VIVISECTION AND SCIENCE.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'SPECTATOR'] SIR,—It is a well-known axiom that a false statement confidently asserted will often answer its purpose as fully as if it were a true one. Ignorance and indifference combine to make us receive almost any proposition put forth by men who ought to know.
In no other way can I account for the general belief that vivi- section has been the means of great discoveries, such as the circulation of the blood by Harvey, and the double func- tions of the spinal nerves by Sir Charles Bell. Now, Harvey himself stated that it was from anatomy, and not from vivisection, that lie made his great discovery. To use his own words, he "took notice that the valves in the veins of so many parts of the body were so placed that they gave free passage to the blood towards the heart, but opposed the passage of the blood the contrary way." . . . . "Experiments were after- wards made in proof of what he had discovered The example of Harvey is no plea for the repetition of his demon- strations."
Sir Charles Bell also repudiated vivisection as the source of dis- covery: "In a foreign review the results have been considered as in favour of experimenting on living animals. They axe, on the con- trary, deductions from anatomy, and I have had recourse to experiments, not to form my opinions, but to impress them on others. It must be my apology that my utmost powers of persua- sion were lost while I urged my statements on the ground of anatomy alone." And again :—" Experiments have never been the means of discovery, and the survey of what has been attempted of late years will prove that the opening of living animals has done more to perpetuate error than to enforce the just views taken from anatomy and the natural sciences."
I am sure you will not refuse to publish these undeniable testimonies on the side of humanity.—I am, Sir, &c., CoLIN MACKENZIE.
Previous page
