This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jerod M. Loeb, PhD
Chicago, Ill

Arch Ophthalmol. 1992;110(12):1682.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Dr Kaufman's criticism of the use of animals in medical education is not surprising, for it reflects the views of the chairman of a self-professed animal rights group. Contrary to the views stated by Dr Kaufman, the AMA supports the responsible use of animals in medical research and teaching in much the same way as it supports the appropriate use of technology in medicine: after rigorous and carefully thought-out analysis of benefit, risk, and cost. Certainly fellow students, surrogate patients, and even patients represent important learning "tools." However, as stated in Ms Foreman's article, most expert opinion recognizes the necessity for the use of animals in medical education and research.

It is a bit ironic that Dr Kaufman alludes to a taxpayer's right to demonstrate against a particular biomedical research activity that he or she feels objectionable. Quite often monies collected by animal rights organizations are used to . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?