[12]

The NSMR has been responsible for the propagation of a great deal of wrong information about the Cooper Bill for the humane treatment of experimental animals. Some of this wrong information has found its way into the Minneapolis Star in the article, 'Animal Bill Again Perils Research.'

The Cooper Bill is based on a law which has been in effect in Great Britain sonce 1876. The British scientific community was responsible for the passage of this law, and is still content to abide by it. British scientists do not feel that legislation regulating animal experimentation hampers their research, and indeed, British research is in the front rank. The Cooper bill is in many respects less stringent than the British law. And yet we hear that the Cooper bill would 'stifle research.' Some of this protest is no doubt due to misunderstanding of the language of the bill as it was last session. For instance many scientists wrongly construed Section III to mean that it would be necessary for scientists to obtain prior approval of research plans. What the Cooper Bill does require is that every scientist in federally finanved research should submit a research plan to the Secretary of HEW before undertaing experiments on animals. As soon as the scientist has submitted his research plan he is at liberty to proceed, and should he wish to change the direction of his research he has only to submit a further research plan, and he is again at liberty to proceed. It is a quest on whether a scientist who is so impetuous that he cannot sit down and write what he is going to do on a piece of paper and mail it before he begins an experiment has any place in government financed research.