davef at ahi.pbrc.hawaii.edu (Dave Featherstone) writes:
>...[Animal rightists] always say
>that non-animal systems (cell culture, modeling, etc.) are adequate
>replacements, however....
Oh, dear, I fear you will make Mr. Freund overconfident with your sweeping
assertions. I am reminded of the occasion when the leading local
spokesperson for the animal research industry (head of the Massachusetts
Society for Medical Research) showed up for a radio debate with someone
sent by the local animal rights group. In the "warmup pen" she found that
her opponent was a very sharp scientist (a post-doc fellow at Harvard at
the time) and she walked out before the debate started. Even apart from
animal protection considerations, well-informed scientists argue
persuasively that, while cruel animal-based research has had some
achievements, a portion of which could be achieved in no other way, such
animal research nevertheless receives a greater portion of public funds
than it merits relative to other potential expenditures to improve public
health.
Stephen Ronan sbr at world.std.com
