An ethical problem; or, Sidelights upon scientific experimentation on man and animalsLeffingwell, Albert
Philosophy
An ethical problem; or, Sidelights upon scientific experimentation on man and animals
Leffingwell, Albert
Medicine, Experimental; Vivisection
A considerable amount of testimony was devoted to the alleged
painfulness of vivisection. It is the great problem. If the absence
of sensation were a certainty in all operations of the kind, there
would be no reasonable objection to them, no matter to what extent
they might be carried. The physiologists of the present day occupy a
somewhat different attitude from those of half a century ago, or of
yet later periods. Thirty years ago, one of the leading experimenters
in England declared that he had "no regard at all" for the pain
inflicted upon a vivisected animal; that he never used anaesthetics
except when necessary for personal convenience; and that he had "no
time, so to speak, for thinking what the animal will suffer." We find
no such profession of indifference in the testimony of modern
physiologists. What seems to take its place is, in many cases, a
denial of the existence of pain in the experimentation of the present
day. Does anything here turn upon a definition of words? A professor
at King's College, London, giving his testimony, affirmed that "no
student in England has EVER SEEN PAIN in an animal experiment"--a
statement which in one sense everyone can accept, for who can say that
he ever SAW a pain anywhere? Professor Starling, of the University
College in London, declared that during his seventeen years of
experimentation "on no occasion HAVE I EVER SEEN PAIN inflicted in any
experiment on dog, cat, or rabbit in a physiological laboratory in
this country." The experimenter is undoubtedly correct. Neither he
nor anyone else in or out of a laboratory has ever "SEEN PAIN."
Some of Dr. Starling's testimony on the subject of pain is very
curious. Pain, he tells the Commissioners, "would spoil the
experiment," and "A PHYSIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT WHICH IS PAINFUL IS
THEREBY A BAD EXPERIMENT." He is asked whether "there are any
operations performed under circumstances in which the animal is
necessarily and intentionally sensitive to some pain?" Without any
apparent hesitation he replied: "NO, NEVER." Surely this is a
remarkable assertion. He is not speaking, so far as one can see, of
his own laboratory, but of all the laboratories of the world. If,
since the discovery of anaesthesia over sixty years ago, there has
been painful physiological experimentation in England, in America, or
on the Continent of Europe, IT HAS BEEN BAD EXPERIMENTATION. THE PAIN
INFLICTED HAS SPOILED THEIR WORK. One may not be inclined to dispute
this opinion, and yet be quite certain that some very eminent
vivisectors in Europe and America would question its accuracy so far
as their own work is concerned.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account