Misplaced Pages

Gill Langley: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:10, 23 July 2006 editJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 edits Restoring external link URL← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:38, 1 July 2024 edit undoThroughthemind (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users25,921 edits removed Category:Anti-vivisectionists; added Category:British anti-vivisectionists using HotCat 
(92 intermediate revisions by 64 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|British scientist and writer (born 1952)}}
]
{{For|the Australian cricketer|Gil Langley}}
'''Gill Langley''' is a British ] and writer who specializes in ] and animal protection issues in relation to the use of ]. She is scientific consultant to the ] (BUAV) and the ]. She is a former member of the British government's ], a current member of the Replacement Advisory Group of the British National Centre for the Three Rs, founded by ], <ref name=kin>Langley, Gill. {{PDFlink}}, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, June 2006.</ref> and has worked as a consultant for the ] as well as animal protection organizations in Europe and the United States. <ref>Levinson, Ralph and Reiss, Michael J. (eds) ''Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers''. RoutledgeFalmer, p. 175.</ref> She is also a fellow of the ]. <ref name=Bryan>Bryan, Jenny & Clare, John. ''Organ Farms''. Carlton, 2001. </ref>
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2020}}
{{Use British English|date=July 2011}}
{{Infobox person
| name = Gill Langley
| image =
| image_size =
| alt =
| caption =
| birth_date = {{birth date and age|1952|08|10|df=y}}
| birth_place =
| nationality = British
| known_for = {{nowrap|],}} ]
| education = MA (physiology, cell biology, and zoology), PhD (neurochemistry)
| alma_mater = ]
| organization =
| notable_works =
| occupation = Animal rights scientist & writer
| spouse =
| partner =
| children =
| parents =
| relations =
| awards =
}}


'''Gillian Rose Langley''' (born 10 August 1952)<ref>{{cite news
Langley is the author of ''Next of Kin'' (2006), a report on ] experimentation published by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection with a foreword by primatologist ]; ''Vegan Nutrition'' (1995); and editor of ''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes'' (1990), a collection of essays on animal research by leading scientists and philosophers, including ].
| last =
| first =
| title = Weekend birthdays
| newspaper = ]
| location =
| pages = 45
| language =
| date = 9 August 2014
| url =
}}</ref> is a British scientist and writer who specialises in ] and ]. She was, from 1981 until 2009, the science director of the ], a medical research charity developing non-animal research techniques.<ref>, ''The Guardian'', accessed 9 June 2010.</ref> She was an ] member of the British government's ] for eight years, and has worked as a consultant on non-animal techniques for the ], and for animal protection organizations in Europe and the United States.<ref>Levinson, Ralph and Reiss, Michael J. (eds) ''Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers''. RoutledgeFalmer, p. 175.</ref> Between 2010 and 2016 she was a consultant for ].

Langley is the author of ''Vegan Nutrition'' (1988), and editor of ''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes'' (1990). She has written a number of reports for the ] and the ], including ''Faith, Hope & Charity? An Enquiry into Charity-Funded Research'' (1988), and ''Next of Kin'' (2006), an examination of ] experimentation. She has also published articles and reviews in scientific journals about human species-specific research approaches.


==Education== ==Education==
Langley studied physiology, cell biology and ] for her bachelor's degree at ]'s Department of Zoology, then gained her Ph.D in neurochemistry, also from Cambridge. She took up a position as a research fellow at ], specializing in neurophysiology in cell culture. Langley obtained an ] in ], ], and ] at the ], then earned her ] in ], also from Cambridge. She took up a position as a research fellow at the ], specialising in neurochemistry using human ].


==Involvement in animal protection== ==Involvement in animal protection==
Langley was trained as an animal researcher but after reading ]'s ] she became a ] and an animal rights activist, and campaigned professionally against animal experiments.<ref name=Bryan>Bryan, Jenny & Clare, John. ''Organ Farms''. Carlton, 2001. </ref> She was a member of the Animal Procedures Committee for eight years, which advises the ] on issues related to animal testing, and has acted as an advisor to the government on the introduction of the new European Union chemicals legislation, REACH. She has served as a specialist consultant for the European Commission and the ] (OECD).<ref name=kin /> She was called as an expert witness in 2001 by the ] Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures during its inquiry into animal experimentation in the UK.<ref>, Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, United Kingdom Parliament, retrieved 15 July 2006.</ref>
{{Alib}}
Described in the book ''Organ Farms'' as "not what some would regard as a typical animal rights campaigner," <ref name=Bryan/> Langley is herself a former animal researcher who decided she could not justify the experiments her employment required her to conduct. She subsequently took up a position as scientific advisor to the BUAV.


In April 2006, she was a member of the panel at the ] that debated whether "This house would not test on animals." Opposing the motion were Laurie Pycroft—who founded ], which organised the debate—Sir ], Professor ], and Professor Lord ].<ref>Asthana, Anushka. , ''The Observer'', 30 April 2006.</ref> Supporting the motion, along with Langley, were Dr Andrew Knight, ] and BUAV campaigns director ].<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060716191249/http://www.buav.org/news/2006_news_updates/05122006.html |date=16 July 2006 }}, BUAV, retrieved 15 July 2006.</ref> The motion was defeated by 273 to 48.
She was a member of the ] for eight years, which advises the British ] on issues related to animal testing, and has acted as an advisor to the government on the introduction of the new ] Chemicals legislation, REACH. She has served as a specialist consultant for the ] and for the ] (OECD). <ref name=kin/> She was called as an expert witness in 2001 by the ] Select Committee on Animals In Scientific Procedures during its inquiry into animal experimentation in the UK. <ref>, Select Committee on Animals In Scientific Procedures, United Kingdom Parliament, retrieved July 15, 2006.</ref>


===Position on animal research===
In April 2006, she was a member of the panel at the ] that debated whether "This house would not test on animals." Opposing the motion were Laurie Pycroft &mdash; who founded ], which organized the debate &mdash; Sir ], Professor John Stein and Professor Lord ]. <ref>Asthana, Anushka. , ''The Observer'', April 30, 2006.</ref> Supporting the motion, along with Langley, were Dr Andrew Knight, ] and BUAV campaigns director Alistair Currie. <ref>, BUAV, retrieved July 15, 2006.</ref> The motion was defeated by 273 to 48.
Langley is an anti-vivisectionist and ]. She told ''The Guardian'' that she "would never claim that all animal experiments are without scientific value. "<ref>Burch, Druin. , ''The Guardian'', 2 March 2006.</ref> She argues that the ethical case against animal research is absolute and that medical progress will benefit from 21st-century, human-relevant tools being used in place of animal experiments. This transition urgently requires funding and policy changes. She told the ]: "When you know that other animals can feel pain and distress in the same ways that humans do, it is unethical to experiment on them."<ref>, BBC News, 24 July 2002.</ref>


She has campaigned against the use of non-human primates in ], where pig organs were grafted onto the necks of primates to test anti-rejection drugs. She told medical journalists ] and ] that the primates used in xenotransplantation research are subjected to major ]; internal ]s; isolation in small cages; repeated blood sampling; ]; ], vomiting and diarrhoea because of ]; ] or ], and eventually death. She said: <blockquote>"It's not just the suffering they endure in the laboratories and research establishments. Just getting there can be torture. Studies of primates show them to have complex mental abilities which may increase their capacity to suffer. Supplying the laboratories in the UK imposes huge suffering on the animals... They're then contained in small, single cages, and transported for very long distances causing deaths, distress and suffering."<ref name="Bryan" /></blockquote>
==Position on animal research==
Langley told '']'' that she does not rule out ] entirely, <ref>Burch, Druin. , ''The Guardian'', March 2, 2006.</ref> but argues that the legislation supposed to protect the 2.7 million animals currently used each year in the UK is inadequate, and that more money should be invested in developing alternatives, such as in-vitro and clinical studies. She told the BBC: "When you know that other animals can feel pain and distress in the same ways that humans do, it is unethical to experiment on them." <ref>, BBC News, July 24, 2002.</ref> She argues that because the British government's budget for alternatives is subdivided into different areas, what each area receives is "barely enough to fund one research project." <ref>''Nature'' 417, 684-687; 2002.</ref>


===''Next of Kin''===
She is particularly opposed to the use of non-human ]s in ], where pig organs are grafted onto the necks of primates to test anti-rejection drugs. She told medical journalists Jenny Bryan and John Clare that the primates used in xenotransplantation research are subjected to a large number of ]tic procedures and their effects, such as major surgery; internal ]s; isolation in small cages; repeated blood sampling; wound infections; nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea because of immunosuppressant drugs; kidney or heart failure; and eventually death. <ref name=Bryan/> She said: "It's not just the suffering they endure in the laboratories and research establishments. Just getting there can be torture. Studies of primates show them to have complex mental abilities which may increase their capacity to suffer. Supplying the laboratories in the UK imposes huge suffering on the animals. It involves capturing wild individuals, usually in ]. They're then contained in small, single cages, and transported for very long distances causing deaths, distress and suffering." <ref name=Bryan/>
Langley's report against primate experimentation, ''Next of Kin'' (2006),<ref name=kin>Langley, Gill.

, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, June 2006, accessed 9 June 2010.</ref> was published simultaneously with the publication by the ] and the ] in favor of primate experimentation. The ''New Scientist'' wrote that her report cited studies suggesting that ]s and other small monkeys are more conscious of themselves and others than was previously believed, giving them a moral status equivalent to that of ]s, who are currently not used in experiments in the UK.<ref name=NS>Coghlan, Andy. , ''New Scientist'', 2 June 2006. Also see "Primates in Medical Research", Medical Research Council.</ref> David Morton, professor of ] & ] at the ], said the report was "a wake-up call to scientists to raise their game in their justification and ways they use non-human primates in research."<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061007181915/http://www.buav.org/news/2006_news_updates/primate_report_launch.htm |date=7 October 2006 }}, 31 May 2006.</ref>
==''Next of Kin''==
Langley's ], ''Next of Kin'' (2006), is written in opposition to the recent publication <ref> {{PDFlink}}</ref> by the ] and the ] in favor of primate experimentation. <ref name=NS>Coghlan, Andy. , ''New Scientist'', June 2, 2006.</ref> She argues that monkeys suffer the same kind of pain, anxiety and anticipation as human beings would if placed in the same situations. In the press release accompanying the publication David Morton, professor of Biomedical Science & Ethics at the ], calls it a "wake-up call to some scientists to raise their game in their justification and ways they use non-human primates in research." <ref>, May 31, 2006.</ref>

Langley told '']'': "It’s not that they are so much like us they shouldn’t be experimented on. It comes down to pain and suffering. Like humans, they know the pain is coming, they remember pain and are susceptible to non-physical pain, suffering anxiety if they’re isolated socially from other monkeys." <ref name=NS/> Langley says that there is "no halfway house": "We can argue about the science forever, but what I’ve never heard is any clear scientific explanation for moral discrimination." The ''New Scientist'' states that her report cites studies suggesting that ]s and other small monkeys are more ] of themselves and others than was previously believed, giving them a moral status equivalent to that of ]s &mdash; currently not used in experiments in the UK.


==Publications== ==Publications==
{{refbegin}}
* {{PDFlink}}, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection and European Coalition to End Animal Experiments (ECEAE), 2006.
* , British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection and European Coalition to End Animal Experiments (ECEAE), 2006.
*''Vegan Nutrition''. The Vegan Society, 1995. ISBN 090733718X
* ''Vegan Nutrition''. The Vegan Society, 1988. {{ISBN|0-907337-18-X}}
*''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes''. MacMillan, 1989. ISBN 041202411X
*"Plea for a Sensitive Science" in ''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes''. MacMillan, 1989 * ''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes''. MacMillan, 1989. {{ISBN|0-412-02411-X}}
* "Plea for a Sensitive Science" in ''Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes''. MacMillan, 1989
* {{PDFlink}}, ECEAE, 2005.
* {{PDFlink}}, ], 2004. * , ECEAE, 2005.
* {{PDFlink}}, ECEAE, 2004. * , ], 2004.
* , ECEAE, 2004.
*"The Way Forward: Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy," {{PDFlink}}, {{pdflink}}, ECEAE, 2004.
* , , ECEAE, 2004.
* ''The case against the use of animals in medical experiments'' in Levinson, Ralph and Reiss , Michael J. (eds.) ''Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers'', pp.167-174. Taylor & Francis Group 2004 ISBN 0-203-47286-1 (e-Book).
* , Drug Discovery Today, (2016). DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.10.011
{{refend}}


== See also == ==See also==
* ]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]


==Notes== ==Notes==
{{reflist}}
<references/>

==References==
*Asthana, Anushka. , ''The Observer'', April 30, 2006.
*Bryan, Jenny & Clare, John. ''Organ Farms''. Carlton, 2001.
*Burch, Druin. , ''The Guardian'', March 2, 2006.
*Coghlan, Andy. , ''New Scientist'', June 2, 2006.
*Levinson, Ralph & Reiss, Michael J. (eds.) ''Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers''. RoutledgeFalmer. ISBN 0203464532
*, ''BBC News'', July 24, 2002.
*, British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, retrieved July 15, 2006.
*, Select Committee on Animals In Scientific Procedures, United Kingdom Parliament, retrieved July 15, 2006.
*, ''BUAV'', May 31, 2006.
* {{PDFlink}}, Medical Research Council.


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
{{refbegin}}
*
* , accessed 9 June 2010.
*
* * , accessed 9 June 2010.
* , Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, accessed 9 June 2010.
*
* , ''Today'', BBC Radio Four, 7 September 2004, accessed 9 June 2010.
{{refend}}


{{Animal rights|state=collapsed}}
===Audio===
{{atestingend}}
*, ''Today'', BBC Radio Four, September 7, 2004, retrieved July 16, 2006.
{{Authority control}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Langley, Gill}}


] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 12:38, 1 July 2024

British scientist and writer (born 1952) For the Australian cricketer, see Gil Langley.

Gill Langley
Born (1952-08-10) 10 August 1952 (age 72)
NationalityBritish
EducationMA (physiology, cell biology, and zoology), PhD (neurochemistry)
Alma materUniversity of Cambridge
OccupationAnimal rights scientist & writer
Known forAlternatives to animal testing, animal rights

Gillian Rose Langley (born 10 August 1952) is a British scientist and writer who specialises in alternatives to animal testing and animal rights. She was, from 1981 until 2009, the science director of the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research, a medical research charity developing non-animal research techniques. She was an anti-vivisection member of the British government's Animal Procedures Committee for eight years, and has worked as a consultant on non-animal techniques for the European Commission, and for animal protection organizations in Europe and the United States. Between 2010 and 2016 she was a consultant for Humane Society International.

Langley is the author of Vegan Nutrition (1988), and editor of Animal Experimentation: The Consensus Changes (1990). She has written a number of reports for the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection and the European Coalition to End Animal Experiments, including Faith, Hope & Charity? An Enquiry into Charity-Funded Research (1988), and Next of Kin (2006), an examination of primate experimentation. She has also published articles and reviews in scientific journals about human species-specific research approaches.

Education

Langley obtained an MA in physiology, cell biology, and zoology at the University of Cambridge, then earned her PhD in neurochemistry, also from Cambridge. She took up a position as a research fellow at the University of Nottingham, specialising in neurochemistry using human cell cultures.

Involvement in animal protection

Langley was trained as an animal researcher but after reading Peter Singer's Animal Liberation she became a vegan and an animal rights activist, and campaigned professionally against animal experiments. She was a member of the Animal Procedures Committee for eight years, which advises the British Home Office on issues related to animal testing, and has acted as an advisor to the government on the introduction of the new European Union chemicals legislation, REACH. She has served as a specialist consultant for the European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). She was called as an expert witness in 2001 by the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures during its inquiry into animal experimentation in the UK.

In April 2006, she was a member of the panel at the Oxford Union that debated whether "This house would not test on animals." Opposing the motion were Laurie Pycroft—who founded Pro-Test, which organised the debate—Sir Colin Blakemore, Professor John Stein, and Professor Lord Robert Winston. Supporting the motion, along with Langley, were Dr Andrew Knight, Uri Geller and BUAV campaigns director Alistair Currie. The motion was defeated by 273 to 48.

Position on animal research

Langley is an anti-vivisectionist and vegan. She told The Guardian that she "would never claim that all animal experiments are without scientific value. " She argues that the ethical case against animal research is absolute and that medical progress will benefit from 21st-century, human-relevant tools being used in place of animal experiments. This transition urgently requires funding and policy changes. She told the BBC: "When you know that other animals can feel pain and distress in the same ways that humans do, it is unethical to experiment on them."

She has campaigned against the use of non-human primates in xenotransplantation, where pig organs were grafted onto the necks of primates to test anti-rejection drugs. She told medical journalists Jenny Bryan and John Clare that the primates used in xenotransplantation research are subjected to major surgery; internal haemorrhages; isolation in small cages; repeated blood sampling; wound infections; nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea because of immunosuppressant drugs; kidney or heart failure, and eventually death. She said:

"It's not just the suffering they endure in the laboratories and research establishments. Just getting there can be torture. Studies of primates show them to have complex mental abilities which may increase their capacity to suffer. Supplying the laboratories in the UK imposes huge suffering on the animals... They're then contained in small, single cages, and transported for very long distances causing deaths, distress and suffering."

Next of Kin

Langley's report against primate experimentation, Next of Kin (2006), was published simultaneously with the publication by the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust in favor of primate experimentation. The New Scientist wrote that her report cited studies suggesting that macaques and other small monkeys are more conscious of themselves and others than was previously believed, giving them a moral status equivalent to that of great apes, who are currently not used in experiments in the UK. David Morton, professor of Biomedical Science & Ethics at the University of Birmingham, said the report was "a wake-up call to scientists to raise their game in their justification and ways they use non-human primates in research."

Publications

See also

Notes

  1. "Weekend birthdays". The Guardian. 9 August 2014. p. 45.
  2. "Gill Langley: Profile", The Guardian, accessed 9 June 2010.
  3. Levinson, Ralph and Reiss, Michael J. (eds) Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers. RoutledgeFalmer, p. 175.
  4. ^ Bryan, Jenny & Clare, John. Organ Farms. Carlton, 2001. excerpt
  5. ^ Langley, Gill. "Next of Kin: A Report on the Use of Primates in Experiments", British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, June 2006, accessed 9 June 2010.
  6. "Examination of Witnesses (Questions 382–399)", Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, United Kingdom Parliament, retrieved 15 July 2006.
  7. Asthana, Anushka. "Pro-Test in support of animal experiments", The Observer, 30 April 2006.
  8. Alistair Currie's speech to the Oxford Union Archived 16 July 2006 at the Wayback Machine, BUAV, retrieved 15 July 2006.
  9. Burch, Druin. "The sceptic", The Guardian, 2 March 2006.
  10. "Reduce animal testing, Lords urge", BBC News, 24 July 2002.
  11. Coghlan, Andy. "Report claims experiments on monkeys are vital", New Scientist, 2 June 2006. Also see "Primates in Medical Research", Medical Research Council.
  12. "MP to chair BUAV / Pro-Test debate on primate testing" Archived 7 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine, 31 May 2006.

Further reading

Animal rights
Topics (overviews, concepts, issues, cases)
Overviews
Concepts
Issues
Animal agriculture
Animal testing
Animal welfare
Fishing
Wild animals
Other
Cases
Methodologies
Observances
Advocates (academics, writers, activists)
Academics
and writers
Contemporary
Historical
Activists
Contemporary
Historical
Movement (groups, parties)
Groups
Contemporary
Historical
Parties
Activism
Media (books, films, periodicals, albums)
Books
Films
Periodicals
Journals
Magazines
Albums
Fairs and exhibitions
Animal testing
Main articles
Testing on
Issues
Controversial
experiments
Companies
Groups and
campaigns
Writers and
activists
Legislation
Categories: