212 HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 
And Dr. David E. Price, Deputy Director of the NIH, says : “It is said that 
it is easier to repeat research than to dig it out of the literature. * * * If these 
charges are true, then we seem to be strangling ourselves to death, or to be trav- 
eling in circles.” 
I have already indicated the enormous significance of the statistical analysis 
of typical medical research experiments being done by Dr. Bryant and his asso- 
ciates but it should be emphasized particularly that their findings indicate a 
clear waste of public funds and equally clearly show an open route to important 
savings. Statistical analysis of this kind is among the methods of control that 
would be used by the Agency for Laboratory Animal Control proposed by Con- 
gressman Moulder. 
The Moulder bill would exert a needed new control over redundancy and repeti- 
tion, with their unavoidable incidental waste of money. Taxpayers as well as 
humanitarians will thank you for making law of this bill. 
You will most certainly hear arguments here today, to the effect that legislation 
is unnecessary because the 8,000 or 9,000 animal-using laboratories in the United 
States will police themselves. 
A persuasive rebuttal to that contention is that they have not so far done so. 
It will become obvious today, I expect, that neither do they intend to do so. 
There are scientists, there are laboratory administrators, who know that 
reforms are needed and who wish to have those reforms effected. But there is 
no central organization of those who use animals in research, there is no organi- 
zation with authority. In this respect, this field is an anarchy. And there can be 
no effective self -policing in an anarchy. It would be as reasonable to say that the 
American people as a whole need no anticruelty laws as to say that none is needed 
in this special but very large segment of the American population. 
I will conclude with a comment on a technical aspect of H.R. 3566 — the methods 
provided for operation and enforcement of the proposed controls. We believe 
that in these respects Congressman Moulder’s bill is an exceptionally admirable 
example of good legislation. We think it markedly superior in this respect to the 
other bill that you are today considering. 
H.R. 3556 would establish an Agency for Laboratory Animal Control under 
the administration of a Commissioner for Laboratory Animal Control. The 
Agency and the Commissioner would be responsible simply for law enforcement 
and would have no authority to interfere with research, to direct it, or to influence 
it. The Commissioner would have a nonpolitical status. 
No new army of inspectors or investigators would be required. The enforce- 
ment technique would consist principally of expert analysis of requests for funds 
submitted by applicant laboratories and of reports submitted by these same 
laboratories at specified' times. 
The proposed law would get its teeth — and they are big teeth — from provisions 
of the bill that would make laboratory officers and individual researchers sub- 
ject to the penalties of perjury and of fraud if false statements were submitted. 
Wt think that very few responsible officers of research institutions would know- 
ingly commit perjury or commit fraud in obtaining Federal funds. If there should 
be any such, then the penalties of the Moulder bill would be justified. 
In any event, whatever the enforcement and administration of this law might 
cost, there would most certainly be a great net gain to the taxpayer. Auditing 
procedures do not cost money, they save money. 
We are here discussing an activity that involves a vast interstate commerce in 
animals (predicted soon to be equal in value to all of the livestock product of our 
farms and ranches), that involves the expenditure of more than a billion dollars 
a year of public money, that involves more than 200,000 persons scattered through 
some 8,000 or 9,000 laboratories, that involves the progress of our medical re- 
search and the safety of our public, and that involves a compelling issue of 
morality. 
Sooner or later the Congress will see the need and necessity for imposing con- 
trols over this activity. We hope that the time will be soon. 
Mr. Myers. I would like to take a few minutes for a few extempo- 
raneous remarks not based on my prepared statement. Most of all 
I wish to convey to this committee a realization of the magnitude and 
the urgent nature of the problems that we are here discussing. 
We are very grateful to this committee and particularly to you, 
Mr. Chairman, for giving time at a moment when I know all of you 
