Stop Testing On Pets (STOP) is a campaign by the non-profit organization Salt Lake Animal Advocacy Movement (SLAAM) to end the use of dogs and cats in experimentation at the University of Utah. The campaign started in November 2009 in response to shocking revalations uncovered during an eight-month long undercover investigation by the animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). During this time, PETA's investigator gained employment inside the University of Utah labs and revealed evidence of widesperead animal suffering inside the U's animal labs. PETA's investigation, supported by photo and video evidence, revealed that:

• Homeless dogs and cats were obtained for a few dollars from local animal shelters and used in invasive, painful experiments and killed.


• Kittens of a cat obtained from Davis County animal shelter had a chemical injected into their brains when they were only 7 days old to cause fluid to build up. However, as a result of this procedure, the mother cat stopped nursing her babies. The kittens all died as the researchers did not foresee this tragedy.


• A cat named Robert (pictured below) was bought from Davis County animal shelter and had a hole drilled into his skull and electrodes attached to his brain.


• Dogs from a local shelter had their necks cut open so that medical devices could be implanted.

Much of what the investigator uncovered appear to be violations of federal animal welfare laws. In addition, the investigator uncovered widespread negligence towards the many thousands of mice and rats at the University of Utah labs. The investigator also revealed severe depression and suffering experienced by the monkeys at the U of U labs. For all the details on PETA's investigation, please watch the video and click the link below.

STOP is a grassroots campaign based out of Salt Lake City with the goal to end the use of dogs and cats in experimentation at the University of Utah. First, we feel it is a betrayal of the public's trust for the university to misappropriate the intended purpose of animal shelters. Shelters are supported by taxpayers to be a haven for homeless animals until they can find a loving home. If that is not at all possible, at a bare minimum, we owe those animals a painless death. But shelters are not supported by the community to be a convenient resource for subjects in invasive and deadly experiments. But most importantly, it is a betrayal to the animals who we have bred to be our companions and who we share our lives with to use them as though they were inanimate equipment. Dogs and cats are sentient beings that deserve to only have loving and caring contact with humans. They have the capacity to bond with people and they suffer greatly, both physically and emotionally, when their only contact with people is in a laboratory environment where they are generally being harmed for an experimental procedure. There is no right way to use a dog or a cat in a harmful or lethal experiment.

We realize the obstacles ahead of us. Much of the public believes this research to be life-saving and the U receives a very large sum of money from the federal government to carry out these experiments. Nevertheless, we believe if the public were fully informed and understood the issue, we can truly effect change. Until we reach our ultimate goal, we are calling on the U to implement six very moderate c in the right direction. These steps are not only good for animals, but they're good for a healthy democracy. We're asking the U to:

• Release records detailing your experiments. Right now the University of Utah releases very little information through public records laws concerning its animal experimentation activities. It typically tries to claim that potential security risks outweigh the public's interest in knowing how their tax dollars are being spent in the laboratory. We consider this a very flimsy argument and a smokescreen to keep the public in the dark. We are asking the U to be more open and release full minutes from their animal care and use committee meetings, daily care logs of animals, full census information on animals, and experimental protocols; all with only reasonable redactions and at a reasonable fee.


• Make the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) meetings public. IACUC meetings are public in several other states, including Washington and Wisconsin. In these states, members of the public are able to attend and listen as IACUC members discuss potential research projects and animal welfare issues in the labs. This would allow the public to take a more proactive role as a watchdog over research activities at the U. .


• Appoint a member of the animal welfare community on the IACUC. The IACUC at the U of U is predominantly composed of insiders from the lab. Most members carry out animal research themselves. This is not a democratic oversight community and often these committees act as a simple rubberstamp process. If one member on the community was representing an animal welfare organization, the public can be better assured that a perspective that is truly looking out for the animals' best interests would be heard.


• Don't allow past abusers to have animals anymore. Ultimate responsibility for the treatment of animals in labs must rest somewhere and with some individual. Each researcher must be accountable for their actions or negligence. PETA's investigation uncovered violations of law and negligence on the part of some researchers. We believe those researchers should not be allowed access to research animals in the future in order to establish a clear and firm policy for future potential violators.


• Allow members of the media to have extensive tours of your labs. Undercover investigations with hidden cameras have proven necessary in the animal rights movement due to the impenetrable wall of secrecy surrounding the labs at the U of U. This doesn't have to be the case. If the media were allowed to see and document the living conditions of all animals in the U of U's labs as part of a guided tour, the public would be better informed as to the U's research practices and the U would have to maintain a more stringent code of conduct at the labs.


• Engage in public debate and discussion. The animal research industry likes to portray scientists and doctors as being unified in support of animal research. This is not the case. There are plenty of scientists who oppose animal research on the grounds that data obtained from animal research cannot be extrapolated to humans. If their case is persuasive, this greatly undercuts the U's mandate to carry out harmful experiments on animals. The U of U has the burden, as the recipient of public funds, to demonstrate to the public why they feel their research is necessary and to engage in public discussion with dissidents. We are able to set up a debate with a representative from Americans For Medical Advancement (CureDisease.com) or Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM.org) if the U agrees to a debate in public. We would also like to see debates with animal activists on the philosophical issue of whether or not it is ethical to use animals in experiments in the first place.

If you agree with any or all of our objectives, make your voice heard. Contact the University of Utah to demand they start making progress to clean up their labs and to start practicing better public disclosure. Contact any and all of your representatives to demand they do what they can in their power to oversee the University and make changes on a legislative front. Contact STOP to get involved in coming grassroots petition, letter-writing, and demonstration campaigns. Our efforts won't stop until dogs and cats no longer suffer on our dime and at our university. The time to speak out is now. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Please get in touch with us now to get involved and make a difference for animals in labs.