Editor:

In her recent column (“Animal research is clearly worth it,” Dec. 1), Alicia Williams was so busy fearmongering over peaceful animal rights activists that many could’ve easily missed her weak arguments in defense of animal experimentation.

Her primary authority for her claims is U vice president of research, Tom Parks, who personally benefits from the animal research industry. Clearly, Parks and the vivisectors he speaks for have a vested interest in the matter. This is akin to asking Exxon about the harms and benefits of offshore drilling. Thus it should be no surprise that much of what she presented as fact in her column is actually fiction.

First, the numbers of animals used in research has continually climbed over the last few decades, not declined.

Second, it can be easily demonstrated that what drives the engine of animal research, even here at the U, is not scientific ingenuity, but moneymaking.

And finally, the dogs, cats and monkeys here at the U and elsewhere in the country suffer absolutely miserable lives in labs. They live in environmentally deprived conditions and are forced to undergo experiments that we have deemed too cruel and unusual to be carried out on consenting humans. The long history of cruelty inside vivisection labs is well-documented, as is the history of the efforts of the labs to maximize secrecy and avoid public scrutiny.

Jeremy Beckham,
Senior, History and Philosophy