How Animal "Rights" Activists Are Trashing Science

ROBERT BOOT, HERSTON MEDICAL LIBRARY mail_boot at uqvax.cc.uq.oz.au
Sat Jul 17 07:11:43 EST 1993


In article <2289vcINNcul at darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, jdale at cats.ucsc.edu (Jonathan Dale) writes:
> 
> Well, I'm glad you posted this relevant and interesting talk that Franklin
> gave.  But I'm sorry to see that it is the same typical emotional, 
> grandstanding, empty type of argument that dominates all discussions about
> animal research.  

Much very sensible comment deleted.
 
> ---Jonathan Dale
>   (and of course I will be happy to post my own paper on the issue, 
>    especially on relevant criteria for ethical consideration, if
>    anyone is interested.  There are lots of interesting things to
>    say about this issue without calling each other Nazis.)

I, too, think that Franklin seriously weakened his argument with his allusions
to Nuremberg. I should be pleased to see your paper, Jonathan. If you don't
wish to post it, I should be happy to receive it by email.

Your comments about Singer are correct as I far as I remember. It is certainly
unfortunate that he is being made the scapegoat for animal rights activists,
although I, too, disagree with his assesment of the utilities.

Whatever the differences in detail & in priorities it is vitally important that
the public & politicians be better informed on these issues &, for that matter,
on the value of the scientific enterprise.
 
___________________________________________________________________________
ROBERT BOOT                                             R.BOOT at cc.uq.edu.au
HERSTON MEDICAL LIBRARY
The University of Queensland                       Telephone +61 7 365 5354
Brisbane Qld 4072  AUSTRALIA                       Facsimile +61 7 365 5243



More information about the Bioforum mailing list