The Calgary Journal published a fact-checking report examinging PETA’s claims that laboratory animals “languish in pain, suffer from extreme frustration, ache with loneliness, and long to be free.”
After the story was published, PETA sent a reponse to the reporting. As part of the Calgary Journal’s commitment to free and lively debate, the animal rights organization’s slightly edited letter is published below.
The Calgary Journal article questioning whether animals in laboratories “suffer and long to be free” relies heavily on assurances from a veterinarian employed within the very system under scrutiny—and focuses almost exclusively on experimental procedures, while overlooking the profound and continuous deprivation that defines laboratory confinement itself.
For animals, suffering does not begin and end with a surgical incision. It is built into the conditions of captivity.
Animals in laboratories are typically confined to small, barren enclosures that severely restrict their ability to move.
Monkeys who would naturally travel miles each day are reduced to pacing a few steps back and forth. Rodents who would burrow, forage, and explore complex environments are confined to shoebox-sized cages.
This chronic restriction of movement is itself a well-recognized physiological and psychological stressor.
Lab confinement
Laboratory confinement also disrupts animals’ most basic biological and social needs.
Many species used in research are intensely social, yet they are often housed alone or in artificial groupings that bear no resemblance to their natural social structures. Infant primates may be separated from their mothers.
Social bonds are broken. Animals experience repeated handling, restraint and unpredictable disturbances, all of which contribute to sustained stress.
Even the physical environment can impose hardship: animals may be exposed to cold stress, unnatural lighting cycles, constant noise and the absence of meaningful stimulation.
These conditions are not incidental—they are inherent to laboratory use.
The consequences are visible and measurable.
Animals in laboratories commonly exhibit signs of chronic stress and psychological distress, including repetitive pacing, self-injury, withdrawal and abnormal behaviours that do not occur in natural settings.
These are not signs that animals’ behavioural and psychological needs are being met.
They are indicators of nervous system dysfunction caused by confinement and deprivation.
Life ‘defined by restriction, deprivation and control’
The article cites oversight systems and “enrichment” measures as evidence that animals do not suffer.
But enrichment items—such as a plastic tube or nesting material—cannot compensate for the loss of freedom, family, autonomy and the ability to engage in the full range of natural behaviours.
Nor do regulatory categories capture the cumulative burden of lifelong confinement, social disruption and loss of agency.
When PETA states that animals in laboratories suffer and long to be free, we are referring not only to invasive procedures but to the totality of their existence in captivity: a life defined by restriction, deprivation and control.
That reality is not refuted by institutional assurances.
This is supported by decades of scientific literature on animal behaviour, stress physiology and welfare.
Any honest discussion of animal research must account not only for what is done to animals during experiments, but for what is done to them every hour of every day in the laboratory environment itself.
Read more of the Calgary Journal’s fact-checking reporting here.
Learn about our method and process for fact-checking here.
If you have an idea for a fact-check, contact us.