Skip to main content
Log in

Animal experimentation: the continuing debate

  • Science and Society
  • Published:

From Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

View current issue Sign up to alerts

Abstract

The use of animals in research and development has remained a subject of public debate for over a century. Although there is good evidence from opinion surveys that the public accepts the use of animals in research, they are poorly informed about the way in which it is regulated, and are increasingly concerned about laboratory-animal welfare. This article will review how public concerns about animal experimentation developed, the recent activities of animal-rights groups, and the opportunities and challenges facing the scientific community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1: Protesting against Huntingdon Life Sciences.

References

  1. French, R. D. Antivivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lederer, S. E. in Vivisection in Historical Perspective (ed. Rupke, N. A.) 236–258 (Croon Helm Ltd, Beckenham, Kent, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Regan, T. The Case for Animal Rights (Univ. California Press, Berkeley, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Matfield, M. The ALF: terrorist attacks on medical research. Scand. J. Lab. Anim. Sci. 23, 31–35 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Matfield, M. Addressing the two basic questions — is it necessary and is it cruel? Res. Def. Soc. News 8–9 (April 1996).

  6. Coghlan, A., Copley, J. & Aldhous, P. Let the people speak. New Scientist 26–31 (22 May 1999).

  7. Davies, B. In-depth survey of public attitudes shows surprising degree of acceptance. Res. Def. Soc. News 8–11 (April 2000).

  8. Davies, B. Hillgrove farm closes down. Res. Def. Soc. News 1 (October 1999).

  9. Anon. Lessons from Huntingdon. Nature 409, 439 (2001).

  10. Davies, B. Government gets tough on animal rights extremism. Res. Def. Soc. News 1–3 (April 2001).

  11. Anon. Animal-lab director injured in attack. Nature 410, 8 (2001).

  12. Morrison, A. R. in Animal Research and Human Health: Advancing Human Welfare Through Behavioral Science (eds Carroll, M. E. & Jovermier, J. B.) 361–384 (American Psychological Association, Washington, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Guillermo, K. S. Monkey Business: the Disturbing Case that Launched the Animal Rights Movement (National Press Books, Washington, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Liepert, J., Bauder, H., Miltner, W. H. R., Taub, E. & Weiller, C. Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke 31, 1210–1216 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Related links

Related links

FURTHER INFORMATION

The American Physiological Society

American Psychological Society

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Americans for Medical Progress

Animals in Medicines Research Information Centre

Association of Medical Research Charities

Biomedical Research Education Trust

Foundation for Biomedical Research

Research Defence Society

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Seriously Ill for Medical Research

Society for Neuroscience

UKLSC Animal Science Group

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Matfield, M. Animal experimentation: the continuing debate. Nat Rev Drug Discov 1, 149–152 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd727

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd727

  • Springer Nature Limited

Navigation