Will it save dogs or hinder key health research? Two views of Ontario’s Bill 75

Debate over legislation to update animal testing regulations will resume next month, with one advocate fearing it would end vital research into cardio-vascular disease without proper debate.

Meanwhile, an animal rights activist group argues the law is a step in the right direction after a story broke last summer about controversial testing involving dogs at London’s Lawson Research Institute. From Bureau of Investigative Journalism and postmedia

Ontario’s Animal Research Act includes proposed updates bill 75An omnibus Bill with primary focus on law and order and titled “Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act.”

The Bill is currently in its second reading, to be reintroduced in the Legislature Returning from its winter break on March 23.

If passed, it would create a framework to make changes to how animal research can take place in Ontario. Some details will fall into specific regulations that will follow the law.

The main proposed change: The law would ban “invasive medical research” on cats and dogs.

However, there are exemptions. In some situations research will be permitted if it is carried out for a veterinary purpose set out in the regulations. animal rResearch will also be permitted if pre-approved by an organization’s animal care committee.

The proposed law also aims to tighten the way animal care societies operate. For example, under the new rules every animal care committee will be required to have a veterinarian. an animal care committee, and a third-party review, each both cleared Worked at Lawson after the story broke.

The legislation came after Premier Doug Ford criticized the research work at Lawson, even vowing to “pursue” any researchers who used dogs for medical testing. The program was stopped after the story came to light.

Lawyer demands more robust review

Lawyer Brian Governor has over 40 years’ experience and has worked on some high-profile public commissions and investigations, including the Walkerton contaminated water disaster and the Air India bombing. He is concerned that Bill 75 was hastily written in response to the public outcry over the Lawson study.

The Governor said, “I would urge the Prime Minister to postpone legislating in this area until there is a robust public debate on the issue.” “Years ago, we used to have white papers where governments would engage in consultation.”

He believes that Lawson’s testing on dogs has led to “direct benefits to human health”.

However, because it is such a divisive issue, he would like the province to step back and convene a panel of experts before moving forward on legislation.

The governor also questioned why the proposed legislation was wrapped inside an omnibus bus bill, a practice that can limit debate on each piece of legislation.

This law has been appreciated Animal Justice, the group that worked with the Postmedia journalist who exposed the trial.

In a news release, Animal Justice said the proposed legislation “lays a strong foundation for ending the suffering of dogs and cats in laboratories here in the province.” The same release called on the province to go further and mandate that dogs and cats used in trials be “freed from laboratories and placed in loving homes.”

The proposed law would also ban what critics describe as cosmetic surgery on pets, such as claw removal in cats and ear cropping in dogs.

Charu Chandrashekhar is associated with the Canadian Institute for Animal-Free Science. She is a strong supporter of this legislation because it would force medical researchers to use new testing methods instead of using dogs and other animals by default.

“I think over time this will be one of the best things we can do for our province and the entire country.” Chandrashekhar said.