Matthew Parris Matthew Parris

A moderate case for animal rights fanatics

issue 24 March 2012

My reaction last week, I suppose, will not be dissimilar from those of the majority of my readers. I growled. From my radio came a report about problems that British researchers were encountering with supplies of mice for medical experiments. Apparently anti-vivisectionists have been targeting the transport companies that bring supplies of mice from the Continent; and, having frightened the airlines off, were turning their attention to ferry companies, one of which had just decided to stop accepting lorries loaded with this living freight.

I growled because I don’t like bullying and intimidation and don’t approve of ‘direct action’, and because I’m sure that some animal experimentation is necessary if we are to develop drugs, procedures and products that are safe for human use. My mind is made up on this. Scientists have persuaded me. I’ve heard, read and now believe that circumstances arise where there is no inanimate substitute for this form of testing.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in