Cambridge primate testing facility scrapped
research centre to conduct research into neurological disorders
which caught the attention of the scientific press late last year.
The University claims that it has taken the move for unspecified financial reasons, but the root of the problem is believed to be the high cost of keeping the facility secure from animal extremist groups. The centre has already become a focus for the growing battle between medical researchers and anti-vivisectionists.
The cost of setting up the facility has escalated from £24 million (€35m) when it was first announced to more than £32 million, as the need for security measures and compliance with updated requirements on animal welfare, added to the bill.
The news has disappointed patient groups, which had hoped that the work undertaken at the centre would pave the way for novel treatments for a range of diseases affecting the central nervous system, including schizophrenia and Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Huntingdon's disease.
In a statement, Professor Tony Minson, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for the university, said the project had become unviable even without the need for security, adding: "What was an acceptable risk five years ago is no longer the case."
However, Professor Trevor Jones of the Association for the British Pharmaceutical Industry said the costs needed to defend the laboratory against attacks by animal extremists were the principal reason for the scheme being abandoned.
Two UK animal rights groups, Animal Aid and the National Anti-Vivisection Society, started legal proceedings seeking to block the project earlier this month. They cited the university's animal rights record and argued the research was meaningless because of the differences between human and primate brains.
"The decision shows just how urgent it is that a single, specific piece of legislation to tackle the problem is drawn up by the government so that action can be taken against animal terrorists," he added.
Indeed, the UK government had put its full weight behind the scheme, overturning the decision of local planning authorities that the lab should not have been built because of fears about public safety.
Prof Minson acknowledged that the animal rights groups will claim this decision as a victory, but stressed: "In our view they have won no arguments whatsoever. We still believe this work to be of significant national importance and we are already exploring with the medical research funding agencies other ways of continuing this work."
