320 HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 
mals must receive humane treatment. In most dental schools, an infraction of 
this rule is sufficient reason for instant dismissal of either employee or student. 
The professions rarely encounter such infractions and when they do occur, the 
strongest steps are taken to prevent recurrence. Such action is not taken because 
of the existence of laws but because of purely ethical, humanitarian, and scien- 
tific considerations. 
The proper care and treatment of animals is of utmost importance to the 
scientist. The success of his experiments depends in many cases upon his having 
animals that are in the best of health, and the scientist, therefore, above all 
others, is aware of the importance of good care and handling of his experimental 
subjects. 
Although there is no question that existing standards and practices relating 
to the care and treatment of laboratory animals are high, the association is 
supporting the efforts of the Animal Care Panel to develop a guide for the 
further improvement of animal facilities and care. This activity by the Animal 
Care Panel recognizes that there may be a need for standardizing the operation 
of animal research facilities, and without the prod of legislation, through 
voluntary action, investigators are completing the development of adequate 
norms for the housing, feeding, and handling of experimental animals. With 
support of this type of activity the objectives of H.R. 1937 and H.R. 3556 can 
be achieved without the cumbersome, costly, and unnecessary regulatory and 
administrative mechanism which enactment of either bill would entail. 
The association believes firmly that enactment of H.R. 1937 or H.R. 3556 
actually would impede vital research and drain the already short supply of 
competent investigators. 
In addition to the large and costly administrative agency that would be 
required to be established in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 
the bills would require endless recordkeeping and paperwork by the institutions 
and individuals engaged in health research. This could not help but detract 
seriously from the important and major job of carrying on health research 
for the betterment of mankind. Nor is there any assurance that establishment 
of standards, regulations, and a vast licensing mechanism would prevent the 
very few and inevitable infractions that now occur. There is also the real and 
serious question of obtaining the competent personnel necessary to formulate 
and apply standards, inspect facilities, and determine the qualifications of 
applicants. At a time when health research personnel are in extremely short 
supply, where are qualified people to be found? If the program should fall 
under the control or influence of certain emotional groups now prominent in 
urging enactment of the legislation, it is not unlikely that health research in this 
country would be brought to a standstill. 
The relief of pain and the prevention and treatment of oral disease, which 
are the prime responsibilities of the dental profession, require continuing re- 
search. Much of that research must be conducted with laboratory animals in 
order to establish the effectiveness and safety of a new procedure before it is 
applied to human patients. Fundamental research, preceding the applied re- 
search that produce improvements in treatment and prevention, usually requires 
the use of animals to study the basic structures and the processes that go on 
in the human body. To deny scientists the freedom to experiment with 
animals in this connection is to deny mankind the benefits of a healthier and 
more productive existence. 
It should be noted that one effect of enactment of H.R. 3556 would be to halt 
research in the field of oral diseases. Under section 10(a) of the bill a doctor 
of dentistry would not even be eligible to receive a letter of qualification to use 
animals in research. While this exclusion in the bill may be inadvertent, it 
may also be indicative of a lack of understanding of the health research being 
conducted in this country. 
It is the conclusion of the American Dental Association that enactment of 
H.R. 1937 or H.R. 3556 would handicap scientific investigation. The legislation 
would prevent the performance of studies on the control of pain, on healing and 
on therapeutic measures that may in the long run prove to be of extreme benefit 
to society. It is based upon the false premise that mistreatment of animals is 
condoned and practiced by health research workers. 
The American Dental Association therefore urges the chairman and members 
of the committee to reject H.R. 1937 and H.R. 3556. 
