Gas Monkey: German Carmakers Denounce Use of Primates in Diesel Exhaust Study

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

German automakers were faulted with animal cruelty after details emerged that the European Research Group (EUGT) on Environment and Health in the Transport Sector had been gassing monkeys with diesel fumes this week. While this is probably the least egregious example of a German gas chamber in let’s say the last seventy years or so, it doesn’t change the fact that there remain some extremely negative connotations.

People don’t like the idea of testing on animals, especially not cute ones that look like us. Germany may not be taking the full-blame on this faux pas in morality, however. EUGT had commissioned the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute (LRRI) in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to establish if diesel exhaust fumes were carcinogenic — and that’s where ten monkeys were isolated in airtight chambers, inhaling fumes from a diesel Volkswagen Beetle as they watched cartoons.

While EUGT received the entirety of its funding from Volkswagen, Daimler and BMW, The New York Times article that published the details of the research did not make it clear if the automakers had any idea monkeys were being used in the experiments.

For what it’s worth, all three automakers have condemned the actions of the research group — which was originally established in 2007 by VW, Daimler AG, BMW AG and Robert Bosch GmbH to conduct studies that might defend the use of diesel while the European public was turning against it. “We apologize for the misconduct and the lack of judgment of individuals,” Volkswagen said in a statement. “We’re convinced the scientific methods chosen then were wrong. It would have been better to do without such a study in the first place.”

Bosch said it left the group in 2013 and BMW noted it had taken no part in EUGT’s design or research methods. Daimler went one step further by saying it would be launching investigation on the LRRI study in Albuquerque, which took place sometime in 2014. “We believe the animal tests in this study were unnecessary and repulsive,” Daimler said. “We explicitly distance ourselves from the study.”

VW also didn’t mince words and said animal testing contradicted its own ethical standards. It also noted that EUGT was shutdown in June of 2017, apparently without its diesel study ever being published.

It’s worth noting that testing on animals is frequently seen as a necessary evil within the scientific community. In the United States testing on primates is actually relatively common, as their biological and psychological similarities to humans make them good research analogs. However, that doesn’t make any of this less sad.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 29 comments
  • Big Al from Oz Big Al from Oz on Jan 29, 2018

    Not good, it amazes me we still need to do this. Why not look at the safety data sheets.

    • MBella MBella on Jan 29, 2018

      How do you think info gets on the data sheets, magic? Testing is required. It's like saying don't kill animals, buy your meat at the supermarket.

  • EBFlex EBFlex on Jan 29, 2018

    Is this supposed to bother me?

    • See 5 previous
    • Abapper Abapper on Jan 29, 2018

      @SCE to AUX the problem is.. it IS you too, bud. they lied and cheated in order to get around emission requirements.

  • ToolGuy I could go for a Mustang with a Subaru powertrain. (Maybe some additional ground clearance.)
  • ToolGuy Does Tim Healey care about TTAC? 😉
  • ToolGuy I am slashing my food budget by 1%.
  • ToolGuy TG grows skeptical about his government protecting him from bad decisions.
  • Calrson Fan Jeff - Agree with what you said. I think currently an EV pick-up could work in a commercial/fleet application. As someone on this site stated, w/current tech. battery vehicles just do not scale well. EBFlex - No one wanted to hate the Cyber Truck more than me but I can't ignore all the new technology and innovative thinking that went into it. There is a lot I like about it. GM, Ford & Ram should incorporate some it's design cues into their ICE trucks.
Next