190 HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 
nutrition and management, provision of suitable physical facilities, 
and the prevention of disease. 
The AVMA is opposed to the enactment of H.R. 1937 (Griffiths bill) 
and H.R. 3556 (Moulder bill) . We do not accept the a priori premise 
of these bills; that is, that animals in scientific laboratories in the 
United States routinely are ill housed and mistreated and, therefore, 
that corrective legislation is necessary. 
The proponents of H.R. 1937 and H.R. 3556 make a serious error 
in presuming that pain and treatment of animals in general can be 
interpreted in terms of man’s response to the same conditions. This 
view is not correct. Animals possess a different level of intellect and 
different sensorial patterns from that of man. The problems of in- 
terpreting the animal’s intellect and biological needs are best left to 
veterinarians and other biological scientists who specialize in the care 
of experimental animals. 
The AVMA is opposed to the enactment of H.R. 1937 and H.R. 
3556, because these bills would require Federal licensing of most bio- 
logical scientists in the United States and inspection of their labora- 
tories. In addition, prior approval of scientific research plans and 
procedures would be necessary by a Federal bureaucracy administered 
by nonscientific personnel. 
The proposed bills would empower nonscientific personnel to reverse 
a scientific decision on the nature of an experiment and the scientific 
procedure and, also, could force termination of an experimental pro- 
cedure at any time. 
These redtape requirements would smother the personal originality, 
initiative, and liberty which has enabled American scientists to lead 
the world in medical knowledge. The AVMA is irrevocably opposed 
to Federal licensing and policing of scientific investigators and labora- 
tories. 
The AVMA supports the present progressive policies of Federal 
Government agencies granting funds for research involving animals. 
These agencies require scientific institutions to provide moral and 
humane care for experimental animals used in federally financed re- 
search. Great progress has been made in the last decade under this 
system of requiring the institution and the scientific investigation to 
accept the moral responsibility of caring for experimental animals 
properly. It is a fundamental fact that humane care and use of ex- 
perimental animals cannot be obtained magically by simple legisla- 
tive act. Humaneness to animals is a philosophy of mind. Hu- 
maness cannot be legislated. 
The proposed legislation would dangerously limit, and in some in- 
stances curtail, the activities of biologists, veterinary scientists, and 
medical scientists in their use of experimental animals for research. 
The issue in question is whether we can accomplish humane care 
and use of experimental animals by education and cooperation, rather 
than by legislation and policing. We believe more has been, and can 
be accomplished in the future by education and freedom for morally 
responsible scientific investigation. 
This is the end of my formal statement, Mr. Chairman. And if you 
would permit me an additional personal comment 
Mr. Roberts. Without objection. 
