Chapter 1 
Summary, Policy Issues, and 
Options for Congressional Action 
• A former high school teacher in New York organizes demonstrations and advertising campaigns 
opposing the use of rabbits and rodents in two product-safety tests. Industry responds by giving 
several million dollars in grants to university scientists searching for alternatives to animal testing. 
• Researchers induce seizures in rats, draw their cerebrospinal fluid, and use it to quell seizures 
in other rats; the anticonvulsant substance produced during seizures could bear on the under- 
standing and treatment of epilepsy. 
• Industrial toxicologists in New Jersey adopt refined methods of testing potentially poisonous 
chemicals, reducing by 48 percent the number of animals used in acute toxicity studies and 
cutting the cost of compliance with government regulations. 
• A Virginia woman donates $1,250,000 to the University of Pennsylvania to establish the Nation ’s 
first endowed professorship in humane ethics and animal welfare. One of the goals of the chair 
is to investigate alternatives to animal experiments for medical research. 
• Members of the Animal Liberation Front break into a biomedical research laboratory in Califor- 
nia and remove dogs being used in a cardiac pacemaker experiment. 
• Veterinary students in Washington study principles of physiology without recourse to the tra- 
ditional dog dissection. Instead, they use a computer simulation of canine physiology. 
These recent events illustrate the complex po- 
litical; ethical, and economic issues raised by the 
use of animals in research; testing, and education. 
Concern about the continued use of animals has 
led to public calls for development of alternatives. 
The popular debate over animal use has been 
taken up by proponents holding a wide spectrum 
of views, ranging from belief in abolition of animal 
use on moral and ethical grounds to belief in free 
rein on the use of animals in research, testing, and 
education. An increasing number of groups are 
taking a middle ground. In the mid-1980s, it is 
misleading— and often impossible— to character- 
ize many vocal groups either as simply "pro-animal” 
or "pro-research.” 
In light of requests for “a scientific evaluation 
of alternative methods to animal research, experi- 
mentation, and testing” from the Chairman of the 
Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, 
Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), and from Senator 
Alan Cranston (D-CA), this assessment examines 
the reasons for seeking such alternatives and the 
prospects for developing them. It describes ani- 
mal and nonanimal methods used by industry, 
academia, and government agencies; explains the 
roles and requirements of government regulation 
and self -regulation of animal use; and identifies 
policy issues and options that the debate over alter- 
natives places before Congress. 
The report covers three kinds of animal use: 
research in the biomedical and behavioral sci- 
ences; testing of products for toxicity; and edu- 
cation of students at all levels, including the 
advanced life sciences, and medical and veteri- 
nary training. The use of animals in these three 
situations— research, testing, and education— dif- 
fers considerably, and each has different prospects 
for development of alternatives. 
The assessment excludes examination of the use 
of animals in food and fiber production; their use 
in obtaining organs, antibodies, and other biologi- 
cal products; and their use for sport, entertain- 
ment, and companionship. Such purposes include 
numbers of animals generally estimated to be many 
multiples greater than the numbers used for pur- 
poses described in this report (see ch. 3). Issues 
of animal care, such as feeding and maintenance, 
are also beyond the scope of this assessment. 
3 
