AUTHOR: Donald J. Barnes,p.12

Assuming the existence of a research funding crisis, and assuming such crisis cannot be solved by quality-based reallocation of funds, Eugene Garfield's commentary of April 29, 1991 [page 14] suggests meaningful action for scientists at the grass-roots level. Even so, there seems to be a misleading theme running through his editorial--that is, additional funds are required, according to Garfield, to combat animal rights zealots, rather than to fund research directly.

Science is a broad term, encompassing, but not limited to, animal-based research; in fact, such research is but a minor aspect of science. Advocates for nonhuman (and human) animals have no problem with public funds allocated for meaningful and ethical research, preferring these endeavors over many others, such as military funding and misguided World Bank development. Let's be perfectly honest: The credibility of scientists is waning, but because of the arrogance and fraudulent actions of scientists...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?