Scotland Hides Tests Behind Barbed Wire
JOHN BOWKER - The Scotsman

Sunday, August 1, 2004

INVERESK Research, a thriving drug-testing firm with its headquartered behind
high barbed-wire fences in rural East Lothian, recently issued a stark warning to any
would-be critics.

"Research activities with animals have been the subject of adverse attention,
particularly in the United Kingdom," it noted in an official document. "Any negative
attention or threats directed against our animal research activities could impair our
ability to operate our business efficiently and effectively."

Inveresk, one of Scotland’s biggest scientific success stories of modern times, was
wise to highlight the issue. The company has just been bought by a United States
giant, Charles River Laboratories, one of the world’s biggest breeders and sellers of
laboratory mice and rats, in a deal worth $1.5 billion (£816 million).

It was important to raise the thorny subject before the takeover. Inveresk’s bread-
and-butter business is taking unproven drugs from the world’s leading
pharmaceutical companies and testing them, a process which, in many cases,
needs help from animals.

The work involves developing and distributing treatments for human diseases
including cancer and HIV. Before a company can put a new drug on the market, it is
required by law to go through three stages of trials; the first of these is called pre-
clinical - the main business of Inveresk.

Pre-clinical trials test whether the drug is toxic in humans, and can be trialled on
patients who are already in a terminal condition. Primates, rats and mice are also
used.

Inveresk’s services are in demand; it now employs 1,000 people at its main plant,
near Tranent, as well as at Riccarton and Morningside in Edinburgh, and Glasgow.
In 16 years, it has grown from a tiny start-up to a profit machine, despite its
controversial methods.

The deal with Charles River continues a history of links with the US. Following
some "negative attention" two years ago, Inveresk decided to float on New York’s
Nasdaq stock exchange, allowing it to operate in virtual anonymity in Scotland,
avoiding all publicity.

The renewed spotlight on animal rights issues in England is certain to be reflected
with an interest in Inveresk - the activists are aware of its work, but cannot breach
its veil of secrecy. Lynda Korimboccus, campaigns manager at Edinburgh-based
Advocates for Animals, said there was "no doubt" Inveresk still experiments on
animals - it was just difficult to know what to do about it.

"There isn’t a lot of information we can get out of the company," she added. "They
used to deal with primates - we know that much - but what type of testing they do
now is unclear."

Inveresk’s secrecy is not unreasonable considering recent events - just look at the
experience of the construction firm Montpellier.

Walter Lilly, a Montpellier subsidiary, was due to start work on a new laboratory at
Oxford University but pulled out after significant pressure from the militant group
Speak.

The £18 million centre - being built to house research into cancer and Parkinson’s -
would have been useful work for Lilly in a competitive industry. But it thought twice
about the job after Montpellier’s shareholders received letters asking them to sell up
or face the consequences.

"The Oxford laboratory is not in the best interests of animals or humans," says Mel,
a member of Speak. "It’s a return to the dark ages. We have committed all our
resources to ensure its closure and we will keep at it."

The current climate has echoes of the most notorious animal rights campaign - the
relocation of Cambridge-based company Huntingdon Life Sciences to the US. The
firm still operates a research centre in the UK, but the loss of its headquarters was
seen as a catastrophe for the life-sciences industry. It has been at least three years
since Inveresk faced opposition on anything like the scale of Montpellier. That may
change with the Charles River deal.

Its Massachusetts-based owner sells livestock, from chickens to guinea pigs, but
one of its most lucrative products has been a type of obese rat. The JCR - named
after the initials of its Canadian creator - quickly becomes almost three times as fat
as a normal rat, at over 1kg in weight, and can be used to test anti-diet and obesity-
related health drugs.

On the plus side - its creators say - they are very docile animals and can make good
pets.

Charles River makes around 40 per cent of its multi-million- dollar revenues from
breeding and selling lab animals such as the JCR, but has had an easy ride from
US protesters.

That is largely because testing regulations in the US are a lot more benign than
here. John Robins, of Scots-based campaign, Animal Concern, said although UK
animal rights laws are poor for the animals, at least regulations exist at all - unlike in
the US.

David Windley, a Nashville analyst who closely followed the Charles River-Inveresk
takeover, said: "You have to remember the US government treats these folk like
terrorists. It may find things tougher in the UK."

Yesterday’s toughening of laws signal a shift in approach, with ministers praising
the importance of testing on animals in research and denouncing violent protest, but
Inveresk’s views on this - or any other subject - are unknown.

The firm will not return calls on this or any other issue, an approach which has
served it well over the years. In addition, the chief executive, Walter Nimmo, may be
thinking he has no need to worry just yet. Inveresk’s East Lothian plant - along with
all other operations - will keep its company brand name, distancing itself from its
new owner, and, it hopes, the activists. The centre is also so busy that there is no
way Charles River could shift any of its breeding and selling operations across the
Atlantic - certainly for the time being.

"The operations are designed to be complementary," said a US public relations
worker who helped deliver the deal. "Charles River wants to be able to offer
customers in Europe and the US a greater degree of services; now they have a
perfect partner."

This is not how David Windley, who downgraded both the company’s stocks on the
announcement, would describe it.

Asked about the potential stumbling-block of animal rights protests, Mr Windley said
it would be one to watch.

"It’s a very interesting question," he added.

SOURCE: The Scotsman
http://news.scotsman.com/health.cfm?id=876252004

* * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn