Letter: Animal rights and wrongs

Vincent Vere
Saturday 06 November 1999 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

YOUR PRO-VIVISECTION correspondents (Letters, 31 October) seem to assume that if vivisection has benefited humans or other animals, that justifies it. It doesn't. The kernel of the anti-vivisection argument is that it is wrong to subject individual creatures (human or other), without their consent, to experimental procedures that are not in their own interests, even if benefit may follow for humans and others generally. It is just as wrong to use helpless, unconsenting animals as it would be to use helpless, unconsenting humans, such as babies or morons.

Animals are used in preference to humans only because the pro-human voice is, so far, more powerful than the pro-animal voice. Scientists have the animals at their mercy but they are afraid to use humans, who, for most of their purposes, would be far better models.

Brian Furman suggests that anti-vivisectionists should refuse treatments that were developed using experimental animals. But we are not all heroes: espousal of a cause is not necessarily a call to martyrdom.

RUARC GAHAN

Hollywood, Co Wicklow

IF IT is OK to experiment on animals for the benefit of people, is it OK to experiment on people for the benefit of animals?

VINCENT VERE

Richmond, Surrey

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in