266 HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 
Yet one experimenter, with a long record of interest in the starvation of 
animals, felt impelled to try it on four dogs. He subjected them to 28 periods 
of prolonged fasting which varied upward from 11 days. When they were 
starved to the verge of death he offered them hearty meals. The results were 
foreknown. 3 4 Is this science? 
Other researchers go on piling up vast statistical totals far past the point 
where this could affect the results. An eminent endocrinologist in Montreal 
spent 14 years torturing 15,000 rats to death in a variety of ingenious ways, in 
order to study the effect on their adrenal glands and other organs. 1 But since 
the post mortem findings showed no deviation whatever, it was pointed out by 
a critic that under the laws of statistics the learned doctor would have proved 
just as much if he had stopped with the first 500 rats. 
Under the laissez-faire system which now prevails in medical research there 
is no check whatever upon the wasteful repetition of experiments for which the 
taxpayer pays ; no check on careless planning ; no check on the outright sadist, 
who surrounds his real subconscious motive with a fog of scientific terms. 
In a Boston medical school 21 dogs under light sedation were immersed in 
a tub of water just above freezing to observe how long it would take them to 
“collapse.” They were then revived in warm water, immersed again in the 
freezing water in order to time the second “collapse.” That was the sole purpose 
of the experiment. It had previously been performed on other dogs without 
any sedation whatever. 5 
One may ask again, is this really science? 
A team of New York City experimenters reported in 1958 that they had sub- 
jected 18 unanesthetized dogs to massive doses of irradiation on the head. The 
dogs died in from 14 to 28 hours, their lingering agonies being described in some 
eight polysyllabic scientific words. The main finding of the experiment was the 
fact that heavy irradiation on the head damaged certain vital centers in the 
brain, a result which would have surprised no one. 
The researchers acknowledged that the lethal dose of X-irradiation to the 
head had previously been tried out on mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, and monkeys, 
with results very similar to their own, and they then arrived at the earth- 
shaking scientific conclusion that “species differences, among other factors, 
appear to be responsible for the differences in results.” 6 
it’s time foe legislation 
It is time to turn the searchlight of publicity on the laboratories. It is time 
to demand immediate and drastic reform in the care of experimental animals. 
It is time to set up a central authority or clearinghouse over animal experi- 
mentation which would perform the following functions: (a) elimination of 
wasteful repetition, (6) subjection of all plans involving painful experiments 
to the severest scrutiny. 
Two bills have been introduced in Congress which would impose minimum 
humane standards on institutions and individuals seeking Federal grants for 
research. They are H.R. 1987 and H.R. 3556. Both bills require the licensing 
of experimenters ; both require the advance filing of project plans for research 
which involves living animals. The principal difference is that under the first 
bill the administrator would be the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare ; 
under the second it would be a special commissioner of laboratory animal control. 
Write your Congressman and tell him that you support legislation to protect 
lab animals. Write your Senators and ask them to sponsor similar measures 
in the Senate. Write to Chairman Oren Harris of the House Interstate and 
Foreign Commerce Committee and ask for an immediate hearing on both bills. 
All addresses are House (or Senate) Office Building, Washington 25, D.C. 
Call the matter to the attention of your pastor. Write a letter to your local 
editor. Tell your friends. 
3 American Journal of Physiology, April 1952, pp. 249-253. 
4 New York Times magazine section, Dec. 16, 1951. 
6 American Journal of Physiology, vol. 146, p. 262, 1946, 
3 Ibid., August 1958, 
