Henry Spira

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Henry Spira (born June 19, 1927 in Antwerp , Belgium , † September 12, 1998 in New York ) was a Belgian-American animal rights activist.

Life

The beginnings

Henry Spira grew up as the first child of a Jewish family with his five years younger sister Renée in Antwerp, Belgium. While his father Maurice emigrated to Central America in 1937 in order for his family to come later, his mother Margit moved to Hamburg with Henry and his sister. Shortly after the “ Reichskristallnacht ” in November 1938, they followed their father to Panama . In 1940 the family moved to New York. In 1941 his second sister Susan was born.

In 1944, Henry Spira became a member of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), for which he organized events and recruited members with a friend. A year later he was hired by the US Merchant Navy, where he was involved in the union. In between he went ashore several times and finished his education at the Washington Irving Evening High School. He began a liberal arts degree at Brooklyn College and earned a living with various jobs, including General Motors . After graduating in 1958, he left the Navy and moved into an apartment in New York. At Bellevue Hospital, he worked as an assistant in a research project for premature children and then moved to a position in the New York Social Welfare Office. Then he went back to sea.

At the same time, Spira intensified his work for the SWP, with which he had always maintained a connection. He wrote for their weekly newspaper The Militant and for the NMU Democracy Committee newspaper, New York Call , which he also edited. He made particular efforts to involve the trade union movement in the struggle against racial segregation . Since the FBI helped racists deny rights to People of Color , he spent months collecting material for a twelve-part critical series about the FBI. The first part appeared on December 8, 1958 in The Militant under the title: J. Edgar Hoover , the chief of the Thought Police . Much of Spira's researched material was picked up by the New York Post . The result was that the FBI monitored Henry Spira and opened a large dossier on him. Spira also wrote critical articles on US foreign policy towards Cuba .

From 1965 Spira worked on the hospital ship Hope , which was anchored in the port of Conakry , the capital of Guinea . There he met American and European teachers, was inspired by their culture and way of life and decided to also become a teacher. Since there was a shortage of teachers in New York in 1966, he only had to add an intensive course to his degree. Henry Spira taught English and literature at Haaren High School, a Manhattan public school.

Animal liberation

"I told myself that animal liberation was the logical extension of what my life was all about - to take the side of the powerless and vulnerable, the victims who are trampled on."

- Henry Spira

1973 las Henry Spira in the newspaper The Guardian article Animal Liberation , in which the journalist Irwin silver the book Animals, Men and Morals of Peter Singer discussing, which was published in England 1,971th Spira was fascinated by the subject and enrolled in a six-part evening class at New York University in 1974 , which Singer was teaching. The two became friends over the course of the course. This was the prelude to Henry Spira's 25 years of animal rights activity, building on his experience with human rights campaigns - whose traditional struggle strategies had proven effective in the civil rights movement , the trade union movement and the women's movement . By concentrating on a clearly defined goal that seemed attainable to him, he achieved successes against intensive animal husbandry , but especially against animal experiments , which in part resulted in changes in the law and set standards in the animal rights movement .

In preparing for his first campaign, Spira found that the 100-year-old anti-animal experimentation movement in the US, England and other European countries had done nothing at the end of the day: “It seemed completely pointless to me to publish a paper, something about the people To share atrocities and ask for money so we can tell them about more atrocities next month. In the meantime, the cruelty continues to grow, the antivivisection's cash holdings are increasing, and not a single animal benefits from it. ”He noted that despite the best efforts of the opponents of animal testing, the number of laboratory animals used in the USA rose from a few thousand to more than 70 million annually.

American Museum of Natural History

“If anything distinguishes this museum, it is its freedom to examine whatever it wants, regardless of any presentable practical value. And we want to maintain this freedom. "

- Thomas Nicholson, director of the American Museum of Natural History

Henry Spira considered the animal experiments practiced by the American Museum of Natural History since 1962 to be vulnerable because they a) were carried out in a cultural institution with hundreds of visitors every day, b) were carried out on around 70 cats annually, c) were financed by the taxpayer, d ) were not directly used for research into human diseases and e) were in his opinion associated with suffering: The cats' sense of smell was destroyed, nerves in their sexual organs were severed and parts of the brain removed in order to then measure their sexual performance - e.g. B. when mating with female rabbits. Spira and his assistant, the scientifically oriented psychiatrist Leonard Rack, who provided him with the biomedical background knowledge, assumed that the investigators would find it difficult to convey to the public why their experiments were of great value to the general public. Spira decided that the campaign should not be about the abolition of animal testing, but rather the question: "How much pain for how much benefit?"

In June 1976, Spira started the campaign with a letter to the museum that went unanswered. Calls to the museum and his efforts to get the New York Times interested in the experiments failed. Neither did the attempt to get into a conversation with the lead researcher Lester Aronson, as he refused to speak to a layperson about his experiments. It was only through contact with the moderators of a New York radio show, who described the experiments on their broadcast, that the campaign started: the museum received 400 letters of protest. A report by a local newspaper was followed by a demonstration in front of the museum, which took place every weekend for 18 months from then on. There were various actions. B. Collection of signatures attached to the facade of the museum. When protesters were threatened with arrest for carrying protest posters to the museum, they printed their protests on T-shirts and took them to the museum. A targeted campaign was carried out against the chairman of the museum's board of trustees.

Spira wrote to the museum's patrons - including the city and state of New York, public foundations, large corporations, and wealthy individuals - urging them to stop supporting the museum until the experiments stop. For their part, some of them put pressure on the museum, which had now received thousands of letters of protest. Newspaper advertisements were published showing cats in stereotactic devices. Within five weeks, 350 members left the museum association. The editors of the travel magazine Discover America , which had previously reported on the museum's exhibitions, announced that they would no longer mention the museum while the experiments were ongoing.

Despite the increasing public pressure, the museum was not prepared to give up animal experiments. It was known that the antivisectionists had not prevented a single attempt in the past 100 years. The researchers considered them “ignorant fanatics hostile to science, usually guided by strange religious or mystical ideas; so there was no need to listen to them or even give in to them ”.

The breakthrough for the opponents of animal experiments was initiated by Congressman and later New York Mayor Ed Koch : He received many letters about the cat experiments and decided to get an idea of ​​the situation. He had the experiments explained to him in the presence of media representatives and embarrassed the scientists: "If you take a disturbed tomcat with brain lesions and put it in a room and find that he mounts a rabbit instead of a cat, what do you get out of it?" "How will the rabbit all" wanted to know when cooking, which has cost the state, the answer was: ". dollar 435,000" After reporting he had reimbursed the house of representatives, wrote 120 MPs, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to to have the experiments checked. Complaints about the attempts were already piled up there. In October 1976 the science magazine Science published a report in which the author u. a. found that of the 21 articles Aronson and his colleagues had published about their studies since 1962, 14 had never been cited. Now the most influential media reported increasingly on the protest or the new phenomenon of animal rights: New York Times , Chicago Tribune , Christian Science Monitor , Newsweek , NBC .

Nevertheless, the experiments - as well as the weekly demonstrations in front of the museum - continued in the winter of 1976/77 and the following spring. Following a campaign against lead researcher Lester Aronson and a full-page ad in the New York Times in May 1977 by the anti-animal experiments , the Museum and NIH announced that the animal experiment series would be discontinued in late August 1977 and that funding would not be continued. The director of the museum announced that the museum will place more emphasis on the exploration of natural animal populations and field research in the future.

The campaign initiated by Henry Spira against the American Museum of Natural History is now considered the first major success of the anti-animal experimentation movement in the United States. Gary Francione ties the recipe for success of this early Spira campaign to its abolitionist orientation. Spira had explicitly not tried to improve the conditions in which the experiments were carried out, but argued for the point of view that the experiments were useless and cruel even if they were carried out under ideal conditions.

Amnesty International

In 1977 it became public that Amnesty International was funding animal experiments in which a Danish research group injured the skin of anesthetized young pigs with glowing metal rods and electric shocks. The aim of the experiments was to find out whether it is possible to torture people with cattle brand irons without leaving any visible traces. For Henry Spira, this contradicted the high moral standing of the organization. He shared his ethical concerns with Amnesty International on several occasions, warned that the results would be just the opposite in the wrong hands, and urged the organization to focus on providing assistance to victims of torture rather than creating new victims. He met with representatives from her New York office without being able to relent. In a newspaper article he accused Amnesty International of betraying its own principles and values. Animal welfare organizations in Germany, England and Sweden also protested. The organization promised Spira that a decision would be made on the matter, but he was put off and the matter passed from one panel to the next. He began planning a demonstration in front of Amnesty International's New York headquarters when the organization decided in September 1978 not to fund further medical animal testing.

Metcalf-Hatch Act

The Metcalf-Hatch Act , passed by New York State in 1953, allowed human medical research to adopt stray dogs and cats from animal shelters as test animals. The research associations justified this with the fact that every year thousands of surplus animals are killed in the animal shelters, so it makes more sense to use them as a valuable resource for the scientific knowledge process before they die. In 1979, Spira formed the “Coalition to Abolish the Metcalf Hatch”, bringing influential personalities, large animal welfare organizations and local animal shelter and animal liberation groups - moderate and radical - to one table. The coalition sent information about the Metcalf-Hatch Act to all New York state newspapers, causing the MPs offices to receive a flood of letters. Spira spoke to Senator Tarky Lombardy, chairman of the Senate Health Committee, and personally visited all committee members, making him a familiar figure in New York's Parliament in Albany . On April 24, 1979, a new bill on the Metcalf-Hatch Act was discussed in committee and passed on to plenary. Despite opposition from the biomedical research establishment, the Senate pushed through the legal abolition of the Metcal-Hatch Act by a large majority, which was enacted on June 17, 1979 by Governor Hugh Carey . In a short time, Henry Spira had achieved what animal welfare organizations in New York had strived to do for 26 years.

Draize test

"Everyone in this company felt good when they went home that day because their kids would no longer stare at you and mistake you for someone doing crazy things with rabbits."

- Roger Shelley, Vice President of Revlon

In the Draize test , concentrated solutions of the substances to be tested were instilled in rabbits' eyes, which was often associated with severe damage to the cornea or the internal structure of the eye and considerable pain for the animals. Henry Spira selected these attempts for the campaign because most people knew what it felt like to get soap in your eyes. The question of whether another shampoo is worth dazzling a rabbit would seem to many to be justified in his opinion. First, Spira turned to the giant of the cosmetics industry: Revlon . With Leonard Rack, he outlined ideas about developing alternative testing methods that they believed could be faster, more economical, and safer than animal testing, and sent them to Revlon's director of public affairs. With no response to her letter, Spira bought a share of Revlon and made himself heard at the annual general meeting, where he asked Director Michel Bergerac to end the “cruel and grotesque” rabbit glare tests. Bergerac brushed it off: you only have the choice between “harming animals or harming people”. Spira persisted and got a call at Revlon, but every communication resulted in non-binding answers.

Spira decided to set up a "coalition to abolish the Draize glare tests on rabbits". In August 1979, he outlined the coalition's goals and sent the draft to anyone interested in finding out about the campaign and to various people in the cosmetics industry. The coalition grew to more than 400 organizations, with Spira again succeeding in uniting completely different groups for one goal. Soon media reports appeared about the coalition and the Draize test, while Spira increased the pressure on Revlon, again asked for talks and - when these again led to nothing - drafted an anti-Revlon advertisement with an employee of the agency Ogilvy & Mather appeared in the New York Times in April 1980 and received a great deal of attention. At the same time, Spira's coalition acted on regulatory agencies until the Senate dealt with the issue, which resulted in several agencies being asked to provide funding to develop and validate animal-free testing methods. At a science conference, Spira met a cell culture expert and suggested that he develop a research plan for using cell cultures to replace the Draize test. He was able to win the New England Anti-vivisection Society (NEAVS) as a sponsor. In May 1980, hundreds of people demonstrated in front of Revlon headquarters, the company received 20,000 letters of protest, and on October 7th another full-page advertisement appeared in the New York Times , and the media reported increasing numbers. Activists urged stores to stop selling Revlon products. In November the campaign took on international proportions, expanding to Germany, England, France, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.

For the first time there were constructive talks between Revlon and Spira, during which he and the company agreed to commission Rockefeller University to develop an alternative to the Draize eye irritation test. After a conversation between the director of Revlon and Joshua Lederberg of Rockefeller University, Revlon pledged $ 750,000 to the university to further develop in vitro toxicology . On December 23, 1980 Revlon gave a press conference in front of 200 journalists, at which PR Director (and future Vice President) Roger Shelley presented the new research program. In doing so, he followed a suggestion from Spira and called on the general directors of Avon , Bristol-Myers , Elizabeth Arden , Gillette , Johnson & Johnson , Estée Lauder , L'Oréal , Max Factor , Maybelline , Noxell and Procter & Gamble to participate in this research program to participate as a partner, since Draize is not just a problem for Revlon.

In January / February 1981, the cover story of the trade journal Lab Animal published a seven-page interview with Henry Spira that sparked a discussion throughout the laboratory animal industry. On March 18, 1981, Avon announced that it would also make $ 750,000 available for research into alternatives to the Draize test. After lengthy negotiations between Henry Spira and Bristol-Myers, the company agreed to invest $ 500,000 in the program. Bristol-Myers became a pioneer in in-vitro research, founded the industry-wide Industrial In-Vitro Toxicology Group and its own biochemical and cell toxicology department to apply test tube methods to the investigation of drugs. More and more cosmetics companies supported an industry-owned fund, so it was decided to tender a budget of one million dollars for the establishment of its own center for alternatives to animal testing, which would later be increased by another million. The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore was awarded the contract to build the center .

LD50 test

“Power grants nothing if it is not wrested from it. She has never done it and never will. "

- Henry Spira

In May 1981 Henry Spira prepared an international campaign against the LD50 test , in which the dose of a certain substance is determined that is lethal, i.e. fatal, on half of the test animals in a group. Spira re-formed a coalition, making greater use of its growing network for science: Myron Mehlmann, director of the toxicology department at Mobil Oil , told him that the use of animals in toxicology can easily be reduced by 90 percent in some areas without significant loss of information 98 percent could be reduced. As the first target of the campaign, Spira selected the pharmaceutical company SmithKline in Philadelphia, to which he announced a demonstration in writing, but at the same time proposed a personal meeting to prevent it. In a discussion lasting several hours with Stanley Crooke , Vice President of the SmithKline subsidiary, which is responsible for research and development, Spira received a written promise that a. develop a symposium on reducing the use of animals.

Crooke exerted his influence on the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (PMA), which represents 149 American research-based pharmaceutical companies, and endorsed a letter from Spira asking the PMA to take a critical look at all testing procedures. As a result, more and more medical organizations expressed disapproval of the LD50 test, calling it an anachronism that provides little useful information about the health risks of chemicals for humans. Spira let u. a. Run a full-page ad in the Washington Post urging readers to write to Congressmen to lobby regulatory agencies to end the LD50 test. On NBC's Today Show , he pointed out the contradiction that industry and many professionals agree that the LD50 is not needed when the law requires it.

At the same time, the European branch of the campaign kept pace with developments in the USA: In August 1983 the Technical Committee on Drug Testing of the European Commission reported that the number of laboratory animals killed in Europe could be reduced by a quarter if the EEC directive of 1975 was amended who demand the LD50 test for all new drugs.

A letter from New York Congressman Bill Green urging federal agencies to end the LD50 test was signed by 73 other members of Congress. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met on November 9, 1983, attended by representatives from various federal agencies, the cosmetics and drug industries, several scientists and Henry Spira. The unanimous view emerged that "the classic LD50 test has only 'limited' value in the safety test, and that limit value tests or studies over the dose range that require fewer animals can provide sufficient data on toxicity".

From that point on, Spira came under fire from within its own ranks for negotiating with scientists and authorities to reduce animal testing instead of advocating for their complete abolition. For many animal rights activists this was heresy. Spira defended himself by stating that he had the same ultimate goal, but his experiences in the human rights movement told him that change will only come gradually and not with a single revolutionary blow.

Procter & Gamble

“He is fraternizing with our opponent. Six or seven years ago we had a lot in common. Back then he was constantly driving into gravel that other people could use to build roads, that was very important. But I think Henry was fooled by the industry's response. He could not free himself from the swamp he had gotten into as a mediator with industry. The search for alternatives is a very transparent trick to maintain the status quo. "

- Peta founder Ingrid Newkirk on Henry Spira

Because Henry Spira did not want to leave the reduction of the LD50 test to the authorities, researchers and politicians alone, he concentrated again on large companies, including Procter & Gamble , the world's leading manufacturer of household products at the time , which in 1982 offered 260 different brands with 140 companies. After Spira wrote several letters to Procter & Gamble, to which he received evasive replies, he acquired a share in the company and attended its 1982 annual meeting in Cincinnati . There he asked detailed questions about the type and scope of animal experiments at Procter & Gamble - for which no one was prepared. He was promised to deal with his questions, and after further correspondence, Spira met Geoffrey Place, Vice President Research and Development, and scientists from Procter & Gamble. Since the company was already working on animal-free test methods, Spira's suggestions met with open ears. Assurances were given that a more active role would be taken in reducing the number of animals used and the severity of their suffering.

In May 1983 Procter & Gamble presented the "high / low" test at Johns Hopkins University, in which significantly fewer animals are poisoned than in the LD50 test. A few months later, the company published the article “Taking Animals Out of the Laboratory” in its in-house magazine in order to make employees more aware of the animal experiment problem. Spira, who still coordinated a nationwide coalition of animal rights groups, described the company's commitment, which in the meantime had formulated the abolition of all animal testing for toxicological product tests as a goal, as trend-setting.

In the years that followed, the field of in vitro toxicology and animal experimentation alternatives flourished - driven by the awakened animal rights movement in the USA and the animal rights organization PETA , which had become the dominant force in the movement after the incidents involving the Silver Spring monkeys .

Nevertheless, considerable amounts of animals were still used in toxicology, because the Draize and LD50 tests were significantly reduced, but not abolished: In England alone, at the beginning of the 1990s, every animal that was still used in cosmetic tests was around 80,000 test animals in the product tests of other industries.

There was increasing tension between PETA and Henry Spira over the direction of the movement. These intensified in 1987 due to conflicting views on Procter & Gamble's animal experiments. Spira relied on cooperation, praising the company for what it has achieved and the significantly reduced number of animal experiments. PETA relied on confrontation and accused the company of still sacrificing 70,000 to 100,000 laboratory animals annually.

Brandzeichen and McDonald's

As early as 1985, Henry Spira had increasingly devoted his commitment to animals that serve as food: He achieved the abolition of the branding on the face of Mexican cattle and with a campaign informed the public about the living conditions of the chickens of the US manufacturer Frank Perdue. He enforced better husbandry and slaughter conditions for animals at the suppliers of McDonald’s and, together with Temple Grandin, achieved a ban on pulling non-stunned animals on a chain during slaughter .

Henry Spira died of esophageal cancer in 1998 at the age of 71 .

Fonts

literature

  • G. L Francione : The Philosophical and Historical Origins of New Welfarism . In: Rain without thunder: The ideology of the animal rights movement . Temple University Press, 1996, ISBN 1-56639-461-9 , pp. 47-77.
  • Lyle Munro: The Animal Activism of Henry Spira (1927-1998) . In: Society and Animals . 10, No. 2, 2002, pp. 173-192.
  • MA Mehlman: Henry Spira (1921-1998) an Advocate for Animal Rights: A 20th Century Man of La Mancha . In: Toxicology & Industrial Health . 14, No. 6, November 1998, ISSN  0748-2337 , pp. 783-787.
  • Peter Singer : Henry Spira and the animal rights movement . Fischer, Erlangen 2001, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 .

Web links

  • ari-online.org ( Memento of February 24, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) The website of the now inactive group Animal Rights International now only has a homage to Henry Spira on its homepage

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 36.
  2. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , pp. 59-60.
  3. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , pp. 66-67.
  4. ^ Henry Spira: Fighting to win , p. 196. In: Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 66.
  5. ↑ a b Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 69.
  6. ^ John F. Burns: American Museum Pinched for Funds. In: New York Times. February 16, 1976, p. 23.
  7. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 74.
  8. ↑ a b Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 75.
  9. ↑ Nicholas Wade: Animal Rights: NIH Cat Sex Study Brings Grief to New York Museum. In: Science. October 8, 1976.
  10. ↑ a b New York Times, September 15, 1998
  11. ^ G. L Francione: Rain without thunder: The ideology of the animal rights movement . Temple University Press, 1996, ISBN 1-56639-461-9 , p. 22.
  12. ↑ The front pigs. In: Bunte. No. 36, Sept. 7, 1978, pp. 30-31.
  13. ↑ Kurt Allgeier: Animal experiments for and against. Wilhelm Goldmann Verlag, Munich 1980, ISBN 3-442-11277-X , pp. 25-26.
  14. ^ Gerhard Zwerenz : Raw pattern. In: Ilja Weiss (Ed.): Critique of Animal Experiments. Kübler Verlag, Lampertheim 1980, ISBN 3-921265-24-X , pp. 39-40.
  15. ↑ Associated Press, July 1, 1977. Quoted in: Margot Stiller, Herbert Stiller , Ilja Weiss: Tödliche Tests. Edition Hirthammer Tier- und Naturschutz-GmbH, Munich 1979, ISBN 3-921288-54-1 , p. 68.
  16. ↑ Egon Schmidt: Torture that leaves no trace. In: Medical Practice. 17th January 1981.
  17. ↑ Martina Thielepape: Always new pretexts for animal experiments - now animals are to be tortured to prove torture damage in humans. In: Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung. January 22, 1981.
  18. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , pp. 89-91.
  19. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 97.
  20. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 118.
  21. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 105.
  22. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 113.
  23. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 99.
  24. ↑ Henry Spira: Fight Hing for Animal Rights: Issues and Strategies. In: Harlan B. Miller, William H. Williams (Eds.): Ethics and Animals. Clifton NJ 1983, pp. 373-377.
  25. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 130.
  26. ↑ a b Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 135.
  27. ↑ Committee Wants Lethal Test Abolished. In: New Scientist. 4th August 1983.
  28. ↑ Nancy Heneson: American Agencies Denounce LD50 test. In: New Scientist. November 17, 1983, p. 475.
  29. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 136.
  30. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 148.
  31. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 138.
  32. ^ Marion Steinmann: Taking Animals Out of the Laboratory. In: Moonbeams. (Cincinnati, OH) Sep 1983, p. 8.
  33. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 152.
  34. ↑ Peter Singer: Henry Spira and the animal rights movement. Harald Fischer Verlag, Erlangen 1998, ISBN 3-89131-404-3 , p. 144.
personal data
SURNAME Spira, Henry
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Belgian-American animal rights activist
DATE OF BIRTH June 19, 1927
PLACE OF BIRTH Antwerp , Belgium
DATE OF DEATH September 12, 1998
Place of death new York