By Lisa Myers and Diane Beasley
Rock Center
Rosie and Ken are 30-year-old chimpanzees who've never known a day of freedom. They were born in research labs and have spent almost their entire lives being experimented on by scientists in search of cures for human diseases.
These two chimpanzees have been infected with viruses, darted, and sedated more than 100 times, and put through dozens of sometimes painful procedures. For years, Rosie repeatedly was given a drug that caused her seizures.
Today, these aging chimps are living in large enclosures called primadomes at the Texas Biomedical Research Institute in San Antonio, available to be used for still more experiments. When Rosie and Ken and a dozen other chimps were shipped to the lab, in 2010, after a 10-year hiatus from invasive testing, it provoked a public outcry.
Chimpanzee 'Ken' in his enclosure.
We met Rosie and Ken not long ago, when, after months of negotiation, Texas Biomed gave NBC News unprecedented access to the highly secretive world of primate research.
Dr. Robert Lanford, who has experimented on chimps for 27 years, said he wants the public to see what it's like at his research lab today. "The American people has had the wrong opinion that these animals are in little bitty cages in a dark room with no windows," he said. "I want them to see who we are and how we take care of the animals and why we're doing it."
Dr. John VandeBerg, director of the primate research center, says chimpanzees here are treated "with the utmost of reverence," and have a "high quality of life."
But that quality of life is a matter of intense debate and part of the emotional argument over whether experimenting on chimps is morally and scientifically justified to save human lives. Also at issue: When is enough enough? When do chimps who've given much in the name of science get to retire to the relative freedom of a sanctuary?
One reason chimpanzee research is so controversial is that these amazing creatures share 98 percent of our DNA and have many human traits, including emotions ranging from joy to sadness and fear.
"Remember we're talking about our closest living relatives with brains so sophisticated that they can do a lot of problems on a computer with a touchpad, faster than secondary school students. That's how bright they are," said famed anthropologist and primatologist Jane Goodall in an interview with NBC News.
Dr. Goodall has worked tirelessly for decades to improve the lives of lab chimps and to persuade scientists and the government that this research should be banned.
"All invasive research is torture," Goodall says. "And it's not just the procedures. It's the imprisonment. It's being kept in a small space with no choice. You just are there. You're powerless."
Over the four days our team spent at Texas Biomed, our cameras were required to shoot from a "safe zone," since many of the chimps, like Ken and Rosie, are infected with viruses such as Hepatitis C and HIV. So to get close-ups of the chimps, we built special equipment to attach small cameras to the cages. At first, the chimps tried to remove them — and then, were fascinated by seeing their own reflections in the camera lens.
We saw three different types of housing where the chimps live, enrichment which involves activities to keep them engaged, and their interaction with behaviorists. We observed how the chimpanzees are trained to voluntarily present their own body parts to receive shots. We also were allowed to watch one of Lanford's experiments in which a chimp who'd been infected with the Hepatitis C virus was sedated and then bled. Lanford has been working to find a vaccine for over a decade.
Testing on chimps has saved lives in the past: it helped produce the Hepatitis B vaccine which is now given to children at birth.
But scientists disagree about whether chimps are needed to find a cure for Hepatitis C. Lanford says testing on chimps will save human lives. Chimps are crucial, he says, because they're the only animals that can be infected with the virus. Unlike humans, they don't develop liver disease.
Scientists here also argue that they provide a quality of life for chimpanzees which is just as good as a sanctuary, and that instead of being retired, chimps like Rosie and Ken should live out their days in the labs, in case they are needed for research in the future.
"I think of the chimpanzees in the same way that I think of a library. There are many books in the library that will never be used this year or next year," VandeBerg says. "Many of them might never be used again. But we don't know which ones will be needed tomorrow, next year or the year after."
Anthropologist and primatologist Jane Goodall.
Goodall says that's a terrible idea. "Most of them are just stockpiled. Most of them are not being used. They're just there in case maybe one day we might want to use them again," she said. "I definitely think at a certain point, they deserve to be freed from this kind of life of servitude."
Whether a chimp gets to retire is entirely up to the labs and the government. There is no ethical standard or uniform criteria.
According to Goodall, "the tragedy is that some of the chimps in the labs know nothing else. They have never tasted any kind of freedom in their lives. Freedom to choose, freedom to go where they want."
To see what life looks like for lab chimps lucky enough to be deemed no longer needed for research, we spent two days at the National Chimpanzee Sanctuary in Shreveport, Louisiana. It's aptly known as "Chimp Haven."
In the back woods of Louisiana, for the first time in most of their lives, the chimps can walk on grass, swing in the trees ... and forage in the forest.
Dr. Linda Brent founded Chimp Haven, after spending 16 years as a behaviorist at Texas Biomed. "Everything we do here, from the way the facility was built to the things we give to the chimpanzees and the way we manage the facility, every decision we make is for the welfare of the chimpanzees," she says.
Additional Resources: For more information on the National Chimpanzee Sanctuary, Chimp Haven, click here. For more information on the Texas Biomedical Research Institute, click here. For more information on Jane Goodall’s work and the Jane Goodall Institute, click here. To learn about a group of lab chimpanzees that Goodall helped get placed in the Fauna sanctuary outside of Montreal, Canada, click here. To learn more about the Great Ape Protection Act that Goodall is working to pass, click here.
Leave a Comment:
I don't understand the reasoning that we can do what ever we want to gods creatures with no voices. I ony hope that some day people pay for what they do to these animals. I reailize that some people volunteer for testing but I would bet that what ever the drug is thats being tested is not nearly as dangerous as the drugs used on these chimps. When is enough enough. Please stop this practice
" I reailize that some people volunteer for testing but I would bet that what ever the drug is thats being tested is not nearly as dangerous as the drugs used on these chimps."
You are correct. The drugs used in human clinical trials are "not nearly as dangerous." The reason for the increased safety in drugs used in human clinical trials as opposed to drugs used in animal trials is that the drugs in human clinical trials have already been tested in animals. Without the animal trials occurring first, the rate of failure (up to and including death) in human clinical trials would increase significantly.
Some concerns I have about this news story involve the fun things that were shown at the sanctuary that chimps receive that was not shown at the research facility even though they also receive these same things in research labs (toys, enrichment devices like the termite fishing devices, hay to make nests) yet this wasn't shown in the story. Also, the sedation and blood draw shown for the research facility, I am sure is conducted at the sanctuary also since all of these chimps receive veterinary care. Besides the actual trees at the sanctuary, chimps in both types of facilities receive similar things like access to the large outdoor corals with high cement walls, do live in social groups, and receive similar enrichment. I am annoyed that NBC chose not to show these equivalent things for both facilities. They instead decided to make it seem like these good things given to captive chimps only occurred at the sanctuary and not the research labs. I have worked with research chimpanzees, and have seen and participated in ALL of the great things shown at the sanctuary at a biomedical research institution for chimpanzees.
In addition, NBC did not do all of their research or just failed to add it to the story when mentioning the one chimp at risk for sudden cardiac death. Cardiac disease is VERY COMMON in ALL chimpanzees, not just the one particular chimp that has been involved in biomedical research in this story. Sudden cardiac death is a known problem in chimpanzees and should not have been equated to this one particular chimp. The research chimps I have worked with received regular cardiac exams by a board certified cardiologist and were very well cared for at the institution. Based on published literature and colleagues of mine, I know this occurs at other research institutions as well.
Finally, even if we could move all of the research chimpanzees to sanctuaries...there isn't enough room for all of them to retire at places like Chimp Haven. It is likely that they will live out their days at their current locations because there is not enough room for that many animals at sanctuaries that have the appropriate facilities to handle great apes.
I wish NBC would have reported something less biased when comparing the day to day events of a sanctuary versus a biomedical research institution. Many chimps in research facilities right now aren't even being used for anything invasive, only behavioral types of studies (communication, using computer programs or simply observation by a scientist). NBC even stated that one of the Texas chimps hadn't been used for ten years!
Agreed. The piece presented Chimp Haven as the optimal answer to the question of what to do with these animals. However, they did not discuss any of the negative aspects of sanctuary housing. According to Chimp Haven's website, they only have 1 full-time veterinarian and 2 veterinary technicians. I'm sure they do a great job and they are all wonderful at what they do. However, here is a quote from the Southwest primate center's website:
Seven full-time veterinarians, assisted by more than 130 other veterinary technicians and animal care staff at Texas Biomed's Southwest National Primate Research Center, provide for the humane care and treatment of Texas Biomed's primates.
I would conclude the research center is probably better equipped to handle the care of these animals than the sanctuary.
1) In the case of chimpanzees, the invasion of invasive research goes beyond blood draws, even when the blood draw is the only "research" procedure done. The chimpanzee has to anesthetized to draw the blood. Regulations are indeed relatively strict with chimpanzees (for example, no lethal experiments are permitted), but come on, that leads to the question, why is that? The fact of the matter is, on both sides of the issue one finds the conviction that chimpanzees are different. Vandeberg's assertion that chimpanzees are animals (implying that they are little different from the human perspective as pigs or rodents) is in this debate every bit as radical position as Ingrid Newkirk's contention that a dog is a pig is a rat is a boy.
2) Your statement that the chimpanzees were not taken from their native environment is not universally true. Some of the elderly chimpanzees who are still in research were in fact wild caught. Plus, where does it matter precisely where they were born? The fact remains, chimpanzees are an endangered species (much more critically so now with the bush meat market) and many of those bred chimpanzees not only will not reproduce, but the females who were pulled from their mothers wouldn't be able to raise their children if they did get pregnant.
3) Your statement about the purpose of research is incomplete to false, especially when it comes to basic research. Her research and other field research, plus captive research, actually drives much of the informed opposition to using chimpanzees in invasive biomedical research (not to mention the pet and entertainment trade).
4) There are already existing restrictions to research. Research on human beings is justly restricted even though it would provide the most immediate application to human health. There are animals that are more similar to human beings cognitively as well as physically than they are to most other non-human animal. Chimpanzees are undeniably one of those animals.
not so long ago, it was considered Okay to do STD research on black men without even telling them they were research subjects. When Jonas Salk wanted to test his vaccine on humans, he was giving permission to do that... on black children. Because they weren't as important? Because they weren't as sentient or intelligent? Because they weren't as human??
If you REALLY want some truth (and can handle it as it's very hard to watch), catch the PBS/Nature documentary Chimpanzees: an unnatural history
It's entirely about the cruelties of testing. For me, that 50-minute program was life-changing.
NO TESTING. PERIOD.
no testing period on any animal for any reason ever. i completely agree.
Hey Pooua, have you even spent any time with an animal? It's very easy for me to tell when my dog expresses joy, boredom, fear, pain, etc. Millions of hours have been spent studying chimps this century. If you read any recent data there is no argument as to how very alike we are. I will admit that people commenting a/b the US being the only remaining country to test on animals is incorrect, they are one of only 2 countries that still test on chimpanzees. And for those of you that have no compassion for "animals", human beings are animals you idiots! My dog is part of the "Canine" family like wolves, foxes, etc. Homo sapiens (human beings for those of you who are unfamiliar with Latin) are part of the "Primate" family which includes gorillas, monkeys, chimpanzees, lemurs, and a/b 7 others. Also, most testing can be done on human tissue and cell samples, without hurting the person or an animal, however it is more expensive so some labs still use animals unfortunately.
Cell culture is significantly cheaper than using animals in studies. Cell culture will not replace animal research in the near future because it is impossible to model the complexity of an entire organism in a culture dish. Just because a drug kills cancer cells in culture does not guarantee it will kill them in an organism. Nor does it guarantee there won't be ill effects on cell types not present in the culture dish.
All of you read the whole article but forgot to realize the importance of the first paragraph. These Chimps were born in captivity, they wouldn't be able to survive in the wild on their own. Even though they are being tested on and no matter how bad it feels to them they still look pretty happy and content to me, they are still alive, they are enjoying their surroundings. The fact that we have these animals to test with allows for so many advances in the human world for medical research. Do you go throw a fit because scientists are using mice to test on? after all they are just as important as chimps are they not? Weren't they put on the arc? didn't they evolve? whatever your grounds for belief are these animals have made it possible for many people's loved ones to still be here today! I believe if these chimps were in the wild they would have just as high of a chance, if not higher, at getting illnesses, being attacked or even being killed. Are you really gonna lose sleep over this? Are you gonna go join Dr. Jane "Chimp lover" and live among the chimps? I bet you aren't, I bet you are going to go about your normal lives, working, going to your kids' school functions etc. And best of all, you'll be treating your children, and yourselves, with the drugs they were able to develope because of the testing done! THANK YOU HERO CHIMPS! In return you shall have all the food you want, nice cozy shelter and friends to play with!
It's a question of life-value: Is an ANIMAL'S life worth more - not money, but true and honest contributory value - than a human? In this case, two chimps may save a million human lives, or more, eventually. Is this a good trade-off? Is it moral or ethical?
I'm torn: I find the innocence of wild savagery to be much more honest and straight-forward than much of humanity's "civilization." On that front, I think maybe the humans saved may not be worth the cost. On the other hand, the research done, using these animals, may save the life of the human who discovers the key to saving any humanity at all.
For me, it comes down to value: Do we sacrifice untold human lives (and innovation) for the "freedom" of one wild animal? With my optimism, I prefer to believe humanity is basically good... So, no. If you don't like animal testing, boycott the entities that participate - be they cosmetics producers or life-saving medical providers. If you want to hope you'll be CURED of HIV someday (without Magic Johnson's fortune) then you probably don't want to be against (limited) animal testing. To be clear, I do NOT support animal testing for non-life-saving research such as cosmetics, period! However, I think market forces can accomodate this without government intervention.
To be even clearer, I am a free-market, constitutionalist, conservative, "right wing wacko" who supports Ron Paul for President 2012. And yes, I still care about the well-being of the animals... Even the animals we refer to as "human."
"Do we sacrifice untold human lives (and innovation) for the "freedom" of one wild animal?"
What sacrifice are you talking about ? We are all going to die anyway. Why is it a tragedy we die today instead of tomorrow? It is all sentimental horse dung.
Where in the world would infected Animals go??? Zoo that whould show off there scares and uses there symptoms as props to ammuse and entertain Crowds of ther 2% counterparts? Not to mention the extreme cost to keep them quarintined to keep the public safe. Maybe back to Africa where they belong. to be shot and eating by tribesmen that would unleash manmade virus the likes the world has never endured. So give the Apes the option or make the option for them. Just maybe, the would want to exact revenge... on the world. I just recently watched "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" and that situation could go like 10x as worse, becuase Apes rip faces off and arms and everything else they can until they get bored. Even without all the infections, any option to healthy Apes are condemiing them. I don't think many Apes get to that age because they are hunted constantly in Africa and replacing one Zoo for another is not freedom. Freedom is walking agmosnt us and being able to stick your finger up your hole in public without the authorties taking you away. lets give Apes Income, or the whole Animal kingdom because we are now all or will be apperantly human one day! Animal rights is going too far. They are going to start protecting plants from being eatin for there claims of having souls. Don't hate on me Im just speaking my mind and if you want to start a chat war lets do it. nothing I have said has been personally reasearched and I love Animals especially Lions, Tigers and Bears, oh my! really and Wolves/Lobos, all my Tattoos!!!
Even humans have a retirement. If they are so like us don't they deserve the same. This is not to say that I agree in anyway with experimenting on animals of any kind. With all the technology, I don't believe it is necessary. And if the government grants were no longer available, so much of this unnecessary cruelity would go away. The people that promoted keeping the chimps seemed to lack feelings and were extremely cold to these sweet creatures and their treatment. All I can say in closing is shame on you.
Retire these chimps...
it is out f*cking rageous to me in 2012 we still wear fur of any kind, eat duck & goose liver pate (and have the audacity to call it a delicacy) conduct canned hunts, TOLERATE POACHERS, and exotic animal trade/ownership. allow the dork Japanese to whale without immediately creating a trade embargo. As a supposed civilization we bring our children to see the horrible conditions of animal cruelty at the circus, or at a rodeo, or the dull hopelessness of a caged animal at a zoo. We've pesticided honey & bumble bees off the planet, we're fungiciding bats & killing them by the 10's of millions too. So what's a little continual animal research you say? Barbaric & completely without merit in the 21st century.the data science needs can be gleaned from computer models, not from live DNA. This is an ancient & unnecessary practice.
The perverseness of the whole affair is that we are doing research on a somewhat rare specie to help the one specie that is destroying this world by their sheer numbers.
These scientists are purveyors of death. They are collectively destroying the very planet by increasing the human population. A pox on them .
Okay, let's test how "reverently" these chimps are treated, and what their supposed high quality of life is like. Would you allow your own child to live under these same conditions? I highly doubt it. Ok, so let's use orphaned children as research subjects. They will have housing and food provided to them, and according to this article, live a high quality life. Or let the mother of an unwanted child sell her child to a research lab. If you just can't digest using children, let's use prisoners who have life sentences. If they volunteer to be research subjects for a couple of decades, then maybe they can be released early and not have to die in prison. At least they would get the option of volunteering, unlike these chimps. And wouldn't their test results be even more accurate than a chimp's? Oh, but wait! Children and prisoners are humans, and have rights. Chimps (and the billions of other non-human animals that are used in research), on the other hand, obviously have no rights and are expendable. It doesn't matter that they are sentient beings (like humans). It doesn't matter that they can't "talk" in our language and therefore voice their pain and suffering (although, I think their screams and actions probably get the point across)! How can someone think that non-human animals don't feel pain? I would challenge that person to visit a research lab and watch first-hand a caustic chemical being dropped into an animal's eye, or an animal going into seizure because of some invasive procedure that was performed on him. I think you would have a change of heart.
Okay, let's see how "reverently" these chimps are treated and how high their quality of life is. Ask yourself this question: Would you allow your child to live in these conditions, to be subjected to experimentation and infected with diseases?? I think not. Okay, so let's use orphaned children. They will be provided housing (a cage) and food, and according to this story, a "high quality life." Or better yet, let a mother with an unwanted pregnancy sell her child to a research lab. Just can't digest using children for research? Okay, then, let's allow prisoners with life sentences or who are on death row to volunteer to be research subjects. After a couple of decades when the labs are finished using them, they can be released from their prison sentences (if they haven't already died in the lab). At least they get the option of volunteering. And wouldn't their test results be much more accurate than those of chimps?
Oh, but wait. These are humans. They have rights. They have feelings. We know that non-human animals have no rights. They are ours to do with as we please. Who cares that they are sentient beings (like humans)? Who cares that they can't speak our language and tell us that they are in pain or are suffering (although, I'm thinking their screams and actions probably get the point across)! I would challenge anyone who thinks animals should be used in research labs to visit a lab and watch first-hand a caustic chemical being dropped into an animal's eye, or an animal suffering a seizure (or worse) due to an invasive procedure that was performed on him. Most of these tests do not need to be performed - there are alternative methods to vivisection such as computer models that can be used that produce the same results, or stem cells that can be utilized instead of putting a live animal through painful experiments.
I hope no one buys this piece of trash. I'm really sad that the Today Show and Rock Center has given this so much air time.
Why not use Real Humans like the death row inmates. People who have lost the priviledges and rights of living with humane people and leave the poor animals who have done nothing to us to live their life happlily in the wild. I know this will never happened because it is so "INHUMANE", but the great red apes deserve our respect and our protection to keep them around for our grandchildren to enjoy.
I am sadly disappointed in Brian Williams and the program! I really expect(ed) more from the series. This article is sheer Tabloid Jounalism at it's worst! In my opinion the decision maker who decided to air this show should be shown the door! Although no fan of the Kenney clan of JFK's generation, or before, this piece was unneccessary, underhanded, and way out of bounds. Hopefully the program will strive to improve the quality of it;s presentations to at least the disgusting level of "Reality TV"!
how can u sleep at night
torture those poor creatures in the name of greed
find another way to do these test then toturing another life
why is our lives more important then a dog or cat or insect
this world needs to be destroyed its hopeless
we need another noahs flood to clean out all the evil !!!!!!!!!!!!!
greed is truly going to bring the destruction of this planet
wha a stupid system weve bulit were all running around like idiot s wasting our lives trying to make $
AND STABB EACH OTHER IN THE BACKS TO GET THERE ! greed will bring the end of the world , think about it , global warming greed ! CRIMES COMMITED ! BECUASE OF GREED !
BANISH ALL MONEY AND THE WORLD WOULD BE A BETTER PLACE
THIS WORLD IS OUT OF CONTROL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SAD SAD SAD
IF CHIMPS
BELONG TO A SHELF, DO BOOKS BELONG TO THE WILD?
Two Texas Biomedical
experts were interviewed by the Rock Center program on NBC, about 2 weeks ago
(or so). Mr. John Van deberg and Robert Landford. I was amazed by their comments.
I could hardly believe that people who looked so educated and wise would say: “Chimpanzees
are like books; we keep them on the shelf until we need them!” Really?
I love books
as well as chimpanzees. Books are things, but chimpanzees are not; they are
ALIVE. Books are not alive, but they come alive when we read them. They tell us
wonderful stories we like to hear; they help us to understand other cultures,
other beings. That is why I go to the shelves and pull out a book: to get
inspired, to educate myself, to understand others better. The book is there
because it is not ALIVE; we make them come alive.
Living
things don’t belong to shelves; they belong, in this case, to the wild.
Chimpanzees are breathing, living, and sensitive beings with families, needs
and wants, just like us. They have been communicating their capacity for love,
care and understanding for years. I have only had the opportunity to experience
their presence at the St. Louis Zoo and I am mesmerized every time I visit them
there. I am fascinated by their behavior; by the way they demonstrate their
trust and intelligence, compassion and aggression, curiosity and playfulness.
Many of the facts
I have learned from Chimpanzees are in books. Really! And one of my favorite
authors, Dr. Jane Goodall does a wonderful job by transmitting her amazing and
true experiences with chimps in the wild. I am lucky to have her books in my
shelves!
In one of her
books for children called With Love, Dr.
Goodall retells the story of two chimps, Madam
Bee and her daughter (which is actually this story’s name) in their routine
to secure food while enjoying their environment. Madam Bee “had been afflicted
by a paralyzed arm, the result of a polio epidemic that had swept through
Gombe.”(Goodall, J. 1994) Madam Bee’s life had been hard and when she grew old
it was hard for her to climb up trees to obtain fruits. Little Bee, one of her
daughters, realized that her mother couldn’t climb like she did, and so she
waited at the jungle’s floor while resting and wishing to be up there.
Little Bee
collected enough fruit for her and her mother. She packed three in her mouth
and two in her free hand. “She laid two of the fruits beside the old female and
the two of them, mother and daughter, fed side by side, peaceful and content.”(Goodall,
J.1994).
Mr. Van deberg,
Mr. Landford, could you please explain how can a book carry extra fruits to
share with its mother?
Chimpanzees
are our ancestors, they share 98% of our DNA, and all these facts you know
about. Is this why they should suffer? Is it that by being human we get to
decide who experiments on who? Shouldn’t we accept that if we are to test and
experiment on animals to cure human deceases we should experiment and test on ourselves?
Are you able to feel the needs of these
chimps in the way Little Bee felt her mother’s? Would you share your food with
them? Would you share your freedom?
If there is
a book on your shelf where I can find the way to understand your comments,
please share it with me. Chimpanzees don’t belong to a shelf, and they don’t
belong to your laboratory either.
Gabriela
The fact that we are even having this ridiculous debate sickens me..To do research on such animals is barbaric and makes us less than human..Why it continues to happen is beyond me..What if a more intelligent life form ( which obviously isn't saying much after reading some of the less compassionate comments) lands on our planet and uses the same excuse to infect us with diseases that they might be dealing with on their home planet..How would we feel about that? I'm sure that the morons supporting this "research" would have some snappy retort, but i'm certain it would not hold water..I just hope if intelligent beings with superior intellect do land here they pick the researchers who do these experiments and our government legislators who allow it as their first subjects for experimentation..
I am an advocate for Chimpanzees. I believe that what People are doing in the "Name of Research" is nothing but in human. These Chimps have beeen found to be our closest living relative and yet they are being treat as if they dont matter. The head of this research facility in texas stated the following:
"I think of the chimpanzees in the same way that I think of a library. There are many books in the library that will never be used this year or next year," VandeBerg says. "Many of them might never be used again. But we don't know which ones will be needed tomorrow, next year or the year after."
Im sorry but to be this man is no better the some evil dictators this world has seen. Granted he is not in prisoning, torturing or killing humans like lets say Hitler did. But Hitler didnt respect people whom are different. These chimps may not be human but what right does on have to in prison an intellegent creature such as chimpanzees. They are still in prisoned, tortured and sometimes are killed from the very injections they are given...all of this without their concent.
How would you like to be treated this way. To have your freedom taken from you and have no choice in the matter. Yes Chimps may have had improvements to the habitat but in the end they still view TRUE FREEDOM from behind bars.
As stated in this article, "...every country in the world has banned chimpanzee research EXCEPT the United States and one country in Africa." The message is loud and clear...there are more advanced methods of conducting research in the 21st century.