Madam, - "Should we experiment on animals?" Asks Dr Williaqm Reville (June 19th), who proceeds to answer with a definitive "Yes". I would like to offer a different opinion.
Experiments on animals may provide clues as to how a drug may behave when administered to humans, but they can never provide definitive results because drugs will generally cause widely differing reactions among different types of animals. Modern science abounds in examples of drugs that were tested safe on certain animal species yet when released onto the market caused unexpected and sometimes catastrophic results (witness Thalidomide, for example).
The great moral question remains: do we humans have the right to experiment on animals? There is little point citing (as Dr Reville appears to do) the history of human exploitation of animals as comforting proof that it is ethically acceptable to do so. Many former practices now abolished (slavery, withholding the right to vote from women, for example) were at the time deemed morally defensible by a majority of people. The point being, ethical positions alter as we become better educated, more cultured, more compassionate.
In time, our maltreatment of tens of billions of animals during the 20th and 21st centuries will be seen for what it was: a dark age in human/animal relationships, during which ethics were set aside, as the most hideous and callous practices continued unabated, unchecked and undebated. At least Dr Reville, in writing his piece, provides a rare forum for debate. - Yours, etc.,
GERRY BOLAND, Animals in Crisis, Keadue, Co Roscommon.