SAFETY FEARS

http://www.thecnj.co.uk/camden/2008/120408/news120408_22.html
Camden News - by PAUL KEILTHY
Published: 4 December 2008

Safety fears for superlab

SAFETY concerns at the highest ranks of the Town Hall over the siting of a £500million superlab in Somers Town have been revealed by Freedom of Information disclosures.

The government’s intention to allow scientists to build a research centre exploring cancer and infectious diseases in Brill Place, behind the British Library, was revealed by the New Journal last year.

Now papers disclosed under FoI show that the council’s then safety chief, Lib Dem councillor Ben Rawlings, wrote to senior figures at the Town Hall and Camden police about “community safety concerns I have at this early stage”.

Cllr Rawlings listed animal rights protests, the risk of contamination, and the disruption any incident would cause to King’s Cross-based council services.

His letter, sent on August 21 but drafted in January, reads: “I cannot envisage any proposal for a medical research facility that would be acceptable in this area from a community safety perspective.”

Much correspondence has been exempted from disclosure for security reasons.

Camden police began drawing up draft contingency plans for the site last year.

The council has repeatedly stated that it cannot act on the site until a planning application is submitted, as expected, next year.

The Medical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, Cancer Research UK and University College London are backing the centre.

3M ANIMALS TORTURED IN THE UK

Peta.org.uk

Last year, more than 3 million animals were tortured and killed in the UK in cruel animal tests. Daisy's story is just one of them.

As a puppy, Daisy was sold to a commercial testing facility and confined to a barren cage. Poisonous chemicals were mixed into her food, and she grew sicker and sicker. Eventually, her small body gave up, and she died a painful and lonely death.

Your donation today could help eradicate the abuse of animals in laboratories as well as help end the suffering of many more animals around the world. It may be too late for poor Daisy, but it's not yet too late for other animals who will suffer similar fates. Please give generously and help end animals tests!

NEW LAB DESIGN

http://www.camdengazette.co.uk/content/camden/chronicle/news/story.aspx?brand=CAMCOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newscamc&itemid=WeED27%20Aug%202008%2010%3A15%3A30%3A373

Skyscraper firm to design new lab
nlnews@archant.co.uk 27 August 2008

AN INTERNATIONAL firm of architects behind a Canary Wharf skyscraper and a new wing at the Natural History Museum have been chosen to design a £500million science lab in King's Cross.

The UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation is planned to be built by 2014 on land behind the British Library known as Brill Place. It will employ 1,500 staff including leading scientists from around the world to work on cures and treatments for diseases such as cancer, tuberculosis, influenza and malaria.

Now the consortium behind the scheme has chosen architects HOK to design the centre. HOK director Andrew Barra clough said: "This facility has the potential to have an extraordinary impact on the wellbeing of our global popu-lation. Our goal is to create an intelligent and memorable building - one which works, and delivers the benefits of re-search and inno-vation.

"HOK has designed the Barclays Bank World Headquarters, at Canary Wharf, and the Darwin zoological centre at the Natural History Museum.Fay Gillott, programme director for UKCMRI, said: "HOK has shown the partner organisations an exciting vision for this building. We want to create a building that will serve the people of London and the UK for decades.

"The lab was anounced despite a wave of opposition from campaigners who say the publicly-owned 3.6 acre site should be used for social housing for Camden residents. Camden Council. Leader Councillor Keith Moffitt has warned it goes against the council's planning brief to build new homes.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

The below is the Governments response to an on-line Petition started on the 10 Downing Street website.

I would argue that the UK Government needs to make a greater commitment to ending all animal testing in the UK and to set a target date for doing so. There really is no excuse for continuing with this outdated and barbaric model of testing.

" The Government's policy on the use of animals in scientific procedures is clear and straightforward. There is still a need for the responsible use of animals for experimental and other scientific purposes to continue if improvements in healthcare and veterinary treatment are to be developed with the minimum of delay and to make proper provision to protect man and the environment from health risks and other hazards.

Some campaigners describe animal experiments as 'outmoded science' and argue that there are better ways of making medical and scientific progress using modern, non-animal methods, such as computer modelling and microdosing.

However, under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, animal experiments cannot be carried out if the same objectives can be achieved using non-animal methods. So, as relevant, new and improved technologies and testing methods are developed, they already have to be used instead of animal methods.

Animal tests cannot predict with absolute certainty what will happen in humans, nor are they expected to. All modern medicines are tested in cell cultures, computers, animals and human volunteers: animal studies are used only as a coarse screen for gross toxicity purposes, and for obvious unacceptable side effects, before candidate drugs are tested in human volunteers.

The real safety testing for side effects in such drugs is carried out in large, controlled trials in humans who have the target disease, and at the dose and formulation anticipated for use. There are several human trial phases, and materials may fail at any stage. Despite the pre-clinical testing and the considerable investment required to develop candidate materials to this stage, the failure rate is high - and the figure of only 8% of materials becoming licensed products is of the right order.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is the Government agency which is responsible for ensuring that medicines and medical devices work. The Home Office has oversight of only one of the component parts of the pre-clinical testing programme: the use of animals. The MHRA will only grant a marketing authorisation (MA) if it is satisfied that a product is efficacious, safe and of appropriate quality. The decision to grant an MA is taken based on an overall risk/benefit analysis, recognising that all drugs have some risk attached.

The Government strongly supports the development and use of non-animal alternatives where possible. The National Centre for Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) was announced in May 2004 and acts as a focal point for research into the 3Rs.

The NC3Rs is an independent scientific organisation which provides a UK focus for the advancement of the 3Rs. Working with stakeholders in academia, industry, Government, research funders, regulatory authorities, and animal welfare organisations, the Centre aims to increase the development and implementation of the 3Rs in medical, biological and veterinary research and testing. The Centre is funded by Government and the Research Councils and also receives some funding from the Wellcome Trust and Industry.

We would all like to see a time when medical progress and improvements in healthcare are not dependent on the use of animals. But that time is not yet here. The fact remains that animals will be needed for research for the foreseeable future if we are to continue to develop life-saving medicines."

CAMDEN COUNCIL STATEMENT

http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/press/2007/december/camden-council-statement-on-the-sale-of-the-land-at-the-rear-of-the-british-library.en

Camden Council statement on the sale of the land at the rear of the British Library
Date: 05/12/07

The Prime Minister has today announced that the land at the rear of the British Library has been sold to four organisations to make way for a UK Centre for medical research and innovation.

Cllr Keith Moffitt, Leader of Camden Council said:
“Camden Council will now be carefully assessing the proposed development including the medical research centre against our planning brief.

“Right from the start we have made it very clear to central Government that any proposed development must have the right mix of housing, employment and community facilities for King’s Cross and for Camden as a whole.

“Housing in Camden, especially affordable housing is in short supply and with our residential population expected to grow by 10% by 2016 it has to be a priority. The Council’s planning brief has laid down clear requirements for 50% or more of the new land use to be housing, and 50% or more of that to be affordable housing. We will be very disappointed if the proposed plan ignores this brief.

“Only a few weeks ago we were very much encouraged by the Housing Green Paper, particularly the Government's desire to better co-ordinate the use of public land to address the shortage of housing. However in this case the Government seem to have fallen at the first hurdle when it comes to putting their own policy into practice.

Ref Code: ST78
Contact: 020 7974 5717
pressoffice@camden.gov.uk

OTHER ISSUES

Letters page CNJ 1 May 2008

Need to fight against ‘danger lab’

• WE attended one of the poorly advertised open meetings held by the Medical Research Council consortium at the Somers Town community centre.

The MRC claim that local people are very interested in this exciting project”. The need for huge, top-notch security men on the door of, and inside, the community centre indicates how local people really feel and I hope that the MRC are invoiced for these security costs.

The MRC are also claiming that the centre won’t be “dealing with really dangerous diseases like ebola or lassa fever” yet have not ruled out, and refused to comment on, whether pathogens such as anthrax or rabies would be held in the centre.

It will be at least a “level three” facility, and these do hold deadly viruses and diseases.

Their leaflet states that “no security warnings have been issued about our plans” and that they are liaising with security and emergency authorities.

Indeed, a security alert was leaked by MI5 about the plans for the site also owned by the consortium, on Hampstead Road, close to the Regent’s Park estate. The plans for this were abandoned because the site was too small.

The site at Brill Place, given its proximity to St Pancras International, King’s Cross and Euston, is surely a far more dangerous idea.

As for “working closely with the authorities”, we have as proof, in the form of a document, that emergency services including British Transport Police, London Fire Brigade etc were not informed or consulted.

It is they who will have to deal with a deadly virus leak or terror attack so close to international transport terminals.We are appalled at the statement issued by MRC who say they “understand the concerns about housing but local people need to remember that the centre will help fight diseases such as TB that affect people living in the area and other serious health issues”.

Tuberculosis thrives in overcrowded and poor living conditions. Building the centre on the already overcrowded and deprived Somers Town estate will, in fact, contribute to the spread of diseases such as TB and stress-related illness such as heart disease.

The MRC claim that “security will be improved on the estate by placing the centre here”, in fact horrifying local people.It is very likely that armed police will patrol the estate if the laboratory goes ahead.None of us has forgotten the shooting of innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes who was killed after being mistaken for a terrorist.The MRC claims that building the lab will boost the economy are groundless.

Building council homes and community facilities will provide employment in areas of construction, security and other projects, employing local people, whereas the MRC plans will provide jobs for people only outside the local area and security will be in the form of state-controlled armed forces.St Pancras & Somers Town Councillor Roger Robinson is calling for an open meeting between the MRC and the people of Camden.

The MRC meet-and-greet sessions were conducted in what amounts to secrecy and were addressed only to the people of Somers Town when the issues affect everyone – not just in Camden but London and further afield.

The MRC are attempting to keep the controversial laboratory plans confined and contained within a small area to prevent feedback and protest. Local people were given just a couple of days’ notice regarding the meet-and-greet sessions and people living in the rest of Camden were not informed at all.

When I asked a representative why this was, I was told (and I quote): “Well, we did dump some leaflets here in the community centre and some more down near one of the shops where the community go.”

This lack of professionalism is very worrying. The consortium claim that they are professional and stringent.

Foot and mouth disease was leaked from an equally professional and stringent facility at Pirbright in Surrey.We suggest that community leaders, tenants’ associations and community centre groups get together to for a Camden people’s forum in support of the Somers Town People’s Forum to give all those across Camden who will be affected a stronger voice in campaigning against this.

Mandy Ford & Sue WHitaker, Elijah B, Jim Beresford

London Against Camden Danger Lab

www.myspace.com/londonagainstblisslab

MEDICAL RESEARCH IN THE 21st CENTURY

The debate surrounding the ethics of medical research is an emotive one.

We have all used medicines and products that claim (and many do) to help with this ailment or that medical condition, or vanity products such as hair colourants or aftershave. All have firstly been tested on animals, who are breed for a life of cruel and amoral suffering. The life's these poor souls lead is of constant pain, suffering and degradation - because they are viewed by many in society as a commodity to be used for the benefit of humans.

As someone who is against animal experimentation because of the above reasons, morals do have to come into the equation - and it is morals and ethics that is missing within the medical research and pharmaceutical industry. The UK government does not help matters by continuing to ignore the issue.

Many medical professionals, politicians and layperson alike argue against the use of animals in product testing and science. Alternatives models of testing are not being explored by the UK government the medical research industry despite the wealth of research and information done by modern medical professionals and animal rights campaigners.

Medical research and science innovation is a global industry and like all other profit making industries, will deceive the public and play on the emotions of humans who are suffering with various illnesses and conditions - we can save you - we can eradicate your pain - we can make you young again - make you beautiful - but we must experiment on defenceless animals to do so - the choice is yours!. Put this way it makes it very difficult for all peoples to oppose medical research that is less then ethical.

Medical and scientific research in the UK is lagging behind other industries in decreasing and eventually stopping animal testing on its 'products' - many big name corporations such as Marks and Spencer, the Co-operative and Superdrug (to name a few) produce own brands that have not been tested on animals, and other brand names have already taken on the challenge of reducing and eventually ceasing to sell products tested on animals.

Its now time for medical and scientific researchers and government to do likewise and take on the challenge.