What Debate?

Your point/counterpoint on "The Use Of Animals In Laboratory Research" (K.P. Stoller, S.E. Paris, The Scientist, Sept. 5, 1994, page 12) was subtitled "Debate Presses Forward," but "Debate Fails to Materialize" would have been more appropriate. Susan Paris ("Animal Rights Advocates' Actions Pose Big Threat To Public Health") ignores Kenneth Stoller's ethical and technical critique of animal modeling ("Experimentation On Animals Reta

Martin Stephens
Oct 30, 1994

Your point/counterpoint on "The Use Of Animals In Laboratory Research" (K.P. Stoller, S.E. Paris, The Scientist, Sept. 5, 1994, page 12) was subtitled "Debate Presses Forward," but "Debate Fails to Materialize" would have been more appropriate. Susan Paris ("Animal Rights Advocates' Actions Pose Big Threat To Public Health") ignores Kenneth Stoller's ethical and technical critique of animal modeling ("Experimentation On Animals Retards Progress Of Science") and, instead, recycles the animal activists-as-menace theme that she and other defenders of the status quo have been advancing for nearly 10 years.

Small wonder that a recent analysis of the animal research controversy (A.N. Rowan, F.M. Loew, J.C. Weer, The Animal Research Controversy: Protest, Process and Public Policy, North Grafton, Mass., Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine, 1994, page 141) concluded that "[the] current debate over the use of animals in research may be intense, but it is largely unproductive."

I say...

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?