Singer (1974)

Numerous factors, including two world wars, a major economic recession and the fear of nuclear annihilation distracted public attention from animal experimentation for much of the 20th century. However, anti-vivisectionism was re-animated in 1974 when "Animal Liberation" was published by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF), founded in 1976, considered the work to be the founding philosophical statement of its *raison d'etre* and subsequently ensured—through various activities—that the subject of laboratory animal welfare became a matter of public concern. However, the chapter featuring laboratory animals and entitled "Tools for Research" tends to overstate the usefulness of in vitro and ex vivo methodologies, while understating the role of national and institutional controls. It contains harrowing and detailed descriptions of selected animal experiments, mainly conducted by the US military and psychiatric researchers delivering noxious agents and, or stimuli to conscious animals—usually primates or dogs. Importantly, the role of anaesthetics in experimental refinement is poor, or mis-represented. For example, when discussing the role of animals in traumatic shock research, Singer summarizes scientific consensus with:

*"They (the scientists) discouraged the use of anaesthesia* ... *the influence of anaesthesia is controversial* ... *and in the reviewer's opinion prolonged anaesthesia is best avoided."* [56]

and

> *"Experimenters may consider it unnecessary to include in their reports any mention of what happens when* ... *animals recover consciousness in the midst of an operation because of an improperly administered anaesthetic* ... *".* [56]

Singer makes no reference to "The Principle of Humane Experimental Technique", while the terms "anaesthesia", "anesthesia" and "analgesia" do not appear in the book's index. Arguably, a more balanced analysis of the benefits of anaesthetics and analgesics in animal experiments might have reduced the number of criminal acts subsequently committed by the ALF against scientists and their work-places while o ffsetting the public's increasing tendency to view scientists as cruel and uncompassionate.

### Holland and Yoxall (1973–1978)

Concerns with unfeeling science may have been allayed had Holland's 1973 article in the Canadian Anaesthetists Society Journal [57] been more widely read. Worried about the paucity of information available for laboratory animal anaesthesia, e.g.,

*"* ... *the relatively low standard of veterinary anaesthesia practised, together with the wide variety of animals which are now being anaesthetized in laboratories and veterinary hospitals"*

Holland asserted that:

> *"vertebrate animals (and perhaps some invertebrates too) have similar pain pathways and similar perceptions of pain as man—their lack of ability to communicate does not indicate a lack of awareness of pain and does not condone inhumane treatment".*

Holland goes on to describe her personal recommendations for anaesthetising dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, infrahuman primates [sic], rats, mice, pigs, ruminants and birds. She also argues that:

*"In spite of their low phylogenetic position, common humanity at the very least dictates that they should be anaesthetized prior to surgical procedures",*

so goes on to describe anaesthesia in fish, amphibians, reptiles and invertebrates". The beliefs expressed in this article in relation to animal pain are remarkable insofar that Holland was a medical anaesthetist with an interest in child health. Furthermore, her sentiments on animal pain were published 5 years before those of Yoxall's.

Yoxall [58] was an early member of the Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and although he held the Royal College Diploma in Veterinary Anaesthesia, his major influence was in veterinary clinical pharmacology. His paper, "Pain in small animals - its recognition and control" (1978) was the first paper in the veterinary medical literature to highlight the importance of appreciating pain—albeit in dogs and cats. The article outlined the then current concepts in pain physiology and described the clinical use of analgesics. Taken with Holland's sentiments, the publication of Yoxall's paper represents a point in time at which some began recognising the importance of eliminating pain rather than just consciousness in animals undergoing noxious procedures.
