Experience gained from a previous enquiry on this subject in human tuberculosis led to the belief that much information might be derived from an investigation of the complement fixation reaction in animals experimentally infected with tubercle bacilli. Accurate dosage can be measured and the true path of infection is definitely known. Various enquiries were suggested and investigated by the detailed examination of rabbits and guinea-pigs; the latter class of rodents were used in batches of six to twelve in number, as otherwise the individual differences between animals in the same group of experiments are entirely overlooked. My cultures of the human tubercle bacillus were obtained by inoculating guinea-pigs with the sputum from typical cases of pulmonary tuberculosis at the Brompton Hospital Sanatorium at Frimley. Pure cultures of the bacillus were obtained from the infected guinea-pigs and cultivated on Dorset's egg medium, so that within a period varying from 14 to 21 days an abundant growth was obtained. The culture of the bovine bacillus was supplied to me by Professor Delépine who obtained it directly from the tissues of an infected cow, and subcultures were kept going on Dorset's egg medium. In every experiment without exception the animals were infected with definitely known quantities of the human or bovine bacillus. These were obtained by carefully scraping the growth off the surface of the egg medium and weighing it on sterile platinum foil, while in some cases (for comparison) a portion of the growth was dried in a desiccator before it was weighed. The untreated or dried bacilli were then shaken in a known quantity of sterile saline, so that a perfect emulsion free from clumps was obtained. The bacilli were kept in the dark in brown stoppered bottles and were always employed within a few days of their preparation.

The purpose of this article is to show that animal rights are not necessarily at odds with the use of animals for research. If animals hold basic moral rights similar to those of humans, then we should consequently extend the ethical requirements guiding research with humans to research with animals. The article spells out how this can be done in practice by applying the seven requirements for ethical research with humans proposed by Ezekiel Emanuel, David Wendler, and Christine Grady to animal research. These requirements are (1) social value, (2) scientific validity, (3) independent review, (4) fair subject selection, (5) favorable risk–benefit ratio, (6) informed consent, and (7) respect for research subjects. In practice, this means that we must reform the practice of animal research to make it more similar to research with humans, rather than completely abolish the former. Indeed, if we ban animal research altogether, then we would also deprive animals of its potential benefits—which would be ethically problematic.

Many of the improvements in the welfare of laboratory animals over the last 10 or so years have come about through the application of the principles of the 3 Rs: replacement, reduction and refinement, originally put forward in 1959 by Russell and Burch. More recently the term alternatives is being used to mean, in a precise sense, replacement and less precisely all three of the Rs. Application of these principles has resulted in a decrease in the number of animals used and a lessening of the amount of suffering. These developments have been welcomed by the scientific community and the legislators as well as by animal welfarists.

In August 1995 the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Training (ANZCCART) held a two-day conference in Wellington, New Zealand on Farm Animals in Biomedical and Agricultural Research. The 14 papers together with their edited discussions - see advertisement on page 338 for details - have now been published. The material ranges from a keynote address on farm animals in biomedical and agricultural research, through to an ANZCCART student award paper on in vitro fertilization technologies in animals and humans, to discussions on consciousness and awareness in farm animals and on human accountability regarding animal use.

Over the last few years the biomedical research community, in response to numerous attacks from animal welfare and anti animal-usage groups, has produced a number of popular and semi popular leaflets and booklets defending animal-based research. The two publications considered here are typical examples of the material that has been produced. ‘Animals and the Advancement of Science’, a booklet from the British Association for the Advancement of Science, is a systematic expansion of the six point declaration on animal experimentation originally put forward at the Annual Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1990. Amongst other things, it lists and briefly discusses a number of medical discoveries that were largely dependent on the study of animals and it claims that research using animals is essential to the understanding of disease processes and in the development and testing of new treatments. ‘Understanding Animal Research’ is a booklet in a less formal style, which has been sponsored by the Animals in Medical Research Information Centre and has been paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. It covers in essence the same ground as the British Association's booklet but in a more popular manner.

Background: Informed consent is not always possible in emergency research particularly during life threatening situations. Deferral of consent is an acceptable method in consenting patients; however, it is underutilized. We aim to share our experience with deferred consent. Methods: Participants in two prospective studies underwent a CT-Perfusion scan (intervention) at the time of first hospital imaging, in order not to impact clinical treatment. Deferred consent was then obtained. The primary outcome was the rate of deferred consent. The number of days to obtain consent, refusal rate, and waiver of consent rate was also reported. Results: A total of 291 patients (200 severe traumatic brain injury [TBI] and 91 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest) were enrolled between the two emergency CT-perfusion studies. Some (34/291[11.9%]) could not be reached; waiver of consent was granted by our ethics board. Deferred consent was obtained in 252/291(86.6%). The majority were consented by the partner/spouse (25.2%) and most consents took place within 7-days (76.0%) of enrollment. Five (1.7%) refused consent. Deferred consent rates were higher in the cardiac arrest population (97.8%) compared to the severe TBI population (83.7%). Conclusions: Deferred consent is an acceptable method of obtaining consent in emergency research when the intervention risk is low.

Each year the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) holds an Animal Welfare Forum. The papers presented at this annual event are published in the Journal of the AVMA and are collectively reprinted as a ‘proceedings of the meeting’. In 1994 the Forum met in Rosemont, Illinois and the subject was Veterinary Perspectives on the Use of Animals in Research. The following seven papers were given and are now published, together with a brief Opening remarks’ by the then President Elect of the AVMA in the February 15th issue of the AVMA journal.

The Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC) in the UK not only supports work on the physiology, biochemistry and pathology of farm animals but is also deeply involved in the non-medical biological sciences and, increasingly over recent years, with cell and molecular biology and bio-technology.

There has, up to now, been little in the way of sound informative literature on the employment of animals in biomedical research which could be recommended as an education resource for use in schools. This deficit has largely been overcome by the publication of two booklets: The Search for Health and Animal Experiments. The first of these has been put out by the Research for Health Charities Group and is a broad account of the role of research in developing modem treatments for human diseases. A serious attempt is made to explain, in as simple terms as possible, the underlying biology of disease processes and at relevant points in the explanations, the role of animal experimentation is discussed. There is little coverage of the control of animal usage.