Xref: utzoo sci.research:609 talk.politics.misc:21304 sci.bio:1805
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pacbell!varian!vaxwaller!wood
From: wood@vaxwaller.UUCP (John Wood)
Newsgroups: sci.research,talk.politics.misc,sci.bio
Subject: Re: animal research
Keywords: none
Message-ID: <2067@vaxwaller.UUCP>
Date: 1 Feb 89 21:30:29 GMT
References: <221@anselm.UUCP-> <5963@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Organization: Varian Instruments, Walnut Creek CA
Lines: 52

In article <5963@phoenix.Princeton.EDU->, skellyjp@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (James P Skelly) writes:
-> In article <221@anselm.UUCP>, sperry@anselm.UUCP (MALF) writes:
-> >     Using animals for scientific research is completely unnecessary and
-> > cruel to the animals.  With todays technology we do not need to use
-> > animals for the research.  The tests done have been done at least 100
-> > times allready. 
-> 
-> This is wrong.  There is no substitute for the use of animals in medical
-> research nor is animal research cruel to the animals.  

This categorical statement deserves some discussion.  (See below)

-> Except in rare cases animals are given all the care that pets would get
-> when they go to a vet.  

Well, I don't know about that claim.  I spent two years in the Parmacology
department of a major Medical School where dogs were used for most of the
medical research that I was involved in.  I must say that the post-operative
care given the animals was less than desirable from my point of view.  
Perhaps this school is the "rare case" but it's the only one that I have
personal knowledge of.

-> Since so many people seem to be unaware of how
-> animal research has benefitted medical practice, including veterinary
-> medicine, I've included some information. 
-> 
-> The following is taken from the pamphlet "What if - There were no animal
-> research?" put out by the Foundation For Biomedical Research.
-> 
-> -Polio would kill or cripple thousands of unvaccinated children and
-> adults this year.
-> 
	(A long list of other diseases that killed and/or maimed a
	large number of humans because animals were not used for 
	research was deleted)

It seems to me that there is a possible error in this thinking.  The
assumption is that if animals were not used for research then all these
diseases would still be killing us.  Perhaps that is too black and white.
I believe that if scientists were not able to use animals for research
they would find some other way to solve the difficult problems that they
encounter.  I submit that the problem would be harder to solve but I don't
think that the problems are insurmountable.  Perhaps the animal rights
folks could add some constructive diologue by suggesting other possible
solutions.  BTW, I am not an activist in this area I just have a personal
ethical belief that _I_ should not be involved in the unnecessary killing
of animals.
-- 
	John Wood		(415) 945-2273
	Varian Instruments, 2700 Mitchell Dr.  Walnut Creek, Ca. 94598
	{zehntel,dual,amd,fortune,rtech,lll-crg,ista,pacbell,csi}!varian!wood
	(These are my opinions.  I don't know what Varian's opinions are.)