Letter: Vivisection truth

Joan Court
Saturday 05 December 1998 00:02 GMT
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.

Sir: Whether or not Barry Horne is regarded as a martyr - "one who undergoes death or suffering for any great cause" - is a matter of opinion ("Will this man be the first martyr of Middle England's animal rights movement?", 30 November). Campaigning for the abolition of vivisection is a great cause. But his demand for a Royal Commission, as promised by our craven government prior to the election is, I believe, both legitimate and at the same time unrealistic.

Mr Horne is not "black-mailing" the Government. The Government is betraying the electorate.

This Government would not risk mounting a Royal Commission because of what it would reveal about the pharmaceutical industry. There is big money involved.

I find it sad that the public believes that testing drugs on animals ensures, or helps to ensure, their safety. Animal experiments often mislead researchers and frequently lead to illness or death by failing to predict toxic effects. A Royal Commission would expose the appalling cost in human and animal suffering caused by the reliance on second-rate research methods, using animals because they are convenient and helpless.

JOAN COURT

Animal Rights, Cambridge

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