About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

14 Info. Rep.: Animal Welfare Inst. 1 (1965)

handle is hein.animal/awiqu0014 and id is 1 raw text is: LIFO MIllION ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE 22 EAST 17th STREET, NEW YORK, N. Y. 10003 January-February, 1965 Yol. 14, No. I SENATORS CLARK, BARTLETT, BYRD, MUSKIE AND YOUNG SPONSOR HUMANE TREATMENT BILL Senator Joseph S. Clark of Pennsylvania, chief sponsor of the Senate bill to require humane treatment of experi- mental animals in the Eighty-Eighth and Eighty-Ninth Congresses, reintroduced his bill on February ninth. He -was&4oined by Senator E. L. Bartlett of Alaska, Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia, Senator Edmund S. Muskie of Maine, and Senator Stephen M. Young of Ohio. The bill, S. 1071, would provide humane treatment for all animals used in experiments and tests by the Federal Government and by institutions receiving grants from the Federal Gov- ernment. (For the full text of Senator Clark's remarks, see page 4.) The following editorial published by the Ann Arbor, Mick. News, March 6, 1965 expresses clearly the need for immediate passage of S. 1071. Belated Aid for Animals A minor phenomenon worthy of encouragement is tak- ing place in the U.S. Senate. Sens. Joseph S. Clark, D-Pa., and Harry F. Byrd, D-Va. -who seldom agree on political matters-have joined as co-sponsors of a bill. S.1071, introduced by Sen. Clark Feb. 9, is modeled on British law dating back to 1876, requiring humane treat- ment of vertebrate animals used in scientific research. This is not an antivivisection bill. I would not intro- duce or support any measure to outlaw or curtail research which is responsibly and humanely conducted, Sen. Clark comments. His bill, while recognizing that research involving ani- mals can not be made entirely painless, would set up com- mon sense rules for laboratories receiving federal funds. Scientists intending to use live animals in research would receive individual licenses which could be withdrawn from anyone responsible for inhumane treatment: There would be periodic, unannounced inspections by qualified persons with access to animal quarters, laboratory facilities and records: Adequately sized cages, periodic removal for exercise and cleaning, and proper feeding, would be required for animals held for research purposes. Animals suffering lasting pain following experiments would have to be put out of their agony instead of being used repeatedly for experiments. SEN. CLARK himself provides the best summary of why federal legislation on this subject is desirable. There is no need for a country as idealistic as the United States to condone the suffering which great num- bers of these animals undergo before they die. This need- less suffering does nothing to advance science or human welfare. . . . Research performed on unhealthy animals accopnpanied by unnecessary pain contributes to scientific error, wasted funds, confusion in scientific literature ... Research in the biological sciences now receives more support from the U.S. government than from any other source. It is our responsibility no longer to condone need- less suffering. Sen. Clark's bill is now in the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee, of which Sen. Lister Hill, D-Ala. is chairman. Last year, a similar bill died in committee because ani- mal dealers who favor the status quo demonstrated more interest than those who would like the bill passed. The fate of such proposals is one guideline by which American civilization can be judged. COMPANION BILL INTRODUCED BY CONGRESSMAN CLEVELAND Congressman James C. Cleveland (R., N.H.) introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on March second a bill identical to S. 1071. The number of Congressman Cleveland's bill is H.R. 5647. In introducing it he said: Humane protection for laboratory animals is a proper -concern for any civilized society. I have studied many proposals and am convinced my bill will provide standards of humane treatment without impairing legitimate research. It follows closely the guidelines established in England in 1876. That law is still in force today and has the ap- proval of the overwhelming majority of responsible British scientists. (Continued on page 2) NEW EDITION OF BASIC CARE OF EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS EMPHASIZES ANALGESICS A new edition of Basic Care of Experimental Animals is now in press. An important addition to this manual which is supplied free on request to scientific institutions by the Animal Welfare Institute, is a new chapter on the use of pre and post operative analgesics in experimental animal medicine. Written by a distinguished veterinarian who is experienced in both laboratory animal medicine and clinical practice of veterinary medicine, it will add to the humane and practical value of the manual. Basic Care for Experimental Animals is designed for animal caretakers. It may be ordered in quantity by scien- tists or administrators so that each technician or caretaker who has charge of animals may have his own copy. Re- quests for copies of the new edition may be sent now to the office of the Animal Welfare Institute, and the manuals will be mailed as soon as published. Chapter eight is re- printed below. THE USE OF PRE AND POST OPERATIVE ANALGESICS IN EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL MEDICINE by H. C. ESCHENROEDER, D.V.M. It is common practice in clinical veterinary medicine to use analgesic drugs before and after surgical anesthesia. The purpose of these drugs is to reduce the sensibility of the animal and hasten induction of anesthesia, as well as to cause a smooth recovery. It seems that these drugs should be used more than they are in experimental medi- cine and surgery. Many investigators are unfamiliar with the fact that these drugs are both scientifically advantageous and aid greatly in humane handling of animals. It is in- deed true that good scientific technique and humane treat- ment are so closely allied that they are almost inseparable. Some of the drugs useful as pre and post operative analgesics are the tranquilizers, (Sparine), the opiates (Morphine), and Atropine. The tranquilizers and opiates reduce conscious sensory perception and therefore alleviate fear and reduce the amount of intravenous or inhalant anesthesia needed to accomplish proper surgical depth. These drugs also reduce the severity and length of the excitement stage during the recovery periods. Many sur- gical endeavors can be nullified if the excitement stage during anesthetic recovery is not mitigated. Post-operative. What Can Caretakers Do? Atropine reduces secretion (i.e., saliva and bronchial mucous) and blocks secondary cardiac depressing effects of anesthesia. Care must be exercised when the analgesics are used, for they potentiate some anesthetic agents. Certain anal- (Continued on page 2) 41m

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most