784 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



every attempt to cure disease or alleviate suffering must have 

 been, in the nature of the case, an act of human vivisection. A 

 large proportion of modern medicine at present is equally in 

 essence nothing more nor less than human vivisection, and it is 

 only gradually, as elements of experiment and uncertainty are 

 eliminated from remedial measures by more exact knowledge, 

 that the practice of medicine becomes anything more than human 

 vivisection.* 



A further argument against the utility of animal experimen- 

 tation is based on differences between animals and men, which 

 make it unsafe to apply results directly from the animal to man. 

 A logical error is here involved; for, while there are physio- 

 logical differences between different animals, to one point of dif- 

 ference there are many points of close similarity. A difference in 

 physiological function is technically known as an idiosyncrasy. 

 These differences exist between individual men as well as be- 

 tween different species of animals. A man who has had small- 

 pox or measles acquires an idiosyncrasy which protects him from 

 having them again. In some cases this difference exists from 

 birth ; in others it is impossible to acquire it. Man himself be- 

 gins life as a microscopical sj)eck of living matter, and in his 

 physical development passes through and beyond the lower stages 

 of organic life. Hence the fundamental physiological processes 

 and functions he has in common with the great body of living 

 things beneath him. On this wider view physiological idiosyn- 

 crasy becomes the strongest possible incentive to experiment. 

 How is it that certain species have become wholly immune from 

 certain diseases ? With the secret of this immunity discovered, 

 it may be easy to induce a similar immunity in another species or 

 in man. 



The conclusion which follows from the foregoing chapters 

 bears directly upon a topic of considerable present importance, 

 viz., that of legislative interference with scientific work.f With 

 due appreciation of scientific achievements in the past, we must 

 keep ever before us the fact that the hardest labors and richest 

 harvests in science are still in the future. And every considera- 

 tion of religion, morality, altruism, humanity, and utility urge to 



far as I have been able to ascertain, is an individual matter, and can not be taken to repre- 

 sent in the slightest degree the tendency of experimental medicine or the attitude of ex- 

 perimental physiologists in this country. 



* The Zend-Avesta permitted a doctor to practice his art upon three heretics. If these 

 all died or were made worse by his treatment, he was forbidden, on penalty of death, to fol- 

 low his profession further. If they recovered, he might begin practice upon the faithful. — 

 Sprengel. Geschichte der Arzneykunde, vol. i, p. 126. (Refers to Zend-Avesta, Part III, 

 p. 336.) 



I For fuller discussion of this topic see Bowditch, he. cit., pp. 8-16, and appendix. 



