photos she had taken inside the laboratory. The photos
showedGillettetestingnewformulationsofpinkandbrown
inksforitsPaperMatepensbyputtingthemintheeyesof
conscious rabbits. The inks turned out to be extremely
irritating,andcausedabloodydischargefromtheeyeinsome
rabbits.^119 Onecanonlyguessathowmanylaboratoriesthere
areinwhichtheabuseofanimalsisjustasbad,butnoone
has been courageous enough to do anything about it.
Whenareexperimentsonanimalsjustifiable?Uponlearning
ofthenatureofmanyoftheexperimentscarriedout,some
peoplereactbysayingthatallexperimentsonanimalsshould
beprohibitedimmediately.Butifwemakeourdemandsas
absoluteasthis,theexperimentershaveareadyreply:Would
webepreparedtoletthousandsofhumansdieiftheycould
be saved by a single experiment on a single animal?
This questionis, of course, purelyhypothetical. There has
neverbeenandnevercouldbeasingleexperimentthatsaved
thousands of lives. The way to reply to this hypothetical
question is to pose another: Would the experimenters be
preparedto carryout theirexperiment ona humanorphan
under six months old if that were the only way to save
thousands of lives?
Iftheexperimenterswouldnotbepreparedtouseahuman
infantthentheirreadinesstousenonhumananimalsreveals
anunjustifiableformofdiscriminationonthebasisofspecies,
since
adultapes,monkeys,dogs,cats,rats,andotheranimalsare
more aware of what is happening to them, more self-
directing,and,sofar aswecantell,atleastassensitiveto
pain as a human infant. (I have specified that the human