None of the three letters opposing the very real need to conduct some animal research (Letters, February 1) reflected mainstream scientific and medical opinion when attacking such research.
Do readers ever wonder if animal research abolitionists are accurate when rubbishing animal research? Or could they just be airing their extreme opinions?
Separating science fact from science fiction can be difficult. So Seriously Ill for Medical Research (SIMR), a patients' group, conducted a survey of Nobel Laureates in physiology and medicine, the results of which provided expert testimony in support of animal research.
They unanimously agreed about the need for animals to advance medicine, even though many of them did not use animals in their research.
"The medicines of tomorrow depend upon research being done today, for which animal experimentation is essential," said John Vane, Nobel prizewinner, 1980.
"Animal experimentation has been essential to development of all cardiac surgery, transplantation surgery, joint replacement and all vaccinations. The world is not flat," said Joseph Murray, Nobel prizewinner, 1990.
-Thomas Bromley, SIMR member, Littlehampton
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article