HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 323 
American Hospital Association, 
Washington, D.C., October 8, 1962. 
Hon. Kenneth Roberts, 
Chairman, Subcommittee on Health and Safety, 
U.S. House of Representatives, 
Washington, D.C. 
Dear Mr. Roberts : I wish to present the following comments of the American 
Hospital Association with respect to H.R. 1937 and H.R. 3556, 87th Congress. 
The association is deeply and properly concerned with these bills because of the 
profound effect of the use of animals on the association’s stated objective, “better 
hospital care for all the people.” Animal experimentation is basic to research — 
much of it done in hospitals — that has produced so many of our great medical 
advances. Also, large numbers of hospitals depend upon animal tests for proper 
patient care. While supporting the stated purpose of the legislation, the asso- 
ciation joins the vast majority of the scientific community in believing that the 
bills would materially and adversely affect medical research and hospital care in 
the United States. 
The association supports continued improvement in the care of animals in hos- 
pitals and medical laboratories. It believes there has been a steady improve- 
ment and that the voluntary accreditation program being developed by the Ani- 
mal Care Panel will be as successful in this field as the Joint Commission on 
Accreditation of Hospitals has been in voluntarily improving standards of care 
in hospitals. 
We do recognize the need for constant improvement in animal care as well as 
in human care. I am attaching an excerpt from the December 16, 1961, issue of 
Hospitals, Journal of the American Hospital Association which is devoted to the 
care of research animals in hospital laboratories. The legislation now being con- 
sidered by the subcommittee, however, can be construed as an indictment of 
scientists and doctors and the institutions where they work — our universities, 
our laboratories, and our hospitals. We believe any such condemnation is un- 
justified. 
The association’s board of trustees on February 2, 1962, recognized “that it is a 
responsibility of the States to assure proper treatment of animals used in medical 
research.” This can be done through inspection provisions in so-called pound 
laws. The laws prohibiting cruelty to animals provide sufficient authority to 
punish those responsible for inhumane treatment of animals. 
The association’s board of trustees also said at that time that “if the Federal 
Government has any responsibility in such matters (treatment of animals), it 
should be limited to developing acceptable standards through an advisory com- 
mittee composed of knowledgeable authorities and to recommending such stand- 
ards to the States for enforcement.” 
We respectfully suggest that this action by our association proposes a positive 
program by which the Federal Government would encourage the development of 
uniformly high standards in the provision of facilities for animals. 
We are particularly concerned with the requirement proposed for the filing of 
a project plan in a form to be prescribed by a Federal administrator. It is our 
belief that such a proposal would jeopardize the independent research which has 
done so much good for our people. We join with such groups as the American 
Medical Association, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the American 
Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Society for Medical Re- 
search, and the American Veterinary Medical Association which are committed to 
put forth their full efforts in accomplishing the desirable objectives of insuring 
the proper and humane treatment of experimental and test animals. 
We do not feel that the action proposed by the legislation under consideration 
is needed, and we are fearful that such legislation could impair effective medical 
research. 
We would appreciate your incorporating this statement and the enclosure in 
the hearings. 
Sincerely yours, 
Kenneth Williamson, 
Associate Director, American Hospital Association. 
Enclosure. 
