on medical and scientific grounds.
We've all been raised to believe that animal research is scientific
and apparently responsible for medical progress. However, there are
many doctors and medical researchers that explain otherwise. You will
rarely see or hear the views of these scientists in the mass-media
because they directly threaten the profits of one of the largest sources
of media advertising revenue ie. the pharmaceutical/chemical industries.
The mass-media rarely publishes information that threatens the interests
of their advertisers. The reference for
these quotes is further below.

"The reason why I am against animal research
is because it doesn't work, it has no scientific value and every
good scientist knows that."
Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., 1986, Head
of the Liscensing Board for the State of Illinois, paediatrician &
gynaecologist for 30 years, medical columnist & best-selling author,
recipient of numerous awards for excellence in medicine.

"Since there is no way to defend the
use of animal model systems in plain English or with scientific
facts, they resort to double-talk in technical jargon...The virtue
of animal model systems to those in hot pursuit of the federal
dollar is that they can be used to prove anything--no matter how
foolish, or false, or dangerous this might be. There is such a
wide variation in the results of animal model systems that there
is always some system which will "prove" a point....The moral
is that animal model systems not only kill animals, they also
kill humans. There is no good factual evidence to show that the
use of animals in cancer research has led to the prevention or
cure of a single human cancer."
Dr. D.J. Bross, Ph.D., 1982, former
director of the largest cancer research institute in the world, the
Sloan-Kettering Institute, then Director of Biostatics, Roswell Memorial
Institute, Bufallo, NY.

"Practically all animal experiments are
untenable on a statistical scientific basis, for they possess
no scientific validity or reliability. They merely perform an
alibi for pharmaceutical companies, who hope to protect themselves
thereby."
Herbert Stiller, M.D. & Margot Stiller M.D.,
1976.

"Like every member of my profession,
I was brought up in the belief that almost every important fact
in physiology had been obtained by vivisection and that many of
our most valued means of saving life and diminishing suffering
had resulted from experiments on the lower animals. I now know
that nothing of the sort is true concerning the art of surgery:
and not only do I not believe that vivisection has helped the
surgeon one bit, but I know that it has often led him astray."
Prof. Lawson Tait, M.D., 1899, Fellow
of the Royal College of Surgeons (F.R.C.S.), Edinburgh & England.
Hailed as the most distinguished surgeon of his day, the originator
of many of surgery's modern techniques, and recipient of numerous
awards for medical excellence.

"Vivisection is barbaric, useless, and
a hindrance to scientific progress. I learned how to operate from
other surgeons. It's the only way, and every good surgeon knows
that."
Dr. Werner Hartinger, 1988, surgeon
of thirty years, President of German League of Doctors against Vivisection
(GLDAV)

"Atrocious medical experiments are being
done on children, mostly physically and handicapped ones, and
on aborted foetuses, given or sold to laboratories for experimental
purposes. This is a logical development of the practice of vivisection.
It is our urgent task to accelerate its inevitable downfall."
Prof. Pietro Croce, M.D., 1988, internationally
renowned researcher, former vivisector.

"Normally, animal experiments not only
fail to contribute to the safety of medications, but they even
have the opposite effect."
Prof. Dr. Kurt Fickentscher, 1980, of
the Pharmacological Institute of the University of Bonn, Germany.

"Experiments on animals lead inevitably
to experiments on people...As if an animal experiment could ever
predict the same result on a person. And as if an experiment on
one human being could enable us to foresee the reactions of another
human being, whose biology and metabolism are different, whose
blood pressure is different, whose lifestyle and age and nourishment
and sensitivity and genes and everything else are different...We
recognise that each single organism, whether human or animal,
has its very own reactions...Today's orthodox medicine and suppressive
surgery don't understand the purpose of disease and therefore
don't know how to treat it. A real doctor's experience derives
from his natural intuition coupled with his observation at the
sickbed, but never from invasive, violent experiments on people,
and much less on animals. Instead of vital hygiene, which aims
at preservation or reconstruction of health by natural means and
shuns all use of degrading, destructive chemicals, today"s medical
students are only taught to manipulate poisons and mutilate bodies.
We demand that this be changed."
Prof. Andre Passebecq, M.D., N.D., D.Psyc.,
1989, Faculty of Medicine of Paris, then President of the International
League of Doctors Against Vivisection.

"Giving cancer to laboratory animals
has not and will not help us to understand the disease or to treat
those persons suffering from it."
Dr. A. Sabin, 1986, developer of the
oral polio vaccine.

"Not only are the studies themselves
often lacking even face value, but they also drain badly needed
funds away from patient care needs."
Dr. Neal Barnard, M.D., 1987, President
of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), Washington.

"All our current knowledge of
medicine and surgery derives from observations of man following
especially the anatomical-clinical method introduced by Virchow:
symptoms of the patient while alive and the alterations found in
the dead body. These observations have led us to discover the connection
between smoking and cancer, between diet and arteriosclerosis, between
alcohol and cirrhosis, and so on. Even the RH factor was not discovered
on the macasus rhesus. The observations of Banting and Best on diabetes,
attributed to experiments on dogs, were already well-known.
Every discovery derives from
observations on humans, which are subsequently duplicated in animals,
and whenever the findings happen to concur, their discovery is attributed
to animal experimentation. Everything we know today in medicine
derives from observations made on human beings. The ancient Romans
and Greeks gained most of their knowledge from epidemiological studies
of people.
The same goes for surgery.
Surgery can't be learned on animals. Animals are anatomically completely
different from man, their reactivity is completely different, their
structure and resistance are completely different. In fact, exercises
on animals are misleading. The surgeon who works a lot on animals
loses the sensibility necessary for operating on humans."
Prof. Bruno Fedi, M.D., 1986, Director
of the City Hospital of Terni, Italy, anatomist, pathologist, specialist
in urology, gynaecology and cancerology.

"My own conviction is that the study
of human physiology by way of experimenting on animals is the
most grotesque and fantastic error ever committed in the whole
range of human intellectual activity."
Dr. G.F. Walker, 1933.
"Why am I against vivisection? The most
important reason is because it's bad science, producing a lot of
misleading and confusing data which pose hazards to human health.
It's also a waste of taxpayer's dollars to take healthy animals
and artificially and violently induce diseases in them that they
normally wouldn't get, or which occur in different form, when we
already have the sick people who can be studied while they're being
treated."
Dr. Roy Kupsinel, M.D., 1988, medical
magazine editor, USA.

"It is well known that animal effects are
often totally different from the effects on people. This applies
to substances in medical use as well as substances such as 245y
and dioxin."
Dr. A.L.Cowan, M.D., 1985, Acting Medical
Officer of Health, New Plymouth, N. Z.

"The growing opposition to vivisection
is understandable both on ethical and biological counts. However,
a certain scientistic culture says they serve to save human lives.
But reality is quite the opposite. Let"s take the case of pesticides.
These dangerous products, used in agriculture, are classified according
to their acute toxicity, graduated with the Lethal Dose 50% tests
on animals. This represents not only a useless sacrifice of animals,
but it"s an alibi that enables the chemical industry to sell products
which are classified as harmless or almost harmless, but are in
reality very harmful in the long run, even if taken in small doses.
Many pesticides classified as belonging to the fourth category,
meaning they can be sold and used freely, have turned out to be
carcinogenic or mutagenic or capable of harming the fetus. Also
in this case, animal tests are not only ambiguous, but they serve
to put on the market products of which any carcinogenic effect will
be ascertained only when used by human beings--the real guinea-pigs
of the multinationals. And yet there are laboratory tests that can
be used, which are cheaper and quicker than animal tests; in vitro
tests on cell cultures, which have been proving their worth for
years already. But the interests of the chemical industries which
foist on us new products in all fields may not be questioned."
Prof. Gianni Tamino, 1987, biologist
at Padua University, a Congressman in the Italian Parliament.

"Animal model systems differ from their
human counterparts. Conclusions drawn from animal research, when
applied to human beings, are likely to delay progress, mislead,
and do harm to the patient. Vivisection, or animal experimentation,
should be abolished."
Dr. Moneim Fadali, M.D., 1987, F.A.C.S.,
Diplomat American Board of Surgery and American Board of Thoracic
Surgery, UCLA faculty, Royal College of Surgeons of Cardiology, Canada.

"Experiments have never been the means
for discovery; and a survey of what has been attempted of late years
in physiology will prove that the opening of living animals has
done more to perpetuate error than to confirm the just views taken
from the study of anatomy and natural motions."
Sir Charles Bell, M.D., 1824, F.R.C.S.,
discoverer of "Bell's Law" on motor and sensory nerves.

"Experiments on animals do not only mean
torture and death for the animals, they also mean the killing of
people. Vivisection is a double-edged sword."
Major R.F.E.Austin, M.D.,1927, Royal
College of Surgeons, Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians.

Cawadias (1953) has said that:
"The history of medicine has shown that,
whenever medicine has strayed from clinical observation, the result
has been chaos, stagnation and disaster."
(British Medical Journal, 8/10/1955).

For more statements by doctors against animal experimentation
see the article
The International Congress
Of Doctors Against Vivisection and more articles available via
the medical/health index page.
