ROBERT VAN CITTERS 
7 
include metabolic, degenerative, neoplastic, and 
infectious disorders of almost every organ 
system. Very fev^' of these have been exploited 
in the laboratory. They remain as unexplained 
curiosities while the possibility exists that 
the fundamental processes are identical to 
human diseases. Since this conference focused 
to some extent on the cardiovascular system, it 
is appropriate to point out that there are both 
opportunities and needs for development of 
models in the cardiovascular area. Here again 
opportunities exist for exploitation of the low^er 
forms. Reptiles, for example, have a single 
ventricle, so that there are hemodynamic paral- 
lels between some of the reptiles and children 
with ventricular septal defects. 
Beyond such naturally existing examples, 
a lot of simple analogs can be easily cre- 
ated. Valve lesions and shunts have been created 
which parallel to some extent the lesions found 
in humans, and there are some other far more 
elegant examples. The need for discovery or cre- 
ation of models is tremendous. The National 
Heart Institute, in recent years, has offered sub- 
stantial rewards in the form of contract support 
for individuals capable of developing a model of 
coronary heart disease. I believe it is also fair to 
say that there is no existing satisfactory animal 
model of a clinical state which we refer to as 
congestive heart failure. The variety of animals 
now used in the study of atherosclerosis suggests 
that none of those models is entirely valid. 
I would like to turn away from models 
and comment on the need for control and 
supervision of our research animal stock. I 
think all of us have read the standard byline 
which frequently appears in all journals: 
"Mongrel dogs were anesthetized with Nembu- 
tal," and on and on. I think it is possible that 
at one point in the history of research there was 
some justification for the use of the semi- 
starved and anemic, worm-laden pound animal 
or random rabbit. I think it is also likely that 
many of the experiments of the past were con- 
ducted on animals which were too sickly or 
rundown to serve as adequate laboratory tools. 
The recently enacted Animal Research and Ani- 
mal Welfare legislation provides no real assur- 
ance that our animal subjects will, in fact, be 
healthy or uniform. I think the need for stand- 
ardization in our animal stocks is all too ob- 
vious. This implies that there is a need for 
genetically controlled sources, where indicated, 
for adequate nutrition standards, for prelimi- 
nary clinical studies, and for more appropriate 
post-mortem studies so the investigator can 
have some real insight into the validity of both 
his model and his results. 
Finally, I think I would be remiss if I did 
not express my concern over the absence of sen- 
sitivity for the welfare of experimental animals 
which has been shown by the animal research 
community. It is a national professional dis- 
grace that two times in our very recent history 
animal welfare legislation has had to be forced 
upon us. This legislation was framed for the 
most part by non-medical and non-research 
oriented individuals. Few of us provided any 
real support to the small minority of concerned 
individuals who tried to protect the interests 
of the research community. The legislation was 
introduced by members of the Congress who 
are not primarily identified with the biomedical 
research movement, and I think it was sup- 
ported more out of fear of reprisal by the 
public than out of real concern and respect for 
the leadership of the biomedical research com- 
munity. 
Beyond the absence of professional concern 
and impact on the legislation is the fact that the 
legislation provided absolutely no funding what- 
soever for the major changes which it called for : 
the renovation of facilities, the implementation 
of new policies for handling, and so forth, with 
which we are now forced to conform. One result 
of this has been an enormous increase in the ani- 
mal costs at nearly every institution. Across the 
country institutions have had to dip into other 
pockets in order to conform to this legislation. 
It is in the research community's best interests 
to improve and maintain the welfare of experi- 
mental animals and their surroundings, but 
there is obvious need for inclusion of meas- 
ures to insure financial support in such legisla- 
tion as well. 
We have only ourselves to blame for this 
omission because we have abdicated a major 
responsibility. The long-term implications of 
continued disinterest and apathy on our part 
are not palatable and are clearly not in the best 
