2. Goldsmith MF: For better hip replacement results, surgeon's best friend may be a robot. JAMA 1992; 267: 613-614 3. Venning GR: Identification of adverse reactions to new drugs. I: What have been the important adverse reactions since thalidomide? BMJ 1983; 286: 199-202 4. Marwick C: "Alter" a virus molecularly for polio vaccine? JAMA 1992; 267: 473
ticularly the CCAC. Despite this, the activities of the animal rights movement have caused the cost of animal experimentation to escalate, so that this aspect of research and the benefits it brings to humanity are being lost. My laboratory has to be locked, for security, while those in it do experiments. My secretary After reading Dr. Kesteven's arti- has been trained to recognize a cle and then Mr. Cooper's re- letter bomb, and my family has port of a conversation with Dr. received threats. Should any Poznansky, I thought that an at- member of the medical profession tempt was being made to provide be subject to these experiences as a balanced viewpoint concerning a result of pursuing benefits for the use of animals in medical the health of Canadians? If proparesearch. As a medical researcher ganda can inflame the susceptible trying to understand how the arti- mind (as with hate literature) percles would be perceived by those haps now is the time for the in the medical profession who do media and CMAJ to look seriousnot perform animal research I am ly at whether they wish to be used concerned as to their message and to present such a viewpoint? its effect. Several years ago the CMA My worry is that medical re- presented the policy statement search with the use of animals is "Animals in biomedical research" seriously threatened in Canada. (Can Med Assoc J 1986; 135: Why should this be if the use of 928A), which reiterated a commitanimals for medical research is, as ment to the use of animals in Poznansky suggests, both crucial medical research. Those of us doing anand appropriate? Let me first address Kestev- imal-based medical research need en's viewpoint. What she has writ- the help of the media, including ten is a summary of the arguments CMAJ, to reverse the trend that is used by the animal rights move- damaging medical research and to ment, based largely on the philos- expose the activities of the animal ophy of Peter Singer. It is propa- rights movement. ganda. The statements are halftruths and thus appear reasonable Gerald A. Klassen, MD, FRCPC to the reader who has not made Professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics an in-depth study of the issues. Victoria General Hospital Propaganda is a powerful tool for Halifax, NS influencing public opinion. Society relies on the media to pro- [CMAJ responds.] vide a balanced view of public issues and to point out half-truths. As the introduction to her article From my perspective as a states, Dr. Kesteven wrote her physician and researcher for close Viewpoint piece in response to to 35 years I have seen an erosion "We cannot afford to lose the in the ability of medical science in animal rights war," a previous Canada to carry out research in Viewpoint article by Dr. Philp which animals are used. As Poz- (Can Med Assoc J 1990; 142: nansky correctly points out, the 1421-1423). Kesteven was the control of the quality of an- only author to volunteer to write imal-based medical research in such a response, and in the interCanada has been exemplary ests of presenting a balanced arguthrough the efforts of many, par- ment CMAJ accepted it. Dr. Klas1900
CAN MED ASSOC J 1992; 146 ( 11)
sen is right - the article on Dr. Poznansky was run as a companion piece to the Kesteven article because the same topic was being discussed. By publishing such pieces CMAJ is not saying that it accepts or rejects the views and comments being presented. Instead, it is trying to do its joboffer a forum for debate. Patrick Sullivan News and features editor
Dr. Poznansky's work in medical ethics leads him to the rather obvious conclusion that human experimental subjects must give "informed consent." What he fails to grasp and what millions of animal rights advocates from all walks of life readily recognize is that this principle applies to sentient animals. (Philosopher Tom Regan has noted that intelligence, language and other characteristics that render most humans "superior" to animals are irrelevant we would never vivisect a human who lacked these characteristics.') Nevertheless, Poznansky asserts that a situation in which there are difficulties in obtaining animals for experiments is "completely ridiculous," and he derides animal rights groups as poorly informed at best. Although Poznansky claims that animal research is crucial and appropriate Dr. Kesteven's commentary effectively challenges both assertions. Indeed, because animal modelling involves arguing by analogy it is not strictly science. Animal models represent stick figures of human diseases that cannot verify or refute hypotheses about human conditions. Why does animal research persist? I am convinced that the principal reasons are unrelated to science or knowledge. First, the results of animal experiments are easily published. It requires little originality or insight to take an already well-defined animal model, change a variable (or the LE 1er JUIN 1992
ticularly the CCAC. Despite this, the activities of the animal rights movement have caused the cost of animal experimentation to escalate, so that this aspect of research and the benefits it brings to humanity are being lost. My laboratory has to be locked, for security, while those in it do experiments. My secretary After reading Dr. Kesteven's arti- has been trained to recognize a cle and then Mr. Cooper's re- letter bomb, and my family has port of a conversation with Dr. received threats. Should any Poznansky, I thought that an at- member of the medical profession tempt was being made to provide be subject to these experiences as a balanced viewpoint concerning a result of pursuing benefits for the use of animals in medical the health of Canadians? If proparesearch. As a medical researcher ganda can inflame the susceptible trying to understand how the arti- mind (as with hate literature) percles would be perceived by those haps now is the time for the in the medical profession who do media and CMAJ to look seriousnot perform animal research I am ly at whether they wish to be used concerned as to their message and to present such a viewpoint? its effect. Several years ago the CMA My worry is that medical re- presented the policy statement search with the use of animals is "Animals in biomedical research" seriously threatened in Canada. (Can Med Assoc J 1986; 135: Why should this be if the use of 928A), which reiterated a commitanimals for medical research is, as ment to the use of animals in Poznansky suggests, both crucial medical research. Those of us doing anand appropriate? Let me first address Kestev- imal-based medical research need en's viewpoint. What she has writ- the help of the media, including ten is a summary of the arguments CMAJ, to reverse the trend that is used by the animal rights move- damaging medical research and to ment, based largely on the philos- expose the activities of the animal ophy of Peter Singer. It is propa- rights movement. ganda. The statements are halftruths and thus appear reasonable Gerald A. Klassen, MD, FRCPC to the reader who has not made Professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics an in-depth study of the issues. Victoria General Hospital Propaganda is a powerful tool for Halifax, NS influencing public opinion. Society relies on the media to pro- [CMAJ responds.] vide a balanced view of public issues and to point out half-truths. As the introduction to her article From my perspective as a states, Dr. Kesteven wrote her physician and researcher for close Viewpoint piece in response to to 35 years I have seen an erosion "We cannot afford to lose the in the ability of medical science in animal rights war," a previous Canada to carry out research in Viewpoint article by Dr. Philp which animals are used. As Poz- (Can Med Assoc J 1990; 142: nansky correctly points out, the 1421-1423). Kesteven was the control of the quality of an- only author to volunteer to write imal-based medical research in such a response, and in the interCanada has been exemplary ests of presenting a balanced arguthrough the efforts of many, par- ment CMAJ accepted it. Dr. Klas1900
CAN MED ASSOC J 1992; 146 ( 11)
sen is right - the article on Dr. Poznansky was run as a companion piece to the Kesteven article because the same topic was being discussed. By publishing such pieces CMAJ is not saying that it accepts or rejects the views and comments being presented. Instead, it is trying to do its joboffer a forum for debate. Patrick Sullivan News and features editor
Dr. Poznansky's work in medical ethics leads him to the rather obvious conclusion that human experimental subjects must give "informed consent." What he fails to grasp and what millions of animal rights advocates from all walks of life readily recognize is that this principle applies to sentient animals. (Philosopher Tom Regan has noted that intelligence, language and other characteristics that render most humans "superior" to animals are irrelevant we would never vivisect a human who lacked these characteristics.') Nevertheless, Poznansky asserts that a situation in which there are difficulties in obtaining animals for experiments is "completely ridiculous," and he derides animal rights groups as poorly informed at best. Although Poznansky claims that animal research is crucial and appropriate Dr. Kesteven's commentary effectively challenges both assertions. Indeed, because animal modelling involves arguing by analogy it is not strictly science. Animal models represent stick figures of human diseases that cannot verify or refute hypotheses about human conditions. Why does animal research persist? I am convinced that the principal reasons are unrelated to science or knowledge. First, the results of animal experiments are easily published. It requires little originality or insight to take an already well-defined animal model, change a variable (or the LE 1er JUIN 1992
