HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 315 
small staff (perhaps 10) of field inspectors, 1 or 2 veterinarians, and the neces- 
sary clerical force. 
We estimate that the total cost of such a unit, including travel expense and the 
cost of use of computers and data processing machinery, would be well under 
$400,000 a year. It might easily be substantially lower, depending upon the 
cooperation received from other Government agencies. 
Since the Federal Government is granting funds for medical research cur- 
rently at the rate of more than $1 billion a year, the estimated cost of operation 
and administration of H.R. 3556 would be only four ten-thousandths, or four- 
tenths of 1 percent, of the funds being given away and spent. 
Most certainly the operation of H.R. 3556 would save many multiples of that 
amount of money for the taxpayers, besides preventing cruelty and suffering. 
Statement of Mb. Joseph Wood Kkutch 
In every civilized country wanton cruelty to animals is forbidden by law. No 
persons should be exempt from such laws or from the provisions which make 
them effective. Those who, as a matter of routine, are engaged in experiments 
involving even necessary cruelty, inevitably become somewhat insensitive to 
suffering. Law should effectively remind them that to inflict pain, either un- 
necessarily or for any purpose not serious and urgent, is barbarous. 
Statement of C. Ladd Prossek 
The following statement is for hearing record concerning the Moulder and 
Griffiths bill (H.R. 3556 and H.R. 1937). I am a professor of physiology at the 
University of Illinois with more than 30 years’ experience in physiology lab- 
oratories. I am the past president of the Society of General Physiologists and 
of the American Society of Zoologists. I believe that my experience qualifies 
me to give a valid opinion of these bills. I should be very pleased to be per- 
mitted to testify at an open hearing on these bills should this be desired by the 
committee. 
Why should there be experimentation on animals? The immediate practical 
applications in medicine are well known ; for example, the development of 
immunization against polio, the discovery of insulin, the development of many 
surgical operations. In agriculture much has been accomplished in livestock 
improvement by endocrinological, genetic, and nutritional experiments on do- 
mestic animals. Similar advances are being made in fisheries research. Mod- 
ern agriculture could not have reached its present state without much experi- 
mentation on chemical control of insects. Certainly human life has been 
prolonged and made more pleasant as a result of animal experimentation. An- 
other very important justification is the extension of frontiers of knowledge, 
learning the nature of life itself. It is certainly as important to understand 
the intimate processes of living organisms as to learn what is in outer space. 
Granted the need for animal experimentation, is there need for the proposed 
regulatory legislation ? In my 30 years in laboratories I have never seen willful 
cruelty. In our own laboratory, as in others, a printed code for humane treat- 
ment of animals is displayed. Our students are trained to use anesthetics or 
in terminal experiments to dispatch the animal promptly and painlessly. Every 
experimenter wants to study life precesses under as nearly normal conditions 
as possible. Results obtained from animals in pain would have little validity. 
Our scientific journals of physiology, pharmacology and zoology carefully screen 
papers for the methods used. Many zoologists, and physiologists enter the 
profession because they are fond of animals and have a sincere desire to learn 
more about them. Many are motivated by a desire to make discoveries which 
will relieve human suffering. The proponents of the proposed bills have quoted 
sentences from published papers as evidence of cruelty. Usually these are 
quoted out of context and are thus misleading and erroneous. My conclusion 
is that these bills should not be enacted until real need for them is demonstrated 
and that such need does not now exist. 
Are the proposed bills practical and will they help American science? The 
requirement of prior approval of specific research use of animals in advance 
of an experiment would prohibit the day-to-day planning which is so essential 
91142 — 6 ! 
-21 
