Vivisection: A ‘Moderate’ Proposal
1st February, 2003
The problem with vivisection, argues Derrick Jensen, is that we’re experimenting on the wrong sort of animals.
To the dismay of many of my friends, I’m not unalterably opposed to vivisection. In fact, I’d wholeheartedly support it were vivisectors to make one minor administrative change. It would be that scientists perform the experiments not on nonhumans but on themselves and their colleagues.
Scientists keep telling us how beneficial the experiments are for science with a capital ‘s’, progress with a capital ‘p’ and, of course, man with a capital ‘m’. If the experiments really are necessary with a capital ‘n’, the scientists should be willing to make this sacrifice (with a small ‘s’) for the greater good. In any case, according to no other than Lord Sainsbury, minister for innovation and science, advocate of genetic engineering and owner of a large supermarket chain, strict regulations ensure that experiments generally cause no more than ‘moderate’ suffering. If this is actually true, scientists shouldn’t object too much to throwing their hats into this ring.
Now, I’m sure you can spot the problem: there are too many important experiments for the number of vivisectors. In Europe alone an animal is killed in a laboratory...
To view the rest of this article - you must be a paying subscriber and Login
Using this website means you agree to us using simple cookies.