August II, 1881] 



NATURE 



351 



to scientific examination, and witli each step in advance we 

 become more clearly convinced that life, regarded as a great unit 

 in the established jense, is a pure fiction, arising from the obser- 

 vation that in the hierarchical organisation of the human body 

 certain organs attain so elaborate a structure, and therewith so 

 great importance, that they with complete right merit the name 

 of vital organs. And as among these organs the medidla ob- 

 longata possesses the greatest importance, it is easily comprehen- 

 sible that the idea should arise that it might really be the seat of 

 life. But we know now that life is a collective functional action 

 of all parts of the higher or vital, as well as of the lower and 

 less important ; and that there is no one seat of life, but that 

 every true elementary part, especially every cell, is a seat of life. 

 In biological research, also, as well as in pathological, we have 

 arrived at a multiplication of foci. Of course the number of 

 vital foci is much greater than that of foci of disease can ever 

 be ; and hence disea-e and life, or to speak more accurately, 

 diseased and healthy life, can very well coexi-t in the same 

 organi m ; always, however, so that di^ease signifies a reduction, 

 a minus of healthy life. By this research we have even re- 

 discovered the long-lost essence of disease, not indeed in a 

 spiritualistic form, but as a quite material ens, a genuine incar- 

 nate thing— //;f altered cell. 



Has all now produced advantage ? Was it worth the trouble 

 to inflict pain on so many animals? to kill so many animals ? Is 

 there a really justifiable claim for allowing the experimental 

 method to proceed still further ? We can answer all these ques- 

 tions confidently in the affirmative. Not every experiment on 

 animals has results as great as that of Galvani, results which 

 have not merely led to a new and effective method of treating 

 disease — electrotherapy ; which have not only disclosed a large 

 new territory of vital processes, but have supplied the first pre- 

 liminary condition for an incalculable number of the most im- 

 portant technicd arrangements, the knowledge of the natural 

 course of events. But galvanism might yet appear to limited 

 and timid heads as an instructive and refreshing play, for the 

 reason that not every re-ult of true observation of nature is 

 usually brought forward at once, and that nevertheless it may be 

 of the highest practical value. The cellular theory and the 

 proof of the vita propria seii eellularis are in themselves very 

 abstruse things, and no one can cure patients by their means 

 without understanding something further. And yet they have 

 become the foundation, yea, in a certain measure the security, 

 for localising therapeutics, and they will surely become more so 

 from day to day, when first materia medica in its wider extent 

 shall have gone on the way which toxicology has already for a 

 long time followed in a manner so rich in results. 



How then can a great result to the science of healing be ex- 

 pected, if research in animals be cut off? For a long time no 

 remedy has been more rapidly recognised, or more extensively 

 used, than chloral, the effects of which were discovered and 

 established experimentally by Herr O. Liebreich in my labora- 

 tory. How would it have been possible to know how to ascer- 

 tain those effects without experiments on animals? The animals' 

 friends say to us, "Then try the new medicine on yourselves ! " 

 They refer us to the provings of medicines by the homoeopaths. 

 But, quite independently of the fact that the provings of the 

 homoeopaths have not taught us to recognise one single new 

 remedy which can be compared even at a distance with chloral, 

 and that these provings, even in regard to already known reme- 

 dies, do not in the least correspond to scientific investigations ; 

 that thus they cannot be altogether regarded as an original ex- 

 ample — one will yet not be able to earnestly desire that very 

 different, possibly poi-onous bodies, should he made the subject 

 of self-experimentation by physicians or other men. This kind 

 of morality, which forbids experiments on animals and counsels 

 experiments on one's own life or on sick men, misses, in fact, 

 the first foundations of intelligent examination. 



The proof of the great importance of hygiene and prophylaxis 

 is rather superfluous. If any class of men has been active in 

 this direction it is surely medical men. Never has there been a 

 want of zealous hygienists among them ; and when a great 

 problem of prophylaxis was to be solved, one might be sure of 

 finding medical men engaged in the work. We are so accus- 

 tomed to this obligation that we always regard hygiene and pro- 

 phylaxis as belonging to medicine, and to no other science. But 

 it is empty talk when it is said that prophylaxis w ill render 

 therapeutics — yea, even in a certain degree, medicine — super- 

 fluous. I'he arrangement of this imperfect world is such that 

 there surely will be sick as long as ;men exist ; and we are not 



afraid because of the threat that there will be no further need of 

 us. Not even through the assistance of hygiene will people be 

 able to do whhout us ; and still less w ithont experiment on 

 animals. Will even the hygienists be condemned to test the 

 various " causes " cold and warmth, dryness and moisture, dust 

 and noxious gases, micrococci and bacteria, on their own persons, 

 in order that they may from such self-observations determine 

 their effects, and formulate laws? Intelligent Governments will 

 comprehend that it would be an act of madness to sacrifice 

 human life, merely because it occurs to a small number of 

 persons that it is criminal to sacrifice the lives of animals. 

 Medical men are already more exposed in epidemics of all kinds, 

 in the performance of their duties in hospitals, in the country, 

 in their nocturnal visits to the sick, in operations and necropsies, 

 than any other class of the community as a rule ; and it requires 

 all the blindnes- of the animal fanatics to require also of them 

 that they should test on their owm bodies the remedial, or 

 poisonous, or indifferent action of unknown subst.ances, or that 

 they should determine the limit of permissible doses by observa- 

 tions made on themselves. 



In the name of humanity, of morality, of religion, the sup- 

 pression of experiment on animals is demanded. For, in fact, it 

 is not merely vivisection that is in question, but experiment on 

 animals ; that is, the experimental method in general. When 

 the term vivisection is used it is made to include in like manner 

 all painful actions in which there is no cutting ; indeed, to pre- 

 vent any misconception, not only physiological, but also patho- 

 logical and pharmacological, experiments, are expressly included. 

 The criterion is pain. Everything by which, in the "May of 

 experiment, pain is inflicted on an animal is torture of animals, 

 and so far immoral, and contrary to religion. With this defini- 

 tion of torture of animals it might be possible to arrive at excep- 

 tional results by applying it to other callings or men. The dog- 

 fanciers, who in the rearing of their dogs often use, or cause 10 

 be used, methods full of torture and painful chastisement, would 

 readily come into great dangc". The improvement of horses 

 for certain purposes w ould have to be entirely put down. A 

 great part of our domestic animals would have to remain un- 

 trained, so that pain might be spared to them. We should 

 perhaps arrive at conditions similar to those produced by the 

 wild dogs in Turkey. 



Individual anti-vivisectors are at least so far consistent that 

 they w ould see the slaughter of animals also forbidden. From 

 the vegetarian standpoint, the opposition gains a kind of syste- 

 matic aspect. Thus Herr von Seefeld ' demands a vegetable 

 diet and the prohibition of vivisectors ; but as he, as a vege- 

 tarian, has no need of flesh, he is strongly inclined to make still 

 further concessions. Thus he rejects hunting for the purpose of 

 pleasure, but cannot altogether dispense with it as a means of 

 defending life. Others go still further, and sacrifice also war. 

 The principle can scarcely be denied, that death is worse than 

 torture. There could scarcely be a criminal code, which 

 punishes the premeditated killing of a man less severely than the 

 tortiu'e of a m.an. Not without reason is it alleged that a man 

 who still remains alive after his misdeeds may recover and attain 

 to a complete or entire enjoyment of life. Grounds of mitigation 

 in cases of murder and manslaughter are allowed also to men ; 

 but, as a foundation, the extremest injury which can be inflicted 

 on man is alw ays and everywhere the most severely punished. 



As regards animals, the nnti-vivisectors, on the contrary, 

 consider torture to be worse than death. Although they reject 

 every torturing or painful method of death, even for cattle, they 

 without the slightest consideration cause animals, even highly 

 organi-ed one<, to be slaughtered or killed, not only for eating, 

 but also for other purely subjective reasons. They go, indeed, 

 so far as to demand that an animal which has survived vivisection 

 shall be killed, although it might possibly still enjoy a long and 

 happy life. Is there any logic in this, or any morality? How? 

 May we have the right to kill an animal on any ground of public 

 utility, to eat its fle-h, to sell its skin, to pound its bones to 

 manure for the field ? and are we not to have the ^right of sub- 

 jecting it to scientific research, which we institute on entirely 

 ideal grounds, or on the grounds of the public weal, in which 

 we even perhaps run the risk of becoming di-eased ? It will be 

 difficult to assume that we institnte researches on glanders or 

 splenic fever for pleasure, or to pass aw ay time, or without 

 knowledge of the great danger of inoculation. Whoever allows 

 himself the right to kill anirjials, has n.i right to forbid physi- 



' Alfred von Seefeld. " Altes und Neues fiber die vegetarianische Lebens- 

 webe." (Hanover, 1880.) 



