his century that legislative efforts were successful.
One of the greatest problems that opponents of animal research face is that of the pragmatic achievements of the researchers. For example, researchers could point to the discovery of diphtheria toxin in 1894 and say that it was animal experimentation that made the discovery possible. Although the research opponents attacked on scientific grounds and suggested research alternatives, the scientists were able to cite instances where the use of animals greatly speeded up important discoveries. A side benefit realized by the researchers is that because they were coming under attack, the researchers were forced to become more organized in the work and united in defending against the antivivisectionists.
During the 1970s and 1980s, the American public has become increasingly skeptical of scientific research in general, and that based on animal studies in particular. Nonscientific opponents to research have become skilled in using the media, and in finding financial and political support. They have also learned how to present alternative research methods and how to challenge the necessity and validity of research protocols. A wide variety of professionals participate in the efforts to limit or abolish animal research, and the skills that they bring to the debate greatly help their cause.
Of even greater interest than the wide variety of nonscientists involved in the debate is the number of scientists now challenging the use of animals. During the late 1970s and early 1980s, a record number of conferences were held regarding the use of animals in research (Dresser 1151). This development is especially important when one considers the amount of influence scientists have wielded in defense of animal research.
There are two common research tests that opponents of animal research use to illustrate the cruelty and futility of such testing. These are the LD-50 test and the ...