couldpassthis test.Admittedly,aswith anydividing line,
therewouldbeagrayareawhereitwasdifficulttodecideif
an experiment could be justified. But we need not get
distractedby suchconsiderations now.As this chapter has
shown, we are in the midst of an emergency in which
appallingsuffering isbeinginflictedonmillionsofanimals
for purposes that on any impartial view are obviously
inadequatetojustifythesuffering.Whenwehaveceasedto
carry out all those experiments, then there will be time
enough to discuss what to do about the remaining
oneswhichareclaimedtobeessentialtosavelivesorprevent
greater suffering.
IntheUnitedStates,wherethepresentlackofcontrolover
experimentationallowsthekindsofexperimentsdescribedin
the preceeding pages, a minimal first step would be a
requirementthat noexperimentbe conductedwithoutprior
approval from an ethics committee that includes animal
welfarerepresentativesandisauthorizedtorefuseapprovalto
experiments when it does not consider that the potential
benefitsoutweightheharmtotheanimals.Aswehaveseen,
systems of this kind already exist in countries such as
AustraliaandSwedenandareacceptedasfairandreasonable
bythescientificcommunitythere.Onthebasisoftheethical
argumentsinthisbook,suchasystemfallsfarshortofthe
ideal.Theanimalwelfarerepresentativesonsuchcommittees
come fromgroups thathold a spectrum ofviews, but, for
obviousreasons,thosewhoreceiveandacceptinvitationsto
joinanimalexperimentationethicscommitteestendtocome
fromthelessradicalgroupswithinthemovement.Theymay
notthemselvesregardtheinterestsofnonhumananimalsas
entitledtoequalconsiderationwiththeinterestsofhumans;
oriftheydoholdsuchaposition,theymayfinditimpossible