26th November 2007

Dear Sir,

I would like to support the view expressed by Mike Maas (letter 2nd Nov) ‘that we need an independent and transparent scientific evaluation of the use of animals as surrogate humans in drug safety testing and medical research’. This is hardly an eccentric or extremist view. If the anonymous person who responded (letter 9th Nov) was so confident of the scientific validity of using animals as models of human diseases then why not welcome this evaluation.

It is a shame the person feels he/she has to stay anonymous but I must point out that the vast majority of those of us who are concerned about the suffering of animals in laboratories pose no threat to anyone. I am a medical researcher myself and this climate of fear makes it very difficult for me to push for change on this issue. But I do understand why the animal rights movement is an angry and frustrated one. In the 30 or so years that I have been concerned about this, the debate has at least moved on now such that few, if any, scientists still question whether or not animals are capable of suffering both physical and mental pain. At least this fact has been accepted.

But the amount of money and time devoted to researching alternatives to animals is still only a token gesture of what it should be. I liken this to the public transport versus car problem. If over decades one method is heavily invested in and the other neglected, then no wonder people say there is no alternative. The ‘grey’ politicians have been leading us down dangerous and unethical paths for a long time. I hope Mike is not put off all political parties by the backtracking of Nick Clegg on this issue once he became a member of Ming Campbell’s shadow cabinet. If anyone wants to support medical research without using animals you can support one of the humane research charities such as Dr Hadwen Trust, Lord Dowding Fund or Humane Research Trust.

Dr Dawn Biram

Sheffield Green Party