This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Rollin Odell, Jr, MD
Samuel Merritt Hospital Oakland, Calif

JAMA. 1986;256(24):3347.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Dr Wyngaarden's recent editorial¹ regarding the use of animals in biomedical research is narrowly focused, does not take into account the broad-based nature of support in the United States of radical animal rights groups, and smacks of an arrogance unbecoming to the medical profession. The recommendations made for countering animal rights advocates will only galvanize them into greater activity.

As a speaker for the American Cancer Society in California to numerous lay groups, I have been impressed by the skepticism of the general public toward medical "advances." They do not share the dream (or is it fantasy?) that increased knowledge of the human body will solve the problems of suffering and premature death. Indeed, there is a growing awareness that illness can only be understood within the broader context of the whole culture. Organ transplants, bypass surgery, and mood-controlling drugs are seen by many as mixed . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor; Sharon Iverson, Assistant Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?