This comes after students narrowly voted in a referendum in favour of the Otago University Students’ Association (OUSA) lobbying the university to cease development of the Great King St facility until students were consulted on the issue.
Vice-chancellor research and enterprise Prof Richard Blaikie said the university was "fully committed" to developing the facility, which would future-proof Otago’s status as a leading institution by providing world-class facilities for biological and medical research and education.
Animal-based testing had played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough in the past few decades and had helped saved hundreds of millions of lives worldwide, Prof Blaikie said.
"Such research, carried out by many scientific institutions, aims to help both humans and animals live longer, healthier lives."
Just over 50% of the 3713 students who responded supported the group’s view that the development should cease until students were consulted on the "financial, ethical and scientific value and implications of investing in animal-based research".
The group’s president, Oska Rego, said instead of investing millions in an animal testing facility, the university should be moving towards modern alternatives.
The project had been developed in secrecy and the group had not been able to get any information on the project or what consultation had been undertaken with students, Mr Rego said.
"Our assessment of it is that it’s a fundamentally flawed decision."
The group believed animal testing was inefficient and scientifically unreliable and there were alternatives.
He accepted the university was unlikely to overturn its decision, but hoped the referendum would result in a more open discussion about the merits of the facility and animal testing in general, Mr Rego said.
OUSA president Hugh Baird said as a result of the referendum the OUSA would now oppose the facility.
However, given the project was already going ahead "there was not too much" it could do to stop it, Mr Baird said.
Comments
Unusual for a students' association to get something right, but they've certainly managed it here. "Animal-based testing had played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough in the past few decades and had helped saved hundreds of millions of lives worldwide." What bollocks --- if anything, precisely the opposite is true: thalidomide, aminorex, mitoxantrone are just a few of the dozens of unmitigated disasters associated with animal testing. That a university would continue to promote such activities hardly seems to be in keeping with its role as society's 'conscience'.
Interesting, 'Coker', and I am assuming that you have never taken a panadol or a course of antibiotics? Literally every medication or procedure you can think of will, rightly or wrongly, have been tested on animals or tissues taken from animals at some stage, to verify its safety or efficacy. OK, I agree, people are entitled to their views on this. However, I think what would be fair is if you were to carry around a notice that says "Does not wish to receive any treatments that have been tested on animals" so that hospital staff/GPs are ready to deny you or your children that life-saving antibiotic or blood product, to conform with your wishes. That way, there would be sufficient medication for those of us without these polarised views and a few less of you around with these views.