364 HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 
University of Maryland, 
College Park, September 27, 1962. 
The effect of the proposed legislation would have extensive inhibitory effects 
both on the effective training of future scientists and on essentially all phases 
of research of developmental zoology. The properties and influencing factors 
on living systems can only be investigated by the use of a living system. Currently 
in my laboratory, it is essential that fish, amphibians, birds, and small mammals 
be freely available for study. They are used with due respect that they are living 
animals and entitled humane treatment. The restriction on use of these animals 
at the present time could affect facets of research related to each of the follow- 
ing : the origin and genesis of natural immunity ; the surgical transplantation of 
substitute tissue ; the effect of long-term gravitational stress and the mapping and 
possible function of certain poorly understood elements of the nervous system. 
I am fundamentally opposed to the obstruction of the use of lower animal by 
qualified investigators whose primary dedication is the enforcement of the 
knowledge of life and the ultimate betterment of that life. 
Gordon M. Ramm, 
Associate Professor of Zoology. 
American Medical Association, 
Chicago, III., September 28, 1962. 
Hon. Kenneth A. Roberts, 
Chairman, Subcommittee on Health and Safety. 
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, 
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 
Dear Mr. Roberts : The following statement is submitted on behalf of the 
American Medical Association with respect to H.R. 1937 and H.R. 3556, 87th 
Congress. 
The American Medical Association endorses the laudable, very acceptable, 
stated purpose of these bills, namely, “to provide for the humane treatment of 
animals used in experiments and tests * * However, we consider the bills 
now under consideration by your subcommittee objectionable and likely to cause 
serious interference with, and irreparable harm to, the conduct of highly impor- 
tant research. 
The measures provide for procedures which will adversely affect research. 
Although the legislation applies only to research performed under Government 
support, inasmuch as federally supported research accounts for the majority of 
medical and biological research now being done, its impact would be extremely 
serious. 
Perhaps the most serious provision of this legislation is the requirement 
that all research plans be filed in such form as the Secretary of Health, Educa- 
tion, and Welfare might prescribe, describing the nature and purposes of the 
project and the procedures to be employed. Research is by its very nature not 
completely predictable. It proceeds step by step, each step depending on the 
results of the preceding step. Since succeeding steps may alter the procedures, 
nature, and purposes of the project at unpredictable intervals, the foregoing 
requirement would result in confusion, delay, frustration, inefficiency, failure to 
follow promising leads, and the eventual abandonment of many valuable proj- 
ects. If an investigator knew in advance ail the steps to be taken, he would 
be making demonstrations, not pursuing research. 
The people of our Nation enjoy the highest standards of medical care in the 
world. This is one of the direct results of the world leadership of the United 
States in medical research. Most medical and biological research depends on 
the use of animals in experiments and tests. Animals have benefited quite as 
much from research as humans with the conquest of such deadly maladies as 
hepatitis, cholera, and rabies. Virtually all medical advances — antibiotics, hor- 
mones, vaccines, new surgical procedures — trace directly to animal experimen- 
tation. Scientists, before all others, must be concerned with the humane treat- 
ment of animals, because any deviation may well vitiate the experiment and 
the result. 
These bills do not reflect the actual methods and procedures used in research, 
particularly medical and biological research. This legislation implies a shock- 
ing and unjustified indictment of scientists and doctors which is unwarranted. 
The implication of the proposals is that, far from being concerned with bring- 
ing possible relief and benefit to mankind, and indeed to animals, such physicians 
