Table of contents

Preface.................................................................................................................................................... 3
Chapter 1: The municipality of Odoorn and the village of Tweede Exloermond .................................. 5
Geography .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Historical development....................................................................................................................... 5
Demography ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Economic structure............................................................................................................................. 7
Social structure ................................................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 2: Research methods ................................................................................................................. 9
Main focus and theory........................................................................................................................ 9
Research design................................................................................................................................ 10
Research methods............................................................................................................................. 13
In the field ........................................................................................................................................ 14
Chapter 3: Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 16
Panel of respondents......................................................................................................................... 16
Knowledge, experience and behaviour ............................................................................................ 16
Attitude towards animal-testing ....................................................................................................... 18
Personal characteristics .................................................................................................................... 19
General care for animals................................................................................................................... 21
Social-economic status ..................................................................................................................... 24
Politics, religion and domicile.......................................................................................................... 25
Concern for the environment and alternative medicine.................................................................... 27
Differentiation in species of animals ................................................................................................ 28
Reasons for objections to animal testing .......................................................................................... 30
Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusion................................................................................................... 32
Bibliography......................................................................................................................................... 34
Appendix A: Questionaire.................................................................................................................... 35

Page 2
Preface
Almost anywhere in the world people share their territory with all kinds of animals,
although in different cultures the relationship with animals and the attitude towards
certain species may vary. Indian religions like Hinduism and Buddhism embody a
profound respect for all living beings. It is taught that animals take part in the cycle of
reincarnation and there is great tolerance, even for harmful animals like rats and
insects. Among 'primitive' peoples we find respectful attitudes, because animals have
abilities that the human race lacks; for instance the singing of birds and their ability to
fly. According to religions that originated in the Middle-East (Judaism, Islam and
Christianity), all animals are subordinate to the human race. In the Bible it is said that
man is steward over the earth, but how this task has to be fulfilled is still open for
discussion (Smit, 1989: 9-13). Is man obliged to take care of animals in an
affectionate and respectful manner or can man abuse and exploit animals whenever he
thinks it is necessary? It seems that people in western Europe chose the second
option. Although people might take good care of their domesticated animals, there
are many forms of exploitation in other areas. Animals are extensively bred on farms,
not only as a source of food, but also for leather and fur. Other forms of (ab)use
include the exploitation of animals in commercials and in circuses. Furthermore,
animals are experimented upon in laboratories in different fields of research and this
type of use forms the subject of this document.

Although scientists had begun to use animals in experiments even before the
emergence of Christianity, animal research rose sharply after WW II, together with
the development of medical science. Not only has the number of animals risen, but the
variety of species has also increased. Rodents, in particular rats and mice, are in often
used because they are easy to breed. In addition to indigenous species several kinds of
non-human primates are used in labs in the Netherlands. The advantage of primates
like Chimpanzees in research is their genetic and anatomic similarity to the human
species. The fact that the chimp is strongly related to man however, and its position as
an endangered species, has led to stormy, ethics related discussions within the
community.
Opposition to animal testing has existed almost as long as animals have been used in
tests. Organised opposition to all kinds of animal abuse began in England at the
beginning of the nineteenth century. At the end of that century, in 1875, the 'Victoria
Street' society was founded, which opposed in particular the use of animals in
experiments. About twenty years later a Dutch equivalent was founded, which still
exists under the name Proefdiervrij.

Nowadays Proefdiervrij and a similar organisation, the Anti Vivisectie Stichting, are
the two pressure groups in the Netherlands that agitate against the use of animals in
research. Proefdiervrij claims in its brochure Proef zelf maar that the majority of the
Dutch population is against testing on animals. As a student of anthropology and as a
labtechnician that works in an animal research centre I wondered whether
Proefdiervrij

3
really represents the opinion and feelings of so many people in the Netherlands. Are
we becoming a society in which exploitation of animals in research will no longer be
acceptable? This means that scientists would have to spend considerable effort in
searching for alternatives, and eventually legislation on these experiments would also
need to adjust to new standards.

Hence, a consensus was sought, representing an element of Dutch society, with a

view to arriving at conclusions in the matter of animal experimentation. This field
research project, involving the people in a Drenthian village, formed a part of the
practical training for second year students of anthropology or non-western sociology
at the university of Leiden. The research was carried out during the first three weeks
of January 1999 in Tweede Exloermond, a village situated within the municipality
Borger-Odoorn in the east of the Drenthian province.

During fieldwork in Tweede Exloermond I lived at the home of the Prins family.
Herewith I wish to thank Arie and Trijn Prins for their generous hospitality, which
comprised so much more than just board and lodging. I also like to extend my
gratitude to Donna Devine, who has scrutinised this manuscript and has offered
invaluable suggestions to make it more readable.

4
Chapter 1: The municipality of Odoorn and the village
of Tweede Exloermond

Geography

The municipality of Borger-Odoorn was formed a year ago, in January 1998, as a

result of the reorganisation of the Drenthian municipalities. Previously Borger and
Odoorn were two distinct municipalities. Because the village under investigation is
situated in the former municipality Odoorn, only this area will be dealt with in the
remainder of this Chapter.
The former municipality of Odoorn can be subdivided into a western and a eastern
part, which differ in landscapes. The western part is a sandy and hilly area, called the
Hondsrug, and is characterised by sloping fields, moorlands and woods. In this area
old villages or esdorpen are situated, like Exloo, Valthe and Odoorn. The eastern part
of the municipality, which is situated between the Hondsrug and the province of
Groningen, was a peat swamp in the old days. The villages in this area originate from
the peat-digging period in the 19th century and are characterised by ribbon
development surrounded by rectangular agricultural fields. Eerste Exloermond,
Exloerveen, Zandberg, Valthermond and also Tweede Exloermond, where the field
research was carried out, are situated in this area.
The village of Tweede Exloermond is L-shaped. The long leg of the L is formed by
the Zuiderdiep, a 7 km long road which ends in the province of Groningen. Originally
this road was laid out along a canal, that was used for peat transportation in the old
days. This canal was filled up about twenty years ago and replaced by a bicycle trail.
The short leg is formed by the Exloerkijl Zuid, which is 3 km long and ends in the
neighbouring village of Valthermond. Both roads have detached houses and farms on
both sides. In the ‘corner of the L’ a few neighbourhoods are situated with houses in
rows.

Historical development

The villages on the Hondsrug, Valthe, Exloo and Odoorn, started their development
as esdorpen or brinkdorpen; their names were already mentioned in writings from the
thirteenth and fourteenth century (van der Werff, 1997: 28). In esdorpen a couple of
farms were built around an open village square, the brink. Around these farms the
fields or essen were situated, where rye and buckwheat were cultivated. Cattle were
held for their manure because the sandy soil was not very fertile. Between the
farmhouses, fruit and vegetable gardens were cultivated. These villages, where
existence was based on a combination of agriculture, gardening, cattle-breeding and
pasturage, were spread over the sandy plain in the centre of the Drenthian area (van
Dam, 1996: 29; Zwier,1995: 12-31).
In the Dutch Golden Age rich merchants from cities in Holland started to invest in
peat-digging, which took off in the south-west of the Drenthian province and

5
continued in the middle and the northern part. Peat exploitation east of the Hondsrug
did not begin before the middle of the nineteenth century, but at that time villages like
Tweede Exloermond began to develop as peat-colonies or veenkolonien. For the
exploitation of the peat-moor, straight canals and perpendicular smaller canals were
dug for the dehydration and transport of peat.
Many labourers were recruited from towns like Stadskanaal in Groningen and very
often women and children had to participate in the peat-digging. Along the canals
small houses were built for the labourers and their families. Bridges were built over
the canals and in time new neighbourhoods developed in the vicinity of these bridges.
Wherever the peat was removed the underlying soil was highly suitable for
agriculture, and farmhouses also soon appeared along the canals.
After reclamation of the peat-moor, unemployment was widespread in the area and
the new farmers weren't able to provide enough jobs. A solution was sought in
industrialisation, and after WW II towns like Emmen (25 km from Tweede
Exloermond) and Coevorden developed as typical industrial and commercial areas
(Groen, 1994: 57-59; Kleijn, 1984: -).
Another important source of income in the province of Drenthe is the tourist industry.
After WW II the province was discovered by the Dutch population as an appropriate
area for rest and recreation. Many people started to spend their holidays here because
of the quietness and the beautiful scenery. Many hotels and camping sites were built
and hundreds of kilometres of bicycle trails were laid out through the area (Kleijn,
1984: -). In the municipality of Odoorn, the old esdorpen Exloo and Odoorn in
particular are much visited by tourists. The former peat-colonies like Tweede
Exloermond, however, are not considered to be very attractive and are thus neglected
by visitors.

Demography

In the old municipality of Odoorn live at least 12600 people, spread over eleven
villages. These people can be divided into agegroups as follows:

age 0-10 1615

age 11-20 1424
age 21-60 7101
age 61 + 2473

Valthermond and Tweede Exloermond have the largest numbers of inhabitants,

respectively 3588 and 2337 people (information from Borger-Odoorn municipality).
In Tweede Exloermond these 2337 people live in 940 houses (Drenthe in Cijfers
1997: 8) which means that the average household contains 2.5 persons. Information
on gender division and age-groups specific for this village is not available, so
conclusions on family composition or single person households can't be made.

6
Economic structure

Much of the land in the former municipality of Odoorn is used for agriculture, and
especially east of the Hondsrug many people earn their living in this branch. Other
areas in Odoorn, that offer much employment are building trade and business. In the
next table the numbers of jobs (at least 12 hours per week) in the various professional
areas within the municipality are listed:

Line of business Number of jobs

Agriculture 386
Industry 85
Building trade 419
Business 361
Transport 151
Business services 163
Other services 295
1860
(abstract from Drenthe in cijfers 1997: 39)

The table above shows that within the municipality Odoorn 1860 jobs are listed, while
5800 inhabitants are registered as employer (Drenthe in Cijfers 1997: 30). The
remaining 4000 people work elsewhere, mostly in towns like Emmen, Assen,
Stadskanaal and Groningen. In Tweede Exloermond a small industrial area (2.3 ha)
was built in 1992 at the Noorderkijl and the first companies were established in 1993.

At this point the emphasis returns to the subject of animals in experiments. In the
Netherlands 92 organisations hold a licence for the appliance of animals in research.
Among them are universities, hospitals, institutes for agricultural research, industrial
enterprises and lab-animal breeding farms (Zodoende, 1997: 33). It seems that
Drenthe is the only province in our country without licence-holding institutes
(Veterinaire Hoofdinspectie van de Volksgezondheid, personal communication).
Although people from Odoorn find jobs in Groningen, the experience with animal
research among these people might be lower than among the rest of the Dutch
population.

Social structure

In Odoorn municipality are twelve schools for primary education that are attended by
1200 children. Two of these schools, one Protestant and one secular, are situated in
Tweede Exloermond. For secondary education, children go to Emmen or Stadskanaal
and for university study they have to leave the province of Drenthe altogether
(Drenthe in Cijfers 1997: 25-27).

7
Various congregations are represented in the municipality, most of them Protestant. In
Tweede Exloermond are four church buildings, all situated along the Zuiderdiep.
These churches are Baptist, New Apostolic, Samen op weg (coalition of Dutch
reformed and Calvinist) and Vrijzinnig Hervormd (liberally reformed) respectively.
The Sunday services in these churches are well attended by the people of Tweede
Exloermond.
In the municipal council the four most powerful Dutch political parties are
represented; namely PvdA, VVD, CDA and D66, supplemented with the small
religious parties RPF/GPV and a municipal party Gemeentebelangen. The PvdA is the
only party that holds a department in the Odoorn municipality; the office is situated in
Valthe.
A variety of sports associations with appropriate indoor and outdoor accommodations
exist in Odoorn. In Tweede Exloermond we find grounds for soccer, tennis, horse-
riding and clubs for volleyball, skating and gymnastics. In 1989 a new gymnasium,
the Hunsowhal, was built in this village.
Corporate life is rich in Odoorn municipality; various clubs offer opportunities to get
together with other people for activities like dance, theatre and making music. Some
associations exist especially to meet the entertainment needs of the local youth or
those of the elderly. Tweede Exloermond has its own clubs for music, acting, singing
and folk dancing (Information from municipality Borger-Odoorn).

8
Chapter 2: Research methods

Main focus and theory

The goal of the research project in Drenthe was to find an answer to the following
question:
What is the public opinion among the villagers of Tweede Exloermond towards
experimenting on animals in research?
The following question was of particular interest:
Are the majority of these villagers against animal testing?
With the expression 'experimenting on animals' is meant: all treatment of animals and
the administering of substances to these creatures with the goal of gaining knowledge
that benefits humans. The effect of the experimentation may vary from mild
inconvenience to severe suffering and even the death of the animal. The expressions
'animal testing' and 'animal research' also fit in this definition. Some people use the
term 'vivisection' for experimenting on animals, while others apply this word only in
cases of what they call needless experiments. Because there is no agreement, neither
on the use of the term nor about the need of experiments, the word 'vivisection' was
not used in the questionnaire during fieldwork and will not be used in the remainder
of this document.

The organisation Proefdiervrij claims that the majority of the Dutch population is
against animal experimentation. After fruitless attempts to track down studies or
opinion polls on this subject, it was Proefdiervrij itself who finally provided me with
two studies on which its claim was based.
The first study was performed by NSS/marktonderzoek bv via CATI (computer
assisted telephonic interviewing). The questionnaire was compiled in co-operation
with Proefdiervrij. When the respondents in this study (N=325) were asked the names
of animal welfare organisations nobody seemed to know Proefdiervrij. When the
name Proefdiervrij was mentioned, 56% of the people were able to state the main
goal of the organisation (the goal is expressed in the name). Eighty percent of the
respondents agreed with some or with all of the aims of Proefdiervrij.
Concerning the use of different species of animals, more than 70% of the respondents
opposed the use of primates, dogs, cats and horses, while 44% were against the use of
rats and mice. Other frequently used species in research, like guinea pigs, rabbits,
pigs, sheep, birds and fish, were not mentioned in the questionnaire.
Furthermore NSS found that females were more often opposed to animal
experimentation than males and younger people (<35) oppose more often than older
people. NSS also stated that people in lower social classes (classes C and D) oppose
more than higher class people (classes A and B); however, NSS forgot to define these
social classes in the study.

9
The second study brought to my attention by Proefdiervrij was a comparative study of
15 Nations, performed by Pifer and Shimizu (1993). From 1989 until 1992
respondents in various countries world-wide were interviewed on a broad range of
topics, so they were not sensitised on the subject of animal research. They were asked
to agree/disagree with the statement: "Scientists should be allowed to do research that
causes pain and injury to animals like dogs and chimpanzees if it produces new
information about human health problems". Low levels of opposition were found in
Japan and the USA, while high opposition was found in France, Belgium and Great
Britain. In the Netherlands the results were as follows:
Strongly agree 11%
Agree 39%
Uncertain/don't know 5%
Disagree 15%
Strongly disagree 30% (N=489)
From these numbers we may conclude that 50% of the Dutch population agrees with
medical experiments, even on animals with a high aaibaarheid (soft, cuddly
appearance) like dogs and chimps. Only 45% seems to disagree, which is not the
majority of the population, as suggested by Proefdiervrij.
Furthermore, Pifer and Shimizu concluded that in each of the 15 countries more
women than men were opposed to animal experiments. This gender-based difference
appeared to be largest in our country (32% of men versus 58% of women).
Scientific knowledge (measured by score on ten questions) was not found to have a
relationship with an attitude towards animal research. However, a relationship was
found between a negative attitude towards animal testing and concern about the
environment in some Western European countries.
Except for answering the question whether the majority of the population is against
animal-testing, the gender-based attitude toward animal research was investigated in
Tweede Exloermond. Age of the respondent and concern for the environment were
also included in the examination. Social class seems to have some influence on the
attitude, but is very difficult to determine. Social class is not the sum of education and
profession, but also takes into account the opinion of other people about the person in
question.
Other factors that might have an influence on people's attitude were explored. Chronic
illness and dependency on medical drugs for instance may lead to higher
acceptability, while at the other end of the scale religious beliefs and other personal
philosophies, like overall concern for animals, may lead to lower acceptability of
animal testing.

Research design

A variety of factors that play a role in the subject "animals in experiments" are
represented in the conceptual model in figure 1. The factors that were examined in
Drenthe are represented in bold face in this diagram.

10
Animals in experiments
|- Actors
| |- Opponents
| | |- Animal welfare organisations
| |- Researchers / License holders
| | |- Universities / Academic hospitals
| | |- Other hospitals / Healthcare labs
| | |- Institutes on agriculture / cattle breeding
| | |- Scientific institutes
| | |- Industrial enterprises
| | |- Schools for MBO / HBO
| | |- Lab animal breeding companies
| |- Control
| | |- DEC
| | |- UHI
| |- Public
| |- Variables
| |- Gender
| |- Age
| |- Education
| |- Profession
| |- Religion
| |- Having pets or farm animals
| |- Health
|- Goals
| |- Production of vaccines, drugs (46.3 %)
| |- Education (1 %)
| |- Toxicological research, food industry etc. (7.9 %)
| |- Science (44.1 %)
| |- Diagnostics (0.7 %)
|- Objections
| |- Emotional /general concern for animals
| |- Religious
| |- Philosophical / ethical
| |- Environmental
| |- Alternative methods available
| |- Financial
|- Species
| |- Domestic animals (dog, cat)
| |- Farm animals (cow, pig, sheep)
| |- Rodents (rat, mice)
| |- Exotic animals (non-human primates)
| |- Lower vertebrates (fish, reptiles)
| |- Birds
|- Level of inconvenience
| |- Psychological stress
| |- Moderate pain
| |- Severe pain
| |- Death
|- Other abuses
| |- Bio industry
| |- Hunting, fishing, poaching
| |- Breeding of fur animals
| |- Animals in entertainment
|- Origin of animals
|- Captured in the wild
|- Bred in labs
|- Bred in companies
|- Obtained from asylum / stray animals

Figure 1: Conceptual model of research on acceptability of animal experiments.

11
Although animals are used in many fields of research, the investigation in Tweede
Exloermond was confined to their use in the testing of medical drugs, food additives
and household chemicals. This selection is made on the basis that any respondent may
use these products and therefore understand what the problem is about. Cosmetics
were included in the investigation, although since February 1997 legislation has been
changed and the use of animal in the testing of cosmetics is no longer allowed
(Zodoende, 41). Furthermore it was examined whether the tested species of animal
plays a role in people's attitude.
It is very difficult to make judgements about the levels of pain and stress that are
experienced by animals during experiments, and for that reason these factors were left
out in this project. The origin of lab-animals was also neglected in this project
because people's opinion here might depend on the species of animals. They might
prefer that rats but not monkeys be captured in the wild. It might complicate the
investigation without answering the main questions.

With the aid of the conceptual model above the main focus is narrowed down to the
next question:
What is the attitude of people in Tweede Exloermond toward the testing on
animals of medical drugs, food additives and household chemicals before their
application by humans?
Sub-questions are:
1. Does the majority of this population oppose animal research?
2. Do gender and age play a role in people's attitude toward animal testing?
3. Which other factors play a role in agreement/disagreement with animal
testing?
4. Does it matter for the acceptability of animal testing which species are used
in the experiments?

In the attitude of people toward experiments on animals, different aspects play a role:
• Knowledge about animals in experiments
• Experience with animals in experiments
• Behaviour concerning animal research
Factors that may determine the knowledge about animals in research are age,
education and profession. Experience with the subject may be related to dependency
on medical drugs, or to education and profession. Behaviour patterns in our country
may be related to the amount of money people have to spend. This in turn is related to
profession and earnings.
The aspects of knowledge, experience and behaviour that contribute to "attitude
toward animal research" were examined with the aid of specific questions. For
instance people were asked if they ever conducted experiments on animals or if they
ever saw them. Furthermore they were asked if they ever bought products not tested
on animals or demonstrated against animal research.

12
To answer the second sub-question respondents were asked to indicate their gender
and age. Other factors that may influence people's attitude (third sub-question),
besides the already mentioned concern for the environment, are level of education,
profession and earnings, religion and political orientation. Another factor that may
play a role is concern for the well being of animals in general. Dependency on
medical drugs may lead to a more positive attitude toward animal research. A variety
of questions were designed to investigate the factors mentioned above.
To answer the fourth sub-question a list of various species was made, including pets
with a soft, cuddly appearance, farm animals and harmful animal. The questions were
elaborated in a questionnaire which is present (in Dutch) in the appendix of this
document.

Research methods

One of the areas to be investigated in Tweede Exloermond was whether the majority
of the population is against animal testing. Furthermore we wanted to find out
whether variables like gender, age and concern for the environment play a role in
people's objections. To examine these questions and to apply statistics to the results it
was important to use a broad panel of respondents. For these reasons testing research
methods were used, rather than exploring and descriptive methods. There was an
exploring component in the questionnaire with the aim of finding other factors that
might relate to agreement about or objections to animal research. The unit of
investigation or the population included all persons of 18 years and older, male and
female, who live in Tweede Exloermond. To investigate the gender-based attitude as
well it was important to select almost equal numbers of male and female respondents.
Because age also seems to play a role it was important to select respondents in a wide
age range. Aselect sampling of respondents on the basis of education, profession,
religion and health was difficult, if not impossible. Sampling, based on these personal
characteristics of people, demands files that might not be public.

The research in Tweede Exloermond was performed by means of a structured

questionnaire, which was administered via the "drop and collect" method (Russell
Bernard, 260-62). Advantages of this method are:
• All respondents get the same questions; there is no interviewer bias.
• Respondents feel free to give socially undesirable answers, because the anonymity
provides a sense of security.
• With the "drop and collect" method a higher response is to be expected than by
providing the questionnaire by mail.

13
Of course there are disadvantages as well:
• The interviewer has no control over the way the respondent interprets the
question. This means that the questions have to be very clear and simple.
• The interviewer has no control over the person who fills in the questionnaire. This
is not a great problem in this project, because every adult in the village is a
member of the population under research.
• With this method illiterate and visually disabled people are excluded. In our
industrialised country however the number of illiterate people will be very low.
The population from which respondents would be selected included all persons of 18
years and older in the village. Because of legislation on privacy, a public file from
which to select respondents was necessary. Telephone books are public and can be
used as a sampling frame which represents the population. A disadvantage however is
the absence of people either without a telephone or with an unlisted number.
Another public file which was used in this research project is the postcode book. This
file is also available on floppy disc and CD-ROM. With a list of every postcode
within the village a list of all addresses in the village was made, which were all
numbered. With the aid of a table with aselect numbers a sample of 60 addresses was
drawn.
The resulting addresses yielded a household, not a person. When dropping off the
questionnaires the interviewer could request that a man and then a woman co-operate
at alternating addresses. It was to be expected that by using all the postcodes every
age group would be included. A problem might be that addresses under a certain
postcode are situated in an industrial area without houses. The small industrial area in
Tweede Exloermond developed after 1994 and was situated at the Noorderkijl. These
addresses were not yet listed in the postcode file that was use

In the field

Before entering the field I completed numbering the sampling frame and during the
first two days in the Tweede Exloermond I drew my sample of 60 addresses and made
a checklist. On the third day I began dropping the questionnaires, but soon it became
very clear that this method would not work. Of the first four addresses on my
checklist, at three of them nobody answered the doorbell. Trying again during the
evening was no option because my hostfamily had strongly advised me not to go out
after dark. The consequence was that in the panel of respondents, couples that both
had a job may be poorly represented. The next approach was to try every third house.
If nobody was at home then the next house with the lights on and a car in front of the
door was tried. The same number of houses per street, as drawn in the aselect sample,
was maintained as much as possible.
Maybe unjustly I expected traditional households in this part of the country, where
men go out working while wives stay at home to take care of the household and rear
the children. More often than was expected a man answered the doorbell and it was
not necessary to ask for a male and then a female to fill in the questionnaire.

14
Most people were co-operative and it took me no more than two hours to drop ten
questionnaires. Older people refused very often, especially females. The reason for
these refusals was not clear, but may result in there being only few elderly people in
the panel of respondents. Collecting the Questionnaires took more time; people
weren't always at home at the agreed upon time and I had to try later. Fieldwork was
started with 65 envelopes containing the questionnaires, an answering envelope and a
letter of introduction. Sixty envelopes was dropped at the homes and five were
distributed at the kitchen table of the hostfamily. At the end of the three weeks 55
questionnaires were returned that were ready for analysis.

15
Chapter 3: Analysis

Panel of respondents

The answers in the questionnaires (see appendix 1) were analysed using the program
SPSS for Windows, version 7.5. A number of 55 questionnaires were filled in
satisfactorily by 23 males and 32 females. The respondents and their age-groups are
summarised in table 1. One female didn’t give her age.

Age group * gender Crosstabulation

Count
gender
male female Total
Age 1 1
group 18-30 2 11 13
31-40 7 11 18
41-50 4 4 8
51-60 7 3 10
61-78 3 2 5
Total 23 32 55

Table 1

This table shows that young males in comparison with females are poorly represented
in the investigation. In the older age groups more men than women participated in the
research project.

Knowledge, experience and behaviour

The aspects of knowledge, experience and behaviour, in the context of animal use in
experiments, were investigated on basis of the answers to the first 10 questions.
When asked if people knew organisations or companies in the Netherlands (question
1), which use animals in research, only the Dutch institute for applied research TNO
(Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek) was mentioned by name. Instead of
organisations, most respondents wrote down fields of research, like medical science,
pharmaceutical industry, research on HIV and the consumer industry. Some people
mentioned the cosmetic industry, though in the Netherlands these industries are no
longer allowed to test their products on animals. However, cosmetics that are
produced and tested on animals in other countries are still available on the Dutch

16
market About half of the respondents were aware that animal research is restricted by
legislation (question 2).
Although most people could recall a few animal welfare organisations, none of them
knew of Proefdiervrij or Anti-vivisectie Stichting (questions 7 and 8). With the
answers on questions 1, 2, 7 and 8 a score for ‘knowledge’ was composed, ranging
from 0 to 9 points. The mean score for knowledge was 2.7 points. Among the
respondents only one person has worked in the field of animal research, although 50
people could remember seeing instances of experiments on animals, either on
television or in magazines. With these numbers, ‘experience’ can not really be used as
a variable in this analysis.
In the panel of respondents two persons have agitated for the sake of animals
(question 5), while 15 people wrote that they sometimes buy animal-test-free products
(question 6). If shopkeepers sold animal-test-free products, many people stated that
they would buy these products, and 33 persons indicated they would buy them even
for slightly higher prices. However, if the prices for these products were doubled,
only five respondents would still buy them (questions 10-12). Cross-tabulation (not
represented) revealed no correlation between ‘income’ and ‘willingness’ to buy more
expensive animal-test-free products.
Fifteen respondents were members of an organisation promoting animal welfare. Not
surprisingly, none of them was a member of Proefdiervrij or Anti-vivisectie stichting.
A score for ‘animal-friendly behaviour’ was based on the answers to questions 5, 6
and 10. The score varied from 1 to 5 points with a mean value of 2.6.

17
Attitude towards animal-testing

The attitude towards experimenting on animals was explored with questions 22 to 26,
in which respondents were asked how strongly they agreed/disagreed with a ban on
animal testing. It appeared that a distinction could be made between the testing of
medicines and the testing of other consumer products. Most of the respondents agreed
with a ban on animal testing for paint, soap, cosmetics and food additives, while
concerning the testing of medicines they had a more differentiated opinion. These
latter results are summarised in table 2.
Oppose medicine testing

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid very pro
5 9.1 9.1 9.1
testing
pro
22 40.0 40.0 49.1
testing
no
10 18.2 18.2 67.3
opinion
against
9 16.4 16.4 83.6
testing
strongly
against 9 16.4 16.4 100.0
testing
Total 55 100.0 100.0
Total 55 100.0

Table 2

It appears that 33% (9+9 respondents) is against the testing of medicines on animals,
versus 49% (22+5 respondents) that is in favour of the use of animals in this field of
research.
A score for opposition to the testing of consumer products other than medicines is
derived by a summation of answers to questions 22, 23, 24 and 26. In these questions
a scale from 0 to 4 points was applied for, respectively, strongly against to strongly in
favour of a ban. The higher the score, the stronger the opposition to the use of animals
in testing these kinds of products. When respondents neither agreed nor disagreed, the
summation would lead to 8 points. The scores were grouped as follows:

0 - 5 points agrees with testing

6 - 10 points no strong opinion
11 - 13 points opposes testing
14 - 16 points strongly opposes testing

The results are summarised in table 3.

18
 Attitude towards testing consumer products

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid pro
3 5.5 5.5 5.5
testing
no
7 12.7 12.7 18.2
opinion
against
26 47.3 47.3 65.5
testing
strongly
19 34.5 34.5 100.0
against
Total 55 100.0 100.0
Total 55 100.0

Table 3

From this table we can conclude that 82% of the respondents are against the use of
animals in the testing of consumer products, while 5.5% agree with these kind of
experiments.

To investigate whether ‘knowledge’ and ‘behaviour’ as mentioned above were

correlated with attitudes toward animal testing, cross-tabulations were performed and
Kendall’s τ values (a correlation coefficient for ordinal variables) were calculated. A
weak correlation was found between ‘lab animal-friendly behaviour’ and ‘attitude
towards the use of animals in the testing of consumer products’, where Kendall’s
τ had a value of 0,27.

Personal characteristics

The relationship between gender and attitude towards animal testing was investigated
by cross-tabulation and the calculation of Cramer’s V ( for nominal variables). Both
in the field of medicines and in the field of other consumable products an association
was observed with Cramers’s V values of 0.30. A diagram of the results concerning
consumer products is presented in figure 2.

19
 16

14

12

10

4 gender

2 male
Count

0 female
pro testing against testing
no opinion strongly against

Attitude towards testing consumer products

Figure 2

Further calculations revealed that 88% of the female respondents oppose the testing of
animals for consumer products versus 74% of the males. In the case of medicine
testing these percentages are 41% female- versus 22% male opposition.
These data show that women more often oppose the use animals in the testing of
medicines as well as in the testing of other consumer products.

Another question was whether ‘opposition to experimenting on animals’ is related to

the age of the respondent. Cross-tabulation (data not shown) and a calculation of the
correlation coefficient Kendall’s τ (τ = -0.13) showed no significant correlation.
The correlation between age and the opposition to the use of animals in the testing of
consumer products was not much higher; τ = -0.19. These negative values of τ would
suggest that opposition to animal research decreases as people become older.
Furthermore, it was investigated whether elderly people included in our panel have
more chronic diseases in their household, which might lead to dependency on medical
drugs. These results are presented in figure 3.

20
 20

10

chronic disease in h

no
Count

0 yes
18-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-78

age group

Figure 3

Although a correlation is found between age and chronic diseases (Cramer’s V = 0.51,
Kendall’s τ = 0.30), this does not lead to a higher acceptance of the use of animals in
experimental research.

As many as 44 respondents mentioned having offspring, the number of children varies

from one to five, with most respondents (24) having two. No correlation was found
between having children and an attitude towards animal experimentation.

General care for animals

It was examined whether the owners of domestic animals were more often opposed to
animal-research. A variety of species can be found in Tweede Exloermond, and are
subdivided into four groups.

1. Cats and/or dogs

2. Rodents like rabbits and hamsters
3. Birds like chickens, geese, canaries and parakeets
4. Fishes and reptiles

Cross-tabulation (not shown) demonstrated a low association between having

domestic animals and a negative attitude towards animals in research, both in the
testing of medicines and in the testing of other consumer products. These
associations were slightly higher in the case of owners of fishes/reptiles (nine
people), with Cramer’s V values of 0.38 and 0.35.

21
Another question was whether respondents had a farm with cattle. Although the
questionnaire was dropped at a few big farmhouses along the Zuiderdiep, none of the
respondents owned cattle. Only one respondent kept sheep, another one mentioned
having been born and raised on a cattle farm and a third was married to a blacksmith,
who shoed horses for a living. Because only two people depended financially on the
exploitation of animals, this question was not taken into account in the analysis.

People’s attitudes towards different kinds of animal (ab)use were further investigated
in questions 13 to 21. In these nine questions respondents were asked how strongly
they disagreed/agreed (on a scale 0 to 4) with restriction on certain types of animal
exploitation. Strong agreement with restriction or prohibition corresponds to the high
score of 4 points and to a more animal-friendly attitude. A score of 2 points
corresponds with to neutral opinion. The majority of the respondents had few
problems with the types of exploitation as mentioned in the questions. The mean
values of the scores on most questions varied from 1.2 to 1.9, which means
disagreement with a reduction in these types of animal use. There were two
exceptions, however; most people agreed with the ban on the fur trade and with the
statement that animals in bio-industry need more ranging space (a mean score of 3.2
for both). The aversion to the breeding and the slaughter of animals for fur is
widespread in the Netherlands and also in this part of the country.
The concern for animals in bio-industry was not expected, especially because most
people disagree with the statement that the Dutch should reduce their meat
consumption. Bio-industry might be an issue in this part of Drenthe nowadays
however, as a consequence of the plague that badly affected pig farms in Noord-
Brabant last year. It was said that pig breeders there had plans to move their activities
to the Drenthian countryside. A conversation with locals in the gym, during the
fieldwork period, made clear to me that this branch of industry was not welcome in
this area, for a variety of reasons.
For every respondent a total score for animal-friendly attitude was calculated by a
summation of the scores on the nine questions mentioned above. A neutral opinion on
every question corresponds to a total score of 18 points. The scores varied from 5 to
32 questions, with a mean value of 16.9. To explore the relationship of these attitudes
with opposition to animal testing, the scores were grouped as follows:

5 - 14 points ‘less animal -friendly attitude’

15 - 21 points ‘neutral attitude’
22 - 32 points ‘animal-friendly attitude’

The distribution of these scores among the respondents is visualised in figure 4.

22
 Bar Chart
30

20

10
Frequency

0
less friendly neutral friendly

animal friendly attitude

Figure 4

Cross-tabulation demonstrates a weak correlation between ‘concern for animals’ and

‘opposition to their use in medical testing’, with Kendall’s τ = 0.23. In the case of the
testing of other consumer products however a higher correlation is observed, with a
Kendall’s τ value of 0.42, as can be seen in table 4.

Attitude towards testing consumer products * animal friendly attitude

Crosstabulation

Count
animal friendly attitude
less
friendly neutral friendly Total
Attitude pro
3 3
towards testing
testing no
consumer 6 1 7
opinion
products against
12 9 5 26
testing
strongly
4 8 7 19
against
Total 25 18 12 55

Table 4

23
Social-economic status

Previous studies showed a relationship between social status and attitude towards
animal testing (NSS/marktonderzoek). Social classes are difficult to determine in a
three-week period. For this reason the relationship between the respondent’s attitude
and his or her level of education and profession was explored instead.
The level of education was relatively low, which might be due to the lack of
universities and schools for higher professional education (HBO) in this part of the
country. A scale of education was made according to the following scheme:

1. No education after primary school

2. LBO (lower professional education) and MAVO
3. MBO (medium professional education) and HAVO
4. HBO (higher professional education)

Only two persons completed secondary education at HAVO level and are therefore
categorised under group 3. Cross-tabulation revealed that opposition to animal-testing
is not correlated with level of education.

With the aim of investigating the relationship between people’s line of work and their
opinion concerning animal research, their jobs were grouped according to the
categories mentioned in chapter 1, page 5. Some activities were difficult to classify,
for instance the technical trades like welder, mechanic, painter and engine fitter.
These are grouped in the category ‘business services’. Other activities, in which it
was not clear whether people were self-employed, were categorised in ‘other
services’, examples of which are gardener and farrier. After classification it became
clear that most people are blue-collar workers, either skilled or unskilled. Twenty-two
respondents work in the categories of business services or other services, while 24
people hadn’t a job at all. Thus exploring the correlation between ‘line of work’ and
attitude is pointless in this panel of respondents.
Striking is that none of the respondents works in agriculture, although Tweede
Exloermond is a rural area. Only two of them have spouses that make a living in
agriculture. The list with ‘lines of business’ in chapter 1 shows that, next to
agriculture, most jobs in the Odoorn municipality are found in the building trade and
in business. This is in strong contrast to the findings in our panel of respondents,
where only four people earn a living in these two categories.
Because the categorisation of jobs according to ‘lines of business’ was meaningless,
another means to classify jobs was sought. It was explored whether having a job at all
had any influence on people’s opinion. First it was determined which people in our
panel of respondents have a job. Cross-tabulation soon revealed that women in
particular are without paid work, as is presented in table 5. For this association
between gender and having a job a Cramer’s V value of 0.64 was found.

24
 Having a job * gender Crosstabulation

Count
gender
male female Total
Having no job 5 19 24
a job part-time
2 8 10
job
full-time
15 2 17
job
Total 22 29 51

Table 5

In the panel most of the women that have a job work part-time, while the majority of
the men have a full-time job. The men without paid work are all over age of 56. These
findings are not representative for the village; full-time working couples are not
included in the panel because they were not at home at the times of dropping the
questionnaires. The association between ‘having a job’ and ‘attitude towards animals
in research’ will be similar to the association between ‘gender’ and ‘attitude’ which
was dealt with above.
A group of 15 respondents refused to reveal their household income. Of the 40 people
that divulged their income, 37 earn less than f75,000 a year.
These relatively low incomes reflect the levels of education and the jobs in the field of
business and other services. These factors are, among others, indicators for social
class, and among the panel of respondents no significant class differences were
observed.

Politics, religion and domicile

Within the panel of respondents 24 people were associated with one of the four
distinct Protestant churches (Baptist, Samen op weg, New Apostolic and Liberally
Reformed) in Tweede Exloermond, while 25 people were not members of any
congregation. Among the respondents were two Roman Catholics, who have to attend
Catholic mass outside of the village. Seventeen people attend church on a weekly
basis, while a few others go once a month or less. For the analysis the members of the
four churches were grouped in the category ‘Protestant’. Other categories were ‘no
membership’ and ‘Roman Catholic’. No significant association was observed
between church affiliation and opposition to animal-testing.

25
Last year the respondents voted in the Tweede Kamer elections as shown in figure 5.

Bar Chart
20

10
Frequency

0
not voted VVD D66 Groen links
PvdA CDA RPF/GPV SP

political party

Figure 5

As was to be expected from the jobs and religious affiliations of the respondents, the
left-wing and Christian parties had a lot of support here. For the analysis the parties
were grouped into ‘left-wing’, ‘Christian’ and ‘right-wing’, where D66 was grouped
under ‘left-wing’. Cross-tabulation showed some association between political
preference and attitude towards animal research. In the case of medicine testing,
where a Cramer’s V value of 0.32 was found, right-wing voters tend to agree more,
while Christian voters more often have no opinion. Also in the case of testing of other
products (Cramer’s V = 0.27) the Christian voters more often have no opinion on the
subject.

The choice of a newspaper can be determined by factors like political preference,

education and profession. For instance the Volkskrant is often associated with left-
wing people, NRC handelsblad with right-wing business people and the Telegraaf
with less educated people who like a ‘readable’ newspaper. The reading of certain
newspapers may have an influence on general knowledge and on people’s opinion on
diverse subjects.
The choice of newspapers was also investigated in the panel of respondents, where
the door-to-door (huis aan huis) papers were ignored. The majority reads regional
newspapers, like the Drentsche Courant or the Nieuwsblad van het Noorden. Three
respondents read the Telegraaf and one respondent is a Trouw reader. Seven
respondents read more than one newspaper, sometimes including the Telegraaf .

26
According to a few locals from the village no significant differences can be observed
among the different regional newspapers and hence the choice of newspaper can’t
serve as a variable in the subject of attitude towards animal testing.

It was also investigated whether being born and raised in this part of the Drenthian
province influences people’s attitude. Among the respondents 28 people have always
lived in the village, while 14 people used to live in neighbouring villages. Two other
persons left the village temporarily, for studies in Zwolle and Leeuwarden,
respectively. In contrast to these native Drenthians, nine respondents originated from
other parts of the country but ended up living in Tweede Exloermond. Cross-
tabulation showed that the ‘newcomers’ tend to oppose animal testing slightly more,
with Cramer’s V values of 0.25, both in the case of medicine testing and the testing of
other products.

Concern for the environment and alternative medicine

General concern for the environment and attitude towards alternative medicine in the
panel of respondents was explored. Among the respondents were five members of the
organisation Greenpeace (question 46).
Every respondent states that he or she separates his or her waste (question 47), which
is not surprising. Odoorn municipality, like other municipalities in the country,
supplies every household with garbage containers for different types of waste. The
separation of garbage can for these reasons not be used as a variable in the analysis.
Thirty-two people never buy products in a health-food shop (reform or natuurwinkel),
while 17 respondents indicated they do so less than once a month (question 48). Only
six people buy health-food on a regular base. This might be due to the fact that there
are not many health-food shops in the area around Tweede Exloermond.
As many as 42 people claim to take measures to reduce their energy consumption,
while 12 respondents reduce their use when they think about it (question 49). One
person wasn’t concerned about resources at all.
Although not much variability in concern for the environment was to be expected, the
scores for the questions 46, 48 and 49 were summated. The scores varied from 1 to 5
points and the mean value was 2.4. The relationship between opposition to animal
testing and concern for the environment was then tested but no correlation was found,
neither in case of medicine testing nor in the testing of other products.

The last factor to be explored is the use of alternative medicine in association with
opposition to animal research. From among the respondents, 28 people visited an
alternative practitioner, while 39 people used homeopathic medicines. The overlap
between these two groups is considerable; 27 people turn to both methods in instances
of physical problems. One respondent indicated that he used homeopathic medicines
only for his dog.
Some association is observed between having a chronic disease and the use of
alternative methods; people without chronic physical problems in their household
tend to turn more easily to an alternative practitioner and to use homeopathic drugs
more often. The associations were explored between seeking help in alternative

27
methods and opposition to animal-experimenting. These associations were weak; the
strongest association was observed between the use of homeopathic drugs and
opposition to the testing of consumable products, with Cramer’s V value = 0.39.
Cross-tabulation of this association is presented in table 6.

Attitude towards testing consumer products * uses

homeopathic medicin Crosstabulation

Count
uses homeopathic
medicin
no yes Total
Attitude pro
3 3
towards testing
testing no
consumer 4 3 7
opinion
products against
10 16 26
testing
strongly
2 17 19
against
Total 16 39 55

Table 6

Differentiation in species of animals

Another research question in this project was whether it matters which species of
animals are used in research. A list of 16 species was drawn up and respondents were
asked how strongly they agreed with the use of these animals in experiments. The
answers were scored on a scale from 0 to 4, where 0 corresponds to strong agreement
with the use of the species in question and 4 to disagreement. In concordance with
former questions a higher score is then associated to a more animal-friendly attitude.
When respondents don’t have a strong opinion they score 2 points on these questions.
The species of animals, with the mean scores of all respondents, are listed in table 7
(where 4 decimals is somewhat overdone).

28
 Statistics

N
Valid Missing Mean
CAVIA 50 5 2.9800
MICE 53 2 1.8491
RATS 54 1 1.7593
RABBITS 51 4 3.0588
CATS 51 4 3.2549
DOGS 51 4 3.3725
SHEEP 51 4 3.3137
PIGS 51 4 3.1176
BOVINES 51 4 3.2353
HORSES 51 4 3.3333
CHIMPS 51 4 3.2157
RHESUS 51 4 3.1961
BIRDS 51 4 3.0980
FISHES 51 4 2.8627
REPTILES 53 2 2.6792
INSECTS 52 3 1.9615

Table 7

Most respondents have no problems with testing on rodents like mice and rats, where
mean scores are 1.8. However, opposition is observed in the case of rodents like
rabbits and guinea pigs (cavia in table 7), where mean scores are 3.0. Testing on rats
and mice appeared to be even more acceptable than testing on cold-blooded animals
like fish and reptiles. Furthermore, experiments on insects lead to little opposition
(mean score 2.0).
The greatest opposition is observed in the case of dogs (mean score 3.4), followed by
horses, sheep and cats. Among the respondents there is also considerable resistance to
the use of exotic animals like chimpanzees and rhesus macaques, where mean scores
of 3.2 were observed.

Some people oppose to experiments on any kind of animal, while others differentiate
the species in their acceptability as lab-animals. A score for this more relaxed attitude
is composed as follows: for every respondent the steps between the lowest and
highest score for all the species were counted. For example the number of steps
between agreement (rats for instance) and strong disagreement (dogs) is three. The
results are listed in table 8.

29
 STEPS

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid 0 steps 16 29.1 31.4 31.4
1 steps 1 1.8 2.0 33.3
2 steps 18 32.7 35.3 68.6
3 steps 11 20.0 21.6 90.2
4 steps 5 9.1 9.8 100.0
Total 51 92.7 100.0
Missing System
4 7.3
Missing
Total 4 7.3
Total 55 100.0

Table 8

As can be seen in this table, 16 respondents are fundamental in their opinion that all
species of animal are the same concerning their use as lab-animals, while the majority
differentiates among the species of animals.
The relationship between differentiation in species and opposition to animal testing
was investigated and a considerable negative correlation (Kendall’s τ = −0.46) was
observed in the case of medicine testing. This means that people who are more
fundamental in their opinion also object more often to the testing of medicines.

Reasons for objections to animal testing

The questionnaire contained one open question, in which people were asked to
describe the reason they oppose animal testing. The purpose was to find out on what
grounds people might reject animal testing; for instance, emotional, religious, ethical
or financial. Many people gave no reason, but mentioned the conditions under which
they agreed with animal testing. Most often these conditions were testing for medical
science only. One person held that testing should be performed only on vermin. The
reasons for objections could be categorised as follows:

• Objection to the pain and the suffering of animals

• Objection because animals are subjected and can’t protest
• It shouldn’t be and other reasons
• Objection because alternative methods are available

The numbers of answers in these categories are summarised in figure 6.

30
 Bar Chart
20

10
Frequency

0
animal suffering shouldn't be and oth condition: medical p
animal subjection alternatives condition: certain s

objections

Figure 6

The left four bars in this figure represent the reasons for objection and the right two
bars the conditions under which people agree with animal testing.
Two respondents referred to the Bible in their answer: however, the first one used it to
reject and the other to justify animal testing:

Als mensen zijn wij geschapen door de Schepper met verantwoordelijkheden om

die schepping te onderhouden en te verzorgen en te beschermen. Dierproeven
uitvoeren is niet erg redelijk ten opzichte van dieren en niet de opdracht die we van
de Schepper kregen.

In short, God created humans and gave them the responsibility to preserve and protect
Creation. Animal testing is not justified and not the instruction given to us by the
Creator. This answer is grouped under the third category.

…Wanneer het gaat om- of ter voorkoming van ziektes voor de mens mag het van
mij, mits er wel met respect voor het dier mee omgegaan wordt. Mijn stelling is dat
de mens boven het dier staat (Bijbels gegeven).

Which means that this person agrees with animal testing for the purpose of treating or
prevention of diseases, provided that the lab-animals are treated with respect. His or
her proposition is that humans are superior to animals (stated in Bible).
The purpose of this question was to find out whether people might object to animal
research on religious, philosophical or other grounds, rather than the fact that it causes
the animals pain(is zielig). It became clear that the question was very poorly
formulated and it would have been better had this question been presented orally to
the panel of participants.

31
Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusion
The fieldwork project, the results of which are presented here, was carried out in
January 1999 in Tweede Exloermond. This village is situated in the municipality of
Odoorn, in the eastern part of the Drenthian province. In this former peat colony, now
home to 2500 villagers, people’s attitude towards animal experimenting was explored.
The research was carried out by means of a written questionnaire that was distributed
by the ‘drop and collect’ method. These questionnaires were collected a few days
later. The ‘drop and collect’ method turned out to be a convenient way to obtain the
most response in the shortest time. It was regrettable, in fact, that the field was
entered with only 65 copies of the questionnaire because it was not difficult to find
co-operating respondents.

The first goal of the research project was to determine whether the majority of the
village population opposes animal testing. It became clear that, concerning people’s
attitude, a subdivision needed to be made between testing for medical purposes and
testing for consumer purposes in the production of soap, paint and food-additives.
Concerning these consumer goods, a considerable majority of 82% of the respondents
opposes the use of animals in testing. For the purpose of medical research however,
49% of the panel agrees and only 33% disagrees with these kind of experiments.
These results substantially confirm the findings of Pifer and Shimizu (1993), who
found 50% agreement and 45% disagreement in the Dutch population.

It goes without saying that simply counting the advocates and opponents of the use of
animals in experiments is neither satisfying nor very interesting. More appealing was
to determine which factors influence people’s opinion concerning this subject. Earlier
studies by NSS/marktonderzoek (1997) showed that gender, age and social class play
a role in forming people’s attitudes. Pifer and Shimizu also observed that concern for
the environment was another factor associated with opposition to the use of animals in
laboratories. The gender-based difference in attitude was confirmed in this study,
where women oppose more often than men. However, age seemed to play no role in
people’s opinion regarding animal testing in this research project.
As features of social class, the influences of education, profession and incomes were
investigated. Within our panel of respondents, however, differences in socio-
economic status were not significant. The panel consisted of people with jobs in
business- or in other services, with moderate incomes. Most of them had completed
their studies at the LBO or the MBO level. It should also be kept in mind that the
panel was not wholly representative of the village population. Working couples or
working singles were not included in the panel because they were not at home when
the questionnaires were dropped.
The hypothesis that concern for animals used in research is correlated with concern
for the environment could not be confirmed in this research project.

32
Several other factors that may have influenced people’s opinion regarding animal
testing were explored. In this section only those that showed some correlation are
mentioned.
• Political preferences were found to play a role. Right wing voters tend to be more
in favour of animal testing, while supporters of Christian parties more often held
no opinion.
• A relationship was observed between ‘opposition to testing of consumer products’
and a more ‘animal friendly attitude’, which was measured with a set of questions
about agreement/disagreement concerning different kinds of animal (ab)use. In
the case of ‘medical testing’ this correlation was lower.
• The group of respondents that had lived elsewhere in the Netherlands before they
settled in Tweede Exloermond are more opposed, however slightly, to animal
testing.

Among the respondents no strong objections to testing on mice and rats were found.
In fact, the use of these pre-eminent lab-animals was even preferred above the use of
insects and reptiles. Considerable opposition was observed regarding the use of
domesticated species like horses, cattle, dogs and cats. Primates as well should not be
used in an experimental capacity, according to our panel. This differentiation in
species of animals was also observed by NSS/marktonderzoek. People who are
fundamental in their opinion that no species of any kind should be used are also more
often opposed to medical testing.

The reasons that people gave for their objection to animal research were very briefly
formulated. Although two people referred to the Bible and some others gave a more
ethical reason as to why ‘it shouldn’t be done’ the answers came right from the heart
without any philosophical or other basis. Here, however, one of the disadvantages of
the ‘drop and collect’ method became clear. It would have been better to have posed
the question orally and thus force the respondents were to think it over.
A second disadvantage of the ‘drop and collect’ method was the lack of full-time
working couples and singles in the panel. This problem could have been solved by
using a telephone book instead of a post-code file to select addresses. People could
have been called in the evening hours to ask for their participation.
Other groups that might have been relevant in this project, such as cattle farmers or
others that depend financially on animals, were also missing from the panel. Neither
trades-people nor academics nor people in the building trade were present in the
panel, although it is of course possible that these groups are scarcely -if at all- to be
found in the population of Tweede Exloermond.
The group of ‘foreigners’, people that have lived elsewhere in the Netherlands, tend
to oppose the use of animals in laboratory testing even more than the east-Drenthians,
who have lived in the region all of their lives. This suggests that the opinion of the
villagers of Tweede Exloermond is not entirely representative of the Dutch
population. It would be interesting therefore to repeat this research project in other
parts of the Netherlands.

33
Bibliography
Dam, K.I.M. van, (1996) Nederland dichterbij; Drenthe. Amsterdam: Readers Digest.

Drenthe in cijfers 1997. Provincie Drenthe.

Groen, P.C., (1994) Landschap en Dorpen in Drenthe. Zuidwolde: Stichting het

Drentse boek.

Kleijn, A., (1984) Dorpen in Drenthe. Zutphen: Terra.

Pifer, L., (1993) Public Attitudes toward Animal Research; a comparative Study of 15
Nations. Paper presented at World Congress on alternatives and animal use in the life
Sciences: Baltimore, Maryland.

Russell Bernard, H., (1995) Research Methods in Anthropology; Qualitative and

Quantitative Approaches. London: AltaMira Press.

Smit, C., (1989) Dierproeven; 100 jaar discussie. Kampen: La Riviere & Voorhoeve.

Verslag (1997) NSS/Marktonderzoek BV.

Werff, E.O. van der, (1997) 'Onder de Bisschop' in H. Gras (ed.), Rond Hunze en
Hondsrug, pp. 28-43. Gemeente Odoorn.

Zodoende, Annual Report (1997) of the Veterinaire inspectie of the Dutch Ministerie
van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport.

Zwier, G.J., (1995) Reisgids Nederland; Drenthe. ANWB/VVV.

34
Appendix A: Questionaire

Deze vragenlijst bevat een aantal open vragen en een aantal meerkeuze
vragen. Bij de meerkeuze vragen kunt u aankruisen wat van toepassing is.
De eerste tien vragen zijn bedoeld om na te gaan of u bekend bent met het
onderwerp "dierproeven".

1 Kunt u bedrijven of instellingen noemen in Nederland die gebruik maken van

proefdieren?
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Nr Vraag Ja Nee Weet niet

2 Bestaat er volgens u een wetgeving op het gebied van



proefdier gebruik in Nederland?
3 Heeft u via uw werk of opleiding ooit met proefdieren


gewerkt?
4 Heeft u ooit dier experimenten gezien, eventueel op


televisie of op foto's?
5 Heeft u ooit actie gevoerd ten behoeve van dieren?


6 Koopt u wel eens bewust produkten die niet op dieren


zijn getest (b.v. in de Bodyshop)?

7 Welke organisaties kent u die zich inzetten voor het welzijn van dieren?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

8 Welke organisaties kent u die zich speciaal inzetten voor de afschaffing van
dierproeven?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

9 Van welke organisatie(s) die zich inzetten voor het welzijn van dieren bent u
lid/donateur?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

Wanneer de Nederlandse middenstand meer proefdier vrije produkten zou gaan

aanbieden, bent u dan bereid deze te kopen, als deze produkten:
Nr Vraag Ja Nee Weet niet
10 even duur zijn



11 iets duurder zijn



12 tweemaal zo duur zijn

35
De volgende vragen hebben betrekking op het welzijn van proefdieren en
dieren in het algemeen.

Kunt u aangeven of u het eens bent met de volgende uitspraken:

Nr Uitspraak zeer mee geen mee zeer
mee eens mening oneens mee
eens oneens
13 Jagen in Nederland zou eigenlijk verboden





moeten worden.
14 Sportvissen in Nederland zou eigenlijk verboden





moeten worden.
15 Het "acteren" van dieren in reclamespotjes zou





verboden moeten worden.
16 De verkoop van bontkleding zou verboden





moeten worden.
17 Dierentuinen en dolfinaria moeten opgeheven





worden; dieren horen in hun natuurlijke
omgeving.
18 Circus ondernemingen zouden geen gebruik





moeten maken van exotische dieren als apen,
leeuwen, tijgers en olifanten.
19 Circus ondernemingen zouden geen gebruik





moeten maken van dieren als paarden, honden en
katten.
20 Nederlanders zouden veel minder vlees moeten





eten.
21 De leefruimte van dieren in de bio-industrie moet





vergroot worden.
22 De eventuele giftigheid van een nieuwe





structuurverf voor plafonds mag niet op dieren
getest worden.
23 De eventuele giftigheid van een nieuw wasmiddel





mag niet eerst op dieren getest worden.
24 Nieuwe conserveringsmiddelen voor de voedsel





industrie mogen niet op dieren getest worden.
25 Nieuwe medicijnen, bijvoorbeeld tegen hart- en





vaatziekten, zouden niet op dieren getest mogen
worden op eventuele bijwerkingen.
26 Cosmetica produkten, zoals make-up en crèmes





zouden niet op dieren getest mogen worden.

36
Welke dieren zouden wat u betreft gebruikt mogen worden voor het testen van nieuwe
geneesmiddelen en voedseladditieven.
Nr Dieren zeker wel geen liever zeker
wel mening niet niet
27 Cavia’s





28 Muizen





29 Ratten





30 Konijnen





31 Katten





32 Honden





33 Schapen





34 Varkens





35 Runderen





36 Paarden





37 Chimpansees





38 Rhesus apen





39 Vogels





40 Vissen





41 Reptielen





42 Insekten

43. Heeft u huisdieren? Zo ja, welke?

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

44. Heeft u een agrarisch bedrijf met dieren? Zo ja, welke dieren?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

45. Wanneer u bezwaren heeft tegen dierproeven wilt u dan hieronder zo duidelijk
mogelijk de redenen aangeven.
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

37
Hieronder volgen enkele vragen over gezondheid en milieu

46. Bent u lid/donateur van Greenpeace?

ja

nee

47. Doet u aan afvalscheiding, bijvoorbeeld van oud papier, glas of GFT?

ja

nee

48. Hoe vaak koopt u produkten in een natuur- of reform winkel?

ongeveer eenmaal per week

ongeveer eenmaal per maand

minder dan eenmaal per maand

nooit

49. Neemt u water- en energiebesparende maatregelen in het dagelijks leven, zoals

lampen uit als u ruimte verlaat, kraan dicht tijdens tanden poetsen enz.

zoveel mogelijk

alleen als ik er aan denk

nooit

50. Wendt u zich in geval van ziekte weleens tot een alternatieve geneeskundige?

ja

nee

51. Gebruikt u weleens homeopathische (genees)middelen?

ja

nee

52. Heeft iemand in uw huishouden een chronische aandoening waartegen dagelijks

medicijnen gebruikt moeten worden?

ja

nee

38
Tot slot volgen nog enkele vragen omtrent uw persoonlijke gegevens

53. Wat is uw geslacht?

man

vrouw

54. Wat is uw leeftijd? ___________________

55. Wat is uw burgerlijke staat?

gehuwd

ongehuwd

samenwonend

56. Hoeveel kinderen heeft u? ___________________

57. Welke opleidingen heeft u gevolgd na de lagere school (ook buitenschoolse

opleidingen mogen genoemd worden)?
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________

58. Indien u werkt: wat is uw beroep? ___________________

59. Hoeveel uur per week werkt u? ___________________

60. Indien uw partner werkt: wat is zijn of haar beroep? ___________________

61. Wat is het jaarinkomen van uw huishouden?

minder dan f50.000

f50.000-f75000

f75.000-f100.000

f100.000-f125000

meer dan f125.000

62. Bent u aangesloten bij een kerkgenootschap? Zo ja, welke?

___________________

63. Gaat u regelmatig naar de kerk?

minstens eenmaal per week

eenmaal per maand

minder dan eenmaal per maand

nooit

39
64. Op welke partij heeft u gestemd bij de laatste parlementsverkiezingen?
___________________

65. Welke krant(en) leest u?

___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________

66. Heeft u altijd in deze gemeente gewoond?

ja

nee

67. Zo nee, kunt u aangeven in welke plaats(en) u heeft gewoond met vermelding van
het aantal jaren?
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________

U kunt de ingevulde vragenlijst in de bijgevoegde beige envelop doen.

Deze envelop wordt binnen circa een week bij u opgehaald. Hartelijk
dank voor uw medewerking.

40