motion calling for an end to primate experiments, arguing that they cause suffering and are unreliable. No licenses for research on great apes have been issued in the UK since 1998. The Boyd Group, a British group comprising animal researchers, philosophers, primatologists, and animal advocates, has recommended a global prohibition on the use of great apes. The use of non-human primates in the EU is regulated under the Directive 2010/63/EU. The directive took effect on January 1, 2013. The directive permits the use of non-human primates if no other alternative methods are available | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Testing on non-human primates is permitted for basic and applied research, quality and safety testing of drugs, food and other products and research aimed on the preservation of the species. The use of great apes is generally not permitted, unless it is believed that the actions are essential to preserve the species or in relation to an unexpected outbreak of a life-threatening or debilitating clinical condition in human beings. The directive stresses the use of the 3R principle (replacement, refinement, reduction) and animal welfare when conducting animal testing on non-human primates. A 2013 amendment to the German Animal Welfare Act, with special regulations for monkeys, resulted in a near total ban on the use of great apes as laboratory animals | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The last time great apes were used in laboratory experiments in Germany was 1991. Most of the NHPs used are one of three species of macaques, accounting for 79% of all primates used in research in the UK, and 63% of all federally funded research grants for projects using primates in the U.S. Lesser numbers of marmosets, tamarins, spider monkeys, owl monkeys, vervet monkeys, squirrel monkeys, and baboons are used in the UK and the U.S. Great apes have not been used in the UK since a government policy ban in 1998. In the U.S., research laboratories employ the use of 1,133 chimpanzees as of October 2006. Most primates are purpose-bred, while some are caught in the wild. In 2011 in the EU, 0 | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates 05% of animals used in animal testing procedures were non-human primates. In 1996, the British Animal Procedures Committee recommended new measures for dealing with NHPs. The use of wild-caught primates was banned, except where "exceptional and specific justification can be established"; specific justification must be made for the use of Old World primates (but not for the use of New World primates); approval for the acquisition of primates from overseas is conditional upon their breeding or supply center being acceptable to the Home Office; and each batch of primates acquired from overseas must be separately authorized. There are indications that NHP use is on the rise in some countries, in part because biomedical research funds in the U.S | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates have more than doubled since the 1990s. In 2000, the NIH published a report recommending that the Regional Primate Research Center System be renamed the National Primate Research Center System and calling for an increase in the number of NHPs available to researchers, and stated that "nonhuman primates are crucial for certain types of biomedical and behavioral research." This assertion has been challenged. In the U.S., the Oregon and California National Primate Research Centers and New Iberia Research Center have expanded their facilities | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In 2000 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invited applications for the establishment of new breeding specific pathogen free colonies; and a new breeding colony projected to house 3,000 NHPs has been set up in Florida. The NIH's National Center for Research Resources claimed a need to increase the number of breeding colonies in its 2004–2008 strategic plan, as well as to set up a database, using information provided through a network of National Primate Research Centers, to allow researchers to locate NHPs with particular characteristics. China is also increasing its NHP use, and is regarded as attractive to Western companies because of the low cost of research, the relatively lax regulations and the increase in animal-rights activism in the West | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In 2013, British Home Office figures show that the number of primates used in the UK was at 2,440, down 32% from 3,604 NHPs in 1993. Over the same time period, the number of procedures involving NHPs fell 29% from 4,994 from to 3,569 procedures. The American Society of Primatologists writes that most NHPs in laboratories in the United States are bred domestically. Between 12,000–15,000 are imported each year, specifically rhesus macaque monkeys, cynomolgus (crab-eating) macaque monkeys, squirrel monkeys, owl monkeys, and baboons. Monkeys are imported from China, Mauritius, Israel, the Philippines, and Peru. China exported over 12,000 macaques for research in 2001 (4,500 to the U.S.), all from self-sustaining purpose-bred colonies | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The second largest source is Mauritius, from which 3,440 purpose-bred cynomolgus macaques were exported to the U.S. in 2001. In Europe, an estimated 70% of research primates are imported, and the rest are purpose-bred in Europe. Around 74% of these imports come from China, with most of the rest coming from Mauritius and Israel. NHPs are used in research into HIV, neurology, behavior, cognition, reproduction, Parkinson's disease, stroke, malaria, respiratory viruses, infectious disease, genetics, xenotransplantation, drug abuse, and also in vaccine and drug testing. According to The Humane Society of the United States, chimpanzees are most often used in hepatitis research, and monkeys in SIV research | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Animals used in hepatitis and SIV studies are often caged alone. Eighty-two percent of primate procedures in the UK in 2006 were in applied studies, which the Home Office defines as research conducted for the purpose of developing or testing commercial products. Toxicology testing is the largest use, which includes legislatively required testing of drugs. The second largest category of research using primates is "protection of man, animals, or environment", accounting for 8.9% of all procedures in 2006. The third largest category is "fundamental biological research", accounting for 4.9% of all UK primate procedures in 2006 | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates This includes neuroscientific study of the visual system, cognition, and diseases such as Parkinson's, involving techniques such as inserting electrodes to record from or stimulate the brain, and temporary or permanent inactivation of areas of tissue. Primates are the species most likely to be re-used in experiments. The Research Defence Society writes that re-use is allowed if the animals have been used in mild procedures with no lasting side-effects. This is contradicted by Dr. Gill Langley of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, who gives as an example of re-use the licence granted to Cambridge University to conduct brain experiments on marmosets | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The protocol sheet stated that the animals would receive "multiple interventions as part of the whole lesion/graft repair procedure." Under the protocol, a marmoset could be given acute brain lesions under general anaesthetic, followed by tissue implantation under a second general anaesthetic, followed again central cannula implantation under a third. The re-use is allowable when required to meet scientific goals, such as this case in which some procedures are required as preparatory for others. One of the disadvantages of using NHPs is that they can be difficult to handle, and various methods of physical restraint have to be used | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Viktor Reinhardt of the Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center writes that scientists may be unaware of the way in which their research animals are handled, and therefore fail to take into account the effect the handling may have had on the animals' health, and thereby on any data collected. Reinhardt writes that primatologists have long recognized that restraint methods may introduce an "uncontrolled methodological variable", by producing resistance and fear in the animal. "Numerous reports have been published demonstrating that non-human primates can readily be trained to cooperate rather than resist during common handling procedures such as capture, venipuncture, injection and veterinary examination | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Cooperative animals fail to show behavioural and physiological signs of distress." Reinhardt lists common restraint methods as: squeeze-back cages, manual restraint, restraint boards, restraint chairs, restraint chutes, tethering, and nets. Alternatives include: As of 2013, the U.S. and Gabon were the only countries that still allowed chimpanzees to be used for medical experiments. The U.S. is the world's largest user of chimpanzees for biomedical research, with approximately 1,200 individual subjects in U.S. labs as of middle 2011, dropping to less than 700 as of 2016. Japan also still keeps a dozen chimpanzees in a research project for chimpanzee cognition (see Ai (chimpanzee)) | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Chimpanzees routinely live 30 years in captivity, and can reach 60 years of age. Most of the labs either conduct or make the chimpanzees available for invasive research, defined as "inoculation with an infectious agent, surgery or biopsy conducted for the sake of research and not for the sake of the chimpanzee, and/or drug testing." Two federally funded laboratories have used chimps: Yerkes National Primate Research Center at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and the Southwest National Primate Research Center in San Antonio, Texas. By 2008, five hundred chimps had been retired from laboratory use in the U.S. and live in sanctuaries in the U.S. or Canada. Their importation from the wild was banned in 1973. From then until 1996, chimpanzees in U.S | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates facilities were bred domestically. Some others were transferred from the entertainment industry to animal testing facilities as recently as 1983, although it is not known if any animals that were transferred from the entertainment industry are still in testing centers. Animal sanctuaries were not an option until the first North American sanctuary that would accept chimpanzees opened in 1976. In 1986, to prepare for research on AIDS, the U.S. bred them aggressively, with 315 breeding chimpanzees used to produce 400 offspring. By 1996, it was clear that SIV/HIV-2/SHIV in macaque monkeys was a preferred scientific AIDS model to the chimpanzees, which meant there was a surplus. A five-year moratorium on breeding was therefore imposed by the U.S | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates National Institutes of Health (NIH) that year, and it has been extended annually since 2001. As of October 2006, the chimpanzee population in US laboratories had declined to 1133 from a peak of 1500 in 1996. Chimpanzees tend to be used repeatedly over decades, rather than used and killed as with most laboratory animals. Some individual chimpanzees currently in U.S. laboratories have been used in experiments for over 40 years. The oldest known chimpanzee in a U.S. lab is Wenka, who was born in a laboratory in Florida on May 21, 1954. She was removed from her mother on the day of birth to be used in a vision experiment that lasted 17 months, then sold as a pet to a family in North Carolina | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates She was returned to the Yerkes National Primate Research Center in 1957 when she became too big to handle. Since then, she has given birth six times, and has been used in research into alcohol use, oral contraceptives, aging, and cognitive studies. With the publication of the chimpanzee genome, there are reportedly plans to increase the use of chimpanzees in labs, with scientists arguing that the federal moratorium on breeding chimpanzees for research should be lifted. Other researchers argue that chimpanzees are unique animals and should either not be used in research, or should be treated differently | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Pascal Gagneux, an evolutionary biologist and primate expert at the University of California, San Diego, argues that, given chimpanzees' sense of self, tool use, and genetic similarity to human beings, studies using chimpanzees should follow the ethical guidelines that are used for human subjects unable to give consent. Stuart Zola, director of the Yerkes National Primate Research Laboratory, disagrees. He told "National Geographic": "I don't think we should make a distinction between our obligation to treat humanely any species, whether it's a rat or a monkey or a chimpanzee. No matter how much we may wish it, chimps are not human | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates " In January 2011 the Institute of Medicine was asked by the NIH to examine whether the government should keep supporting biomedical research on chimpanzees. The NIH called for the study after protests by the Humane Society of the United States, primatologist Jane Goodall and others, when it announced plans to move 186 semi-retired chimpanzees back into active research | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates On December 15, 2011, the Institute of Medicine committee concluded in their "Chimpanzees in Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Assessing the Necessity" report that, "while the chimpanzee has been a valuable animal model in past research, most current use of chimpanzees for biomedical research is unnecessary," as scientific research indicated a decreasing need for the use of chimpanzees due to the emergence of non-chimpanzee models. Later that day Francis Collins, a head of the NIH, said the agency would stop issuing new awards for research involving chimpanzees until the recommendations developed by the IOM are implemented. On 21 September 2012, the NIH announced that 110 chimpanzees owned by the government were to be retired | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The NIH owned about 500 chimpanzees for research, and this move signified the first step to wind down its investment in chimpanzee research, according to Collins. Housed at the New Iberia Research Center in Louisiana, 10 of the retired chimpanzees were to go to the chimpanzee sanctuary Chimp Haven while the rest were to go to Texas Biomedical Research Institute in San Antonio. However, concerns over the chimpanzees' status in the Texas Biomedical Research Institute as ‘research ineligible’ rather than ‘retired’ prompted the NIH to reconsider the plan. On 17 October 2012, it was announced that as many chimpanzees as possible will be relocated to Chimp Haven by August 2013, and that eventually all 110 will move there | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In 2013 the NIH agreed with the IOM's recommendations that experimentation on chimpanzees was unnecessary and rarely helped in advancing human health for infectious diseases and that the NIH would phase out most of its government-funded experiments on chimpanzees. On 22 January 2013, an NIH task force released a report calling for the government to retire most of the chimpanzees under U.S. government support. The panel concluded that the animals provide little benefit in biomedical discoveries except in a few disease cases which can be supported by a small population of 50 primates for future research. It suggested that other approaches, such as genetically altered mice, should be developed and refined instead | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates On 13 November 2013, Congress and the Senate passed ‘The Chimpanzee Health Improvement, Maintenance and Protection Act’, which approved funding to expand the capacity of Chimp Haven and other chimpanzee sanctuaries, allowing for the transfer of almost all of the apes owned by the federal government to live in a more natural and group environment. The transfer was expected to take up to five years, at which point all but 50 chimpanzees were to have been successfully ‘retired’. On 11 June 2013, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposed to list captive chimpanzees as endangered, matching its existing classification for wild chimpanzees | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Until the USFWS proposal, chimpanzees were the only species with a split listing that did not also classify captive members of the species as endangered. Before the proposal gained final approval, it was unclear what effect it would have on laboratory research. Two years later, on June 16, 2015, the USFWS announced that it has designated both captive and wild chimpanzees as endangered. In November 2015 the NIH announced it would no longer support biomedical research on chimpanzees and release its remaining 50 chimpanzees to sanctuaries. The agency would also develop a plan for phasing out NIH support for the remaining chimps that are supported by, but not owned by, the NIH. In January 2014, Merck & Co | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates announced that the company will not use chimpanzees for research, joining over 20 pharmaceutical companies and contract laboratories that have made the commitment. As the trend continues, it is estimated the remaining non-government owned 1,000 chimpanzees will be retired to sanctuaries around 2020. In the 1940s, Jonas Salk used rhesus monkey cross-contamination studies to isolate the three forms of the polio virus that crippled hundreds of thousands of people yearly across the world at the time. Salk's team created a vaccine against the strains of polio in cell cultures of green monkey kidney cells. The vaccine was made publicly available in 1955, and reduced the incidence of polio 15-fold in the USA over the following five years | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Albert Sabin made a superior "live" vaccine by passing the polio virus through animal hosts, including monkeys. The vaccine was produced for mass consumption in 1963 and is still in use today. It had virtually eradicated polio in the United States by 1965. In the 1950s, Roger Sperry developed split-brain preparations in non-human primates that emphasized the importance of information transfer that occurred in these neocortical connections. For example, learning on simple tasks, if restricted in sensory input and motor output to one hemisphere of a split-brain animal, would not transfer to the other hemisphere. The right brain has no idea what the left brain is up to, if these specific connections are cut | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Those experiments were followed by tests on human beings with epilepsy who had undergone split-brain surgery, which established that the neocortical connections between hemispheres are the principal route for cognition to transfer from one side of the brain to another. These experiments also formed the modern basis for lateralization of function in the human brain. In the 1960s, David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel demonstrated the macrocolumnar organization of visual areas in cats and monkeys, and provided physiological evidence for the critical period for the development of disparity sensitivity in vision (i.e., the main cue for depth perception). They were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates In 1983, designer drug users took MPTP, which created a Parkinsonian syndrome. Later that same year, researchers reproduced the effect in non-human primates. Over the next seven years, the brain areas that were over- and under-active in Parkinson's were mapped out in normal and MPTP-treated macaque monkeys using metabolic labelling and microelectrode studies. In 1990, deep brain lesions were shown to treat Parkinsonian symptoms in macaque monkeys treated with MPTP, and these were followed by pallidotomy operations in humans with similar efficacy. By 1993, it was shown that deep brain stimulation could effect the same treatment without causing a permanent lesion of the same magnitude | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Deep brain stimulation has largely replaced pallidotomy for treatment of Parkinson's patients that require neurosurgical intervention. Current estimates are that 20,000 Parkinson's patients have received this treatment. The non-human primate models of AIDS, using HIV-2, SHIV, and SIV in macaques, have been used as a complement to ongoing research efforts against the virus. The drug tenofovir has had its efficacy and toxicology evaluated in macaques, and found longterm-highdose treatments had adverse effects not found using short term-high dose treatment followed by long term-low dose treatment. This finding in macaques was translated into human dosing regimens | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Prophylactic treatment with anti-virals has been evaluated in macaques, because introduction of the virus can only be controlled in an animal model. The finding that prophylaxis can be effective at blocking infection has altered the treatment for occupational exposures, such as needle exposures. Such exposures are now followed rapidly with anti-HIV drugs, and this practice has resulted in measurable transient virus infection similar to the NHP model. Similarly, the mother-to-fetus transmission, and its fetal prophylaxis with antivirals such as tenofovir and AZT, has been evaluated in controlled testing in macaques not possible in humans, and this knowledge has guided antiviral treatment in pregnant mothers with HIV | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates "The comparison and correlation of results obtained in monkey and human studies is leading to a growing validation and recognition of the relevance of the animal model. Although each animal model has its limitations, carefully designed drug studies in nonhuman primates can continue to advance our scientific knowledge and guide future clinical trials." The reason for studying primates is due to the similar complexity of the cerebral processes in the human brain which controls emotional responses and can be beneficial for testing new pharmacological treatments. An experiment published in the "Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews" describes habituation of the black-tufted marmoset in a figure eight maze model | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates They were presented with a taxidermized wild-cat, rattlesnake, a hawk as well as a stuffed toy bear on one side of the maze. Two cameras and a two way mirror was used to observe the difference between the monkeys natural behaviors versus the behaviors expressed by the diazepam induced monkeys in thirteen different locations inside the maze. Scientist Barros and his colleagues created this model to allow the monkeys to roam a less confined environment and slightly eliminate outside factors that may induce stress. Many of the best-known allegations of abuse made by animal protection or animal rights groups against animal-testing facilities involve non-human primates | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The so-called "pit of despair" was used in experiments conducted on rhesus macaque monkeys during the 1970s by American comparative psychologist Harry Harlow at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.<ref name="Blum1994/95"></ref> The aim of the research was to produce clinical depression. The vertical chamber was a stainless-steel bin with slippery sides that sloped to a rounded bottom. A 3/8 in. wire mesh floor 1 in. above the bottom of the chamber allowed waste material to drop out of holes. The chamber had a food box and a water-bottle holder, and was covered with a pyramid top so that the monkeys were unable to escape.<ref name="Suomi1971/33">Suomi, Stephen John | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates "Experimental Production of Depressive Behavior in Young Rhesus Monkeys: A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology) at the University of Wisconsin–Madison". University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1971, p. 33. Thesis available in physical form on request; see https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/999575603502121</ref> Harlow placed baby monkeys in the chamber alone for up to six weeks. Within a few days, they stopped moving about and remained huddled in a corner. The monkeys generally exhibited marked social impairment and peer hostility when removed from the chamber; most did not recover | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates On April 21, 1985, activists of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) broke into the UC Riverside laboratories and removed hundreds of animals. According to Vicky Miller of PETA, who reported the raid to newswire services, UC-Riverside "has been using animals in experiments on sight deprivation and isolation for the last two years and has recently received a grant, paid for with our tax dollars, to continue torturing and killing animals." According to UCR officials, the ALF claims of animal mistreatment were "absolutely false," and the raid would result in long-term damage to some of the research projects, including those aimed at developing devices and treatment for blindness | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates UCR officials also reported the raid also included smashing equipment and resulted in several hundred thousand dollars of damage. In Germany in 2004, journalist Friedrich Mülln took undercover footage of staff in Covance in Münster, Europe's largest primate-testing center. Staff were filmed handling monkeys roughly, screaming at them, and making them dance to blaring music. The monkeys were shown isolated in small wire cages with little or no natural light, no environmental enrichment, and subjected to high noise levels from staff shouting and playing the radio. Primatologist Jane Goodall described their living conditions as "horrendous | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates " A veterinary toxicologist employed as a study director at Covance in Vienna, Virginia, from 2002 to 2004, told city officials in Chandler, Arizona, that Covance was dissecting monkeys while the animals were still alive and able to feel pain. The employee approached the city with her concerns when she learned that Covance planned to build a new laboratory in Chandler. She alleged that three monkeys in the Vienna laboratory had pushed themselves up on their elbows and had gasped for breath after their eyes had been removed, and while their intestines were being removed during necropsies (autopsy). When she expressed concern at the next study directors' meeting, she says she was told that it was just a reflex | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates She told city officials that she believed such movements were not reflexes but suggested "botched euthanasia performed by inadequately trained personnel." She alleged that she was ridiculed and subjected to thinly veiled threats when she contacted her supervisors about the issue. In the UK, after an undercover investigation in 1998, the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV), a lobby group, reported that researchers in Cambridge University's primate-testing labs were sawing the tops off marmosets' heads, inducing strokes, then leaving them overnight without veterinarian care, because staff worked only nine to five | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates The experiments used marmosets that were first trained to perform certain behavioral and cognitive tasks, then re-tested after brain damage to determine how the damage had affected their skills. The monkeys were deprived of food and water to encourage them to perform the tasks, with water being withheld for 22 out of every 24 hours. The Research Defence Society defended Cambridge's research. The RDS wrote that the monkeys were fully anaesthetised, and appropriate pain killers were given after the surgery. "On recovery from the anaesthesia, the monkeys were kept in an incubator, offered food and water and monitored at regular intervals until the early evening. They were then allowed to sleep in the incubators until the next morning | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates No monkeys died unattended during the night after stroke surgery." A court rejected BUAV's application for a judicial review. BUAV appealed. In 2003, CNN reported that a post-doctoral veterinarian at Columbia University complained to the university's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee about experiments being conducted on baboons by E. Sander Connolly, an assistant professor of neurosurgery. The experiment involved a left transorbital craniectomy to expose the left internal carotid artery to occlude the blood supply to the brain. A clamp was placed on this blood vessel until the stroke was induced, after which Connolly would test a potential neuroprotective drug which if effective, would be used to treat humans suffering from stroke | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates Connolly developed this methodology to make more consistent stroke infarcts in primates, which would improve the detection of differences in stroke treatment groups, and "provide important information not obtainable in rodent models." The baboons were kept alive after the surgery for observation for three to ten days in a state of "profound disability" which would have been "terrifying," according to neurologist Robert Hoffman. Connolly's published animal model states that animals were kept alive for three days, and that animals that were successfully self-caring were kept alive for 10 days | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has expressed strong opposition to this experiment and has written multiple letters to the NIH and other federal agencies to halt further mistreatment of baboons and other animals at Columbia. An investigation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture found "no indication that the experiments...violated federal guidelines." The Dean of Research at Columbia's School of Medicine said that Connolly had stopped the experiments because of threats from animal rights activists, but still believed his work was humane and potentially valuable. In 2006, activists forced a primate researcher at UCLA to shut down the experiments in his lab | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |
Animal testing on non-human primates His name, phone number, and address were posted on the website of the UCLA Primate Freedom Project, along with a description of his research, which stated that he had "received a grant to kill 30 macaque monkeys for vision experiments. Each monkey is first paralyzed, then used for a single session that lasts up to 120 hours, and finally killed." Demonstrations were held outside his home. A Molotov cocktail was placed on the porch of what was believed to be the home of another UCLA primate researcher. Instead, it was accidentally left on the porch of an elderly woman unrelated to the university. The Animal Liberation Front claimed responsibility for the attack | Religion&Philosophy&Ethics | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=8010519 | Animal testing on non-human primates |