facebook
twitter
rss
account
search
search

Major antibodies producer mistreated animals, feds say

A major player in the billion-dollar antibodies industry has repeatedly violated the Animal Welfare Act, USDA says.
By Brooks Hays   |   Feb. 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM   |   Comments

http://cdn.ph.upi.com/sv/em/i/UPI-1791392652609/2014/1/13926604615755/Major-antibodies-producer-mistreated-animals-feds-say.jpg
WASHINGTON, Feb. 17 (UPI) -- Santa Cruz Biotechnology is the second largest supplier of antibodies in the world. It's also been repeatedly mistreating animals, the USDA claims. The agency recently filed a formal complaint against the company outlining a variety of abuses.

The company already has a history of Animal Welfare Act violations, having paid out several thousand dollars in fines over the last decade. But now the antibodies producers are going to have to answer for their misdeeds in court. The company could have responded to the allegations in writing, but refused, and now a court date has been set for July.

Santa Cruz Biotech operates a ranch in Central California where it houses the hundreds of goats and rabbits it uses to harvest antibodies, a large protein vital to the functioning of the body's immune system. Antibodies have a variety of uses in medical and biology research and are sold to labs around the world.

According to a series of USDA inspections, animals at the ranch were consistently neglected. Officials reported that, among other violations, sick or hurt animals were left uncared for and that food was substandard.

The advocacy group Stop Animal Exploitation Now! first brought attention to the company's pattern of abuse in 2011 after reading over a number of the USDA inspection reports. “We look at all the inspection reports as they become available online,” Michael Budkie, the groups executive director, told Nature. “And Santa Cruz Biotechnology has a history of serious animal welfare violations.”

“I don’t think what’s going on is widely known in the scientific community,” Stanford University biologist Matt Scott told The New Yorker. “If it was more widely known, it would have an impact. Biologists care about animals and the land, and don’t want to take part in something where either of those is hurt.”


[Nature]
[The New Yorker]

© 2014 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Any reproduction, republication, redistribution and/or modification of any UPI content is expressly prohibited without UPI's prior written consent.
Most Popular
1
Dinosaurs shrank for 50 million years before becoming birds
2
Cape Cod scientists tag first great white shark of season
3
Five-minute video visualizes history of human culture
4
Music helps cows relax, produce more milk
5
Thousands of velellas wash up on the shores of San Francisco
Trending News
Video
x
Feedback