VIVISECTION OF TO-DAY
If the reform of vivisection may only be hoped for, when the secrecy
concerning it shall have been dispelled, the beginning of the present
century is not propitious of any changes. Against all intrusion upon
its rites, the physiological laboratory in England and America
maintains as successful an opposition as ever characterized the
Eleusinian mysteries of the pagan world. No laboratory--so far as
known--dares to invite inspection at any hour, even from men of the
highest personal character, and leave them free to reveal or to
publicly criticize whatever in the experiments upon animals there
conducted seems worthy of caution or reproof. Silence and
concealment, so far as the outer world is concerned--these are yet the
strange ideals of modern vivisection.
Within the realm of scientific literature, however, this reticence is
not maintained. Experiments may be there described in terms so
abstruse and technical, that, while clear enough to the professional
reader, they convey little or no meaning to the man in the street.
There would seem to be a growing tendency to state certain facts in
carefully shrouded phraseology, in complete confidence that the full
meaning will not be discerned. Within the past few years, therefore,
a large number of vivisections have been described in full--
vivisections which half a century ago would have aroused the horror
and execration of the English-speaking world--without exciting any
very general condemnation beyond the circle of those who ask for
reform. Experimentation of this kind, exhibiting the practice as it
is carried on to-day, seems worth of a somewhat careful examination.
It will not be necessary to go beyond the work of a single vivisector
who has made his name a household word wherever experiments upon
animals are discussed in England or America.
The principal point toward which inquiry must be directed is the
question of pain. One reason why they have been partly condoned by
the public is not difficult to discover. In language which seemed to
have no element of ambiguity, the experimenter apparently affirmed the
entire absence of sensation on the part of the dogs which he and his
assistants subjected to operations of various kinds and of an extreme
character. It is true that, as a general rule, this affirmation was
not as explicit as might perhaps be desired. He was writing for
professional men only, not for the general public, and it is quite
unlikely that any physiologist or medical reader could have been at
any time misled in the slightest degree. If the language used was
capable of more than one interpretation, if possibilities of
insensibility were exaggerated into definite assertions, nothing of
the kind was apparent to the general reader. Glancing at the
statement that "the animals were completely anaesthetized," his doubts
were abolished. Indescribably disgusting and hideous as were some of
the vivisections, if they were absolutely painless, their performance
was a matter of taste. Can we criticize the humaneness of one who, at
the butcher's bench, mutilates the body from which life has gone?
Complete and perfect anaesthesia, maintained till death, is
practically only premature death. Deprived of sensibility--a
deprivation that is never to cease--a living creature is beyond the
infliction of cruelty. But is it certain that all these various
experiments, made upon nearly five hundred dogs were without pain?
Reasons for doubt concerning some of them have been given. Let us now
look into the question so far as concerns vivisection in its relation
to the pressure of the blood.
A little over two centuries ago the Rev. Stephen Hales, the rector of
an obscure country parish in England, became interested in problems
pertaining to the circulation of sap in plants, and blood in the
higher animals. By various experiments he discovered that the blood
of a living animal is subject to a definite pressure, and with some
approach to accuracy he succeeded in measuring it. The subject seems
to have attracted but little attention for over a century after the
discovery of Hales; it was then again investigated by physiologists,
and certain conclusions definitely reached. Without going into the
subject at length, it suffices to state that this blood-pressure
constantly varies slightly, being somewhat influenced by every
disturbing condition, and probably by every physiological act. Any
injury tending to lower the tone of the general system, or to induce
the condition of shock, tends to cause the blood-pressure to fall. On
the other hand, if the animal is sensible to pain, the stimulation of
sensory nerves, or any sharp or sudden pang, TEND TO CAUSE A RISE IN
THE PRESSURE OF THE BLOOD, unless the creature has become exhausted by
the experimentation to which it has been subjected.
Upon this point the attention of the reader should be specially
directed. What authorities support this conclusion? Only a few need
be named, for there would appear to be no difference of opinion among
physiologists regarding the fact.
Sir Thomas Lauder Brunton, one of the leading medical writers in
England, in a contribution to the latest edition of the "Encyclopaedia
Britannica," tells us:
"IRRITATION OF SENSORY NERVES tends to cause contraction of the
bloodvessels, AND TO RAISE THE BLOOD-PRESSURE."[1]
[1] Enc. Brit., Art. "Therapeutics," p. 800.
Dr. Isaac Ott, an American physiologist of distinction, states in a
description of certain vivisections made by him:
"IT IS A WELL-KNOWN FACT THAT IRRITATION OF A SENSORY NERVE causes an
excitation of the vasomotor centre, WHICH IS INDEXED BY A RISE OF
PRESSURE.... As indirect irritation ALWAYS PRODUCES A RISE OF
PRESSURE, the sensory nerves and the conductors of their impressions
up to the (spinal) cord are not paralyzed."[2]
[2] Ott, "On Physiological Action of Thebain," pp. 11-12.
Dr. Leonard Hill, in an article contributed to Schafer's "Textbook of
Physiology" upon the circulation of the blood, says:
"Arterial pressure is affected reflexly BY STIMULATION OF ANY SENSORY
NERVE IN THE BODY.... The usual result of stimulating a sensory nerve
is A REFLEX RISE OF ARTERIAL PRESSURE."[3]
[3] Schafer's "Textbook of Physiology," vol. ii., pp. 166-167.
The writer goes on to explain that when the tone of the system in
weakened "after prolonged experiment OR DURING THE ADMINISTRATION OF
CHLOROFORM AND CHLORAL," then a fall of pressure may occur.
This phenomenon was known to physiologists many years ago. For
instance, Dr. J. C. Dalton, professor of physiology at the College of
Physicians and Surgeons, in his well-known textbook on physiology,
says that the most frequent instance of reflex constriction of
arteries is that "which follows irritation of the central extremity of
a sensitive nerve."
"This effect has been observed by many experimenters, and is regarded
as nearly invariable. Galvanization of the central extremity of the
sciatic nerve causes general constriction of the bloodvessels
throughout other parts of the body, INDICATED BY INCREASED ARTERIAL
PRESSURE. A similar result is produced by the irritation of ... other
sensitive nerves, or nerve roots."[1]
[1] Dalton's "Physiology," pp. 507-508.
And, referring to another experimenter, Dr. Crile, puts the case
clearly:
"PAIN INCREASES (BLOOD)-PRESSURE. In four cases of trauma (injury), a
rise of 20 to 40 was noted upon pressure upon a nerve. Even in a
healthy person, pinching the integument was noted increase the
pressure."[2]
[2] Crile "On Blood-Pressure," p. 341.
It would seem unnecessary to accumulate evidence regarding a
physiological phenomenon so long and so firmly established. We may
therefore take it for granted that in a living animal or in a human
being, as a general rule, the irritation of a sensory nerve will cause
a rise of blood-pressure.
Let us now suppose that an animal destined to be vivisected lies
before us, "stretched" on the vivisection dog-board, so securely
fastened that voluntary movement is almost impossible. An incision
has been made in the neck, and in the principal artery has been
inserted a part of a delicate instrument designed to indicate the
fluctuations of the blood-pressure of the animal. The sciatic nerve
has been laid bare; the animal is supposed to be under the influence
of an anaaesthetic continuously administered, and if our imagination
is vivid and our faith implicit, we may believe that no suffering will
be felt. BUT HOW MAY WE BE CERTAIN? This question came up more than
once before the Royal Commission on Vivisection. How can one tell
that an animal may not be insufficiently anaesthetized IF IT CAN MAKE
NO SIGN, WHEN ALL THE ACTS BY WHICH IT MIGHT EVINCE ITS SUFFERING ARE
CAREFULLY RESTRAINED? The animal which lies before us cannot move;
every physical movement is as far as possible totally suppressed. It
cannot use its voice, for the trachea is cut and otherwise used. ARE
THERE NO MEANS WHEREBY WE CAN TELL WHETHER THE ANIMAL IS SUFFERING
what one of the Royal Commission called "a nightmare of suffering"?
The answer to this question has been given by some of the leading
physiologists of England.
Dr. J. M. Langley, professor of physiology in the University of
Cambridge, a Fellow of the Royal Society, gave explicit testimony on
this point. His examiner was desirous of knowing upon what he would
depend, other than upon the dose of the anaesthetic and watchfulness,
if in the animal he could see nothing that would satisfy him.
"There is the state of the blood-pressure, which would indicate to
some extent the reflexes on the vascular system," Professor Langley
replied.
"WOULD PAIN CAUSE AN INCREASE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE?"
"IT WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE," replied the physiologist.
Of course, he insisted upon the sufficiency of the anaesthesia, but he
had made the most important admission which his evidence affords. IF
PAIN WERE FELT, IT WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE.
Dr. W. E. Dixon of King's College, London, representing one of the
sections of the Royal Society of Medicine, gave evidence before the
Royal Commission on various matters pertaining to anaesthesia. Dogs,
he asserted, "very easily die of chloroform; but if one goes
sufficiently slowly they never die." (18,677)[1]
[1] Figures in parentheses refer to the questions or replies in the
printed evidence.
"Supposing you were giving chloroform with CURARE, then it might be
said you were not giving enough chloroform. BUT YOU CAN SEE WHETHER
YOU ARE GIVING ENOUGH BY LOOKING AT THE BLOOD-PRESSURE." (18,690)
Professor Dixon tells us that one of the gauges used for determining
whether anaesthesia is present or not IS THE BLOOD-PRESSURE. "The
blood-pressure goes DOWN BECAUSE THE CHLOROFORM IS GIVEN. The heart
beats more feebly; therefore the blood-pressure goes down." (18,742)
Another expert physiologist, whose testimony on this point is
enlightening, was Dr. Eh. H. Starling, professor of physiology at
University College, London.
"Are there any means, other than the cries or struggles of the animal,
by which you can tell whether the anaesthetic is passing off?"
"YES, YOU CAN TELL IT BY THE BLOOD-PRESSURE," Dr. Starling
replied. "When one is working without curare, one notices THAT THE
PRESSURE GOES UP, and then, if one does not attend to it, after that
comes a little movement, AND YOU GIVE MORE ANAESTHETIC." (4,054)
We need not follow Professor Starling in his repeated assurances of
complete anaesthesia in his vivisections; all this is merely an
expression of faith in the accurate and perfect working of his
instruments, a faith which some of the Commissioners did not share.
What interests us is the statement that IF THE ANAESTHESIA IS
IMPERFECT, THE BLOOD-PRESSURE WILL REVEAL IT. "The pressure goes up";
there is some slight motion on the part of the animal; IT FEELS, and
that returning sensibility to painful impressions is indicated by an
increase in the pressure of the blood.[1]
[1] Sir Victor Horsley admitted that "changes in the blood-pressure"
afford an indication whether anaesthesia is perfect or not
(Ques. 16,057).
But how is the measurement of the blood-pressure to be ascertained?
One of the instruments in use is thus described:
"The pressure exerted upon the blood in the arterial system may be
measured by attaching the carotid artery of a living animal to a
reservoir of mercury, provided with an upright open tube or pressure-
gauge.... Under pressure of the blood, the mercury rises in this tube,
and the height of the mercurial column becomes an indication of the
pressure to which the blood itself is subjected within the artery.
The arterial pressure is found to be equal to the average of a column
of mercury 150 millimetres, or 6 inches, in height."
Instruments for ascertaining the blood-pressure in human beings record
it merely for a moment or two. In experimenting upon a living animal,
an incision is made in the neck, the principal artery exposed and
severed, and connected with the recording instrument.
"Pain" is a word which as a rule the modern physiologist prefers to
exclude from his vocabulary. "We know absolutely nothing about pain
except that which we ourselves have suffered," says a leading
experimenter. We are unable neither to see, hear, smell, taste, or
feel the pain of another being, and although the cries or struggles of
an animal which is being vivisected may suggest that it is
experiencing intense agony, the physiologist insists that in reality
we know nothing about it, and we can only infer that it is
experiencing something which our reason suggests that we should feel
in its place. Of course we might say the same thing regarding agony
undergone by another human being. What the physiologist does is note
the phenomena following the stimulation of nerves, and to register it
by appropriate instruments.
To stimulate a nerve is to excite its activity in some way. When the
dentist touches with his instrument the exposed nerve of a tooth,
there is immediate "stimulation," as many of us have had reason to
assert, even if the dentist can know nothing of our sensations, and
can only infer them by remembering his own. One may stimulate the
nerve of a vivisected animal by mechanical means, by pinching or
scraping it when exposed; and although the movements of the animal may
indicate an exquisite sensibility, yet other methods are more
effective for the purposes of the experimenter. "Electricity,"
Professor Austin Flint tells us, "is the best means we have of
artificially exciting the nerves. Using electricity, we can regulate
with exquisite nicety the degree of stimulation. WE CAN EXCITE THE
NERVES LONG AFTER THEY HAVE CEASED TO RESPOND TO MECHANICAL
IRRITATION." A French vivisector, M. de Sine'ty, removed the breasts
of a female guinea-pig, nursing its young, and laid bare the mammary
nerve, and he tells us that "the animal exhibits signs of acute pain,
ESPECIALLY WHEN THE NERVE IS STIMULATED BY AN ELECTRIC CURRENT."[1]
[1] Gazette Me'dicale de Paris, 1879, p. 593.
In 1903 there was published in America an account of a large number of
vivisections involving blood-pressure which a well-known experimenter
had made, either personally or by his assistants. The number of dogs
thus sacrificed was no less than 243; the experiments to which they
were subjected amounted to 251. Ether alone was used in 107
experiments, or about 43 per cent. of the whole number; ether and
morphia were employed in 80 experiments, or 32 per cent. of the
total. Chloroform combined with ether was used but ONCE. In no less
than 15 per cent. of the experiments no anaesthetic whatever is named,
and CURARE was employed in nearly 10 per cent. of the investigations.
Why was curare used? We have seen that the professor of physiology in
Upsaal University regards it as "the most cruel of poisons." An animal
under its influence, Professor Holmgren tells us, "changes instantly
into a living corpse, WHICH HEARS AND SEES AND KNOWS EVERYTHING, but
is unable to move a single muscle, and under its influence no creature
can give the faintest indication of its hopeless condition." The
French vivisector, Claude Be'rnard, tells us frankly that death under
the influence of this poison "is accompanied by sufferings the most
atrocious that the imagination of man can conceive." Precisely the
reason why this poison was employed in the investigations before us we
have no means of knowing by anything the vivisector has stated in his
report. He tells us, indeed, that "the animals were all reduced to
full surgical anaesthesia before the experiments began, a nd were
killed before recovery from the same." We see no reason for doubting
why this may not have been true. It is quite probably that as a rule
the preliminary cutting operations necessary were made while the
animal was deeply insensible. But was this deep insensibility
maintained for hours? Was it so absolute that doubt is impossible?
Since it is certain that the irritation produces a rise in blood-
pressure, was this phenomenon never witnessed during the terrible
operations to which these dogs were subjected for hours at a time? If,
as Professor Langley of the University of Cambridge explained, pain
"WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE," was this sign of agony ever
evoked when the bare nerve was subjected to "stimulation," or the paws
"slowly scorched" one after another? Let us see.
We observe that as a rule each vivisection consisted of two
procedures, aside from the preliminary operation. In the first place,
the normal pressure of the blood was reduced by various methods,
calculated to depress the vital powers of the animal, and to induce a
condition of collapse, and this was followed by such "stimulation" of
nerves as would tend to cause the blood-pressure to rise in an animal
not perfectly anaesthetized. The means taken to depress the vital
powers were as varied as the ingenuity of the vivisectors could
devise. Sometimes it was accomplished by skinning the animal alive, a
par of the body at a time, and then roughly "sponging" the denuded
surface. Sometimes it was secured by crushing the dog's paws, first
one and then the other. Now and then the dog's feet were burnt, or
the intestines exposed and roughly manipulated; the tail was crushed,
the limbs amputated, the stomach cut out. Then came the "stimulation"
of the exposed nerve, carried on and repeated sometimes until Nature
refused longer to respond, and death came to the creature's relief.
No torments more exquisite were ever perpetrated unless absence of
feeling was completely secured. Was it so secured? Let the
experimenter's own report give us the facts, remembering that if there
was pain, "THE BLOOD-PRESSURE WOULD RISE."
EXPERIMENT 42. The material used was a little dog, weighing only 11
pounds. How it was "reduced to shock"--whether by skinning or
crushing--we are not informed; all we know is that it was "reduced to
shock." The sciatic nerve was exposed, the artery in the neck laid
bare, and the instrument for measuring the blood-pressure carefully
adjusted. Ether, we are told, was used. Was all sensibility thereby
wholly suppressed? Let us see what is revealed by the changes of the
blood-pressure.[1]
[1] In all experiments cited in this chapter the italics are not in
the original descriptions.
"10.30 a.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. SLOW RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.
10.35 a.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE.
10.51 a.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE.
11.30 a.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE
13 MILLIMETRES.
11.59 a.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE
5 MILLIMETRES."
Noon has come. It is the hour when experimenters need their
accustomed refreshment, and we note a long interval during which there
were no observations. The victim lies stretched upon the rack. After
nearly two hours the pastime began again, or, we may say, "the young
scientists resumed their arduous labours."
"1.55 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. ABRUPT RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE
17 millimetres.
3.3 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF 14 MILLIMETRES.
4.44 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF 2 MILLIMETRES."
The little animal is growing weaker. For more than six hours it has
been on the rack. The play upon its nervous system is about over. At
five o'clock the dog died.
The full details of this experiment do not here concern us, and are
not given. Whether useful or not is another matter Pain, said
Professor Langley, "WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE." Did not the
blood-pressure rise when this creature's nerve was stimulated?
EXPERIMENT 114. In this experiment four dogs were simultaneously
vivisected. Some of them lasted but a short time; but one--a young
dog--was "in splendid condition," and subserved the object of the
vivisection for many hours. The usual incisions were made in the
trachea and carotid artery, and the femoral vein and sciatic nerve was
exposed. At 10.59 a.m. the blood-pressure was found to be 125 milli-
metres; at 10.42 it had been reduced to 99 millimetres--by what means
we are not informed. Further details are as follows:
"11.42 a.m. Blood pressure 99 millimetres.
11.45 a.m. Stimulated sciatic nerve. PRESSURE ROSE TO 115
MILLIMETRES.
12 midday. Blood-pressure 95. Sciatic nerve stimulated:
BLOOD-PRESSURE 115.
12.19 p.m. Blood-pressure 92.
1.23 p.m. Blood-pressure 108; sciatic nerve stimulated.
1.26 p.m. Blood-pressure 110; three minutes later."
Between 1.29 p.m. and 2.19 p.m. there is no record of any
observations. Perhaps we may venture the hypothesis that during this
period of nearly an hour's duration, the young experimenters went out
to luncheon. The dog, while stretched upon the rack, could have had
no other refreshment than cessation from the stimulation of its
nerves.
But after about an hour's intermission the young vivisectors would
seem again to have begun their observations concerning the effect
produced by stimulating the sciatic nerve. What was that effect? It
appears to have been very uniform.
"2.28 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. ABRUPT RISE AND FALL IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE.
3.32 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE AND FALL IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE.
4.16 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. BLOOD-PRESSURE ROSE TO 120,
FALLING TO 105.
4.34 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. ABRUPT RISE AND FALL OF
BLOOD-PRESSURE.
4.53 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. THE USUAL RISE AND FALL
FOLLOWED."
Do we find in the last observation an indication of a growing distaste
for such work? One cannot tell. Between 5.49 p.m. and 6.36 p.m. there
are no observations recorded. Perhaps this period of forty-seven
minutes--three-quarters of an hour--were devoted by the young
vivisectors to the conviviality of their evening repast. Then the
usual observations were renewed. But at 7.10 p.m., while again
"stimulating the sciatic nerve," suddenly the dog's heart stopped. At
7.12 p.m. "the dog died." During a period from eleven o'clock in the
forenoon until after seven o'clock in the evening--EIGHT HOURS AND
THIRTEEN MINUTES--the little animal had been stretched upon the rack.
Its "splendid condition" had enabled it to survive the tortures to
which its three less vigorous companions in martyrdom had long before
succumbed, and had made it possible for many hours to play upon
exquisite sensibility.
"PAIN," said Professor Langley to the Royal Commissioners, :WOULD
CAUSE A RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE."
WAS THERE NOT REPEATEDLY A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE IN THIS EXPERIMENT?
We call attention to no other details.
Let us study these vivisections further. When animals were subjected
to injuries calculated to make the strongest impression uppon their
sensibility, was not the response A RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE?
EXPERIMENT 38. A small female spaniel, weighing about 13 pounds.
Ether is said to have been used for anaesthesia.
"12.54 p.m. Blood-pressure 98 millimetres.
1.11 p.m. HIND-FOOT BURNED. THE BLOOD-PRESSURE ROSE RAPIDLY TO 118
MILLIMETRES. A slow fall followed.
1.42 p.m. THE FOOT WAS BURNED. A SHARP RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE
FOLLOWED."
The dog died of heart failure, after an experience of nearly five
hours in the hands of the vivisectors.
EXPERIMENT 73. A dog, weighing about 15 pounds. Morphia and ether
said to have been used. Did they prevent sensation under such
"stimulation" as follows:
"APPLICATION OF THE BUNSEN FLAME TO THE FOOT FOR FOUR SECONDS WAS
FOLLOWED BY A DECIDED RISE IN THE BLOOD-PRESSURE.... The blood-
pressure was maintained higher BY REPEATED BURNINGS." These are the
final words of the report of this experiment. We do not know when the
dog died, nor to how many burnings he was subjected.
The use of fire as a method of "STIMULATION" of nerves seems to have
been very attractive. For example:
EXPERIMENT 74. Dog. "GRADUAL BURNING OF THE LEFT HIND-FOOT PRODUCED A
VERY MARKED RISE (of blood-pressure). THE RISE WAS MAINTAINED BY
SLOWLY SCORCHING THE PAWS. AFTER THE EFFECT BEGAN TO WEAR OUT IN ONE
PAW, ANOTHER WAS STIMULATED IN A SIMILAR MANNER, SO THAT THE BLOOD-
PRESSURE WAS MAINTAINED FOR TWENTY MINUTES."
Of what possible value was such an experiment? Does any one believe
that in a human being blood-pressure will ever be maintained by slowly
scorching the hands and feet of the patient?
EXPERIMENT 75. Small dog, weighing about 13 pounds. Morphia and
ether said to have been used. During this experiment the intestines
were exposed and manipulated, and the foot and tail "CRUSHED." "THE
LEFT HIND-FOOT WAS BURNED; A RISE IN THE BLOOD-PRESSURE FOLLOWED."
EXPERIMENT 96. Dog. NO ANAESTHETIC MENTIONED. Artificial
respiration. "BURNING HIND-PAW PRODUCED A RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE."
After administration of CURARE, there was another "BURNING OF THE
PAW," the blood-pressure did not respond, and shortly after, the dog
died.
EXPERIMENT 95. Dog, in good condition. NO ANAESTHETIC MENTIONED.
Integument removed from three-fourths of the body. "BURNING OF THE
HIND-PAW. ABRUPT RISE (of blood-pressure), 55 MILLIMETRES, then an
equal fall. The denuded surfaces were roughly sponged for a
considerable time." Then CURARE was given, and artificial respiration
followed.
EXPERIMENT 46. Mongrel; good condition. An excessive amount of ether
given at beginning; artificial respiration became necessary.
Extensive operations were made, such as crushing the paws, breaking
the legs, and manipulating the nerve trunks. These were followed by A
RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.
EXPERIMENT 104. NO ANAESTHETIC NAMED. Dog.
"11.26 a.m. Animal reduced to surgical shock by skinning and
mechanically irritating the raw surface.
11.36 a.m. CURARE given.
11.58 a.m. Electrical stimulation of sciatic (nerve). RISE OF
BLOOD-PRESSURE.
12.48 p.m. Sciatic nerve stimulated. RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE.
1.12 p.m. Electrical stimulation of sciatic nerve cause A RISE ...
IN BLOOD PRESSURE.
2.40 p.m. Animal died."
When Dr. Francis Gotch, F.R.S., the professor of physiology in the
University of Oxford, was examined before the late Royal Commission
on Vivisection, he testified that under curare an animal could not
even blink an eye, so complete is the immobility produced by this
drug. Yet to the eye of the experimenter would there not be something
to tell him whether or not the animal was feeling pain?
"I should say so," replied the physiologist--"in the alternations of
blood-pressure."
"IT IS A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE, is it not?" inquired one of the
Commissioners.
"YES," was the physiologist's curt reply.
"But it would be diminished if the animal was absolutely
anaesthetized?"
"YES," was the reply of Dr. Gotch.
"Is a change in blood-pressure the only mode by which you can
objectively determine whether the animal is conscious, or suffering
pain, if under the influence of curare?" somewhat later, he
physiologist was asked.
"I suggest that THAT IS ONE OBVIOUS WAY."
Let us turn again to the experiment just quoted. No anaesthetic is
mentioned. Curare was administered, the sole effect of which is to
render the living animal as motionless as a corpse. Three times the
greta nerve was electrically "stimulated," and each time there was
that RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE which we are told upon the highest
authority was the "ONE OBVIOUS WAY" of determining the presence of
pain.
Keeping in mind this testimony of the professors of physiology at the
Universities of Oxford, of Cambridge, and of London, that if pain were
present during a vivisection IT WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF THE BLOOD-
PRESSURE, let us now examine a little more carefully some of the
experiments referred to in the volume reviewed in the previous
chapter. We have had assurances of their painlessness. But to the
scientific man assurances are of little value as compared with the
testimony of the instrument. Were any of these experiments associated
with a "RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE"? It is unnecessary to study them in
their relation to other phenomena. In the early "stimulations of a
nerve trunk, a rise in blood-pressure was always produced"; but after
a number of repetitions the time came when no effect was produced, or
the pressure fell; the point of exhaustion had been reached. But let
us note what the instrument recorded. The italics are ours.
EXPERIMENT 5. "Under incomplete anaesthesia, CRUSHING OF FOOT CAUSED A
VERY SHARP RISE, followed by an equally sharp decline of pressure.
This was repeated several times." (The author also tells us that
"under full anaesthesia, crushing of the paws" caused a rise. One may
question the completeness of the insensibility.)
EXPERIMENT 8. Fox terrier, two years old; ether.... CRUSHING OF THE
PAW WAS ATTENDED BY IMMEDIATE RISE..... Crushing of the fore-leg WAS
ATTENDED BY A RISE.... Crushing of the foot, ATTENDED BY A RISE.
Cutting skin of thigh and leg was ATTENDED BY A RISE.
EXPERIMENT 9. "CRUSHING OF THE PAW WAS FOLLOWED BY A RISE, and
continual cutting and crushing of the paw BY A STILL FURTHER RISE OF
PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 17. Several loops of intestines were withdrawn and placed
IN BOILING WATER, ATTENDED BY A RAPID RISE of the blood-pressure,
followed soon by a fall.
EXPERIMENT 28. Hip-joint amputation made on both sides caused a rise
in pressure. GRASPING SCIATIC NERVE WITH FORCEPS and MAKING TRACTION
(pulling upon the nerve) CAUSED A RISE.
EXPERIMENT 36. Small white dog.... HOT WATER introduced into
abdominal cavity PRODUCED A RISE.
EXPERIMENT 59. Spaniel, female; weight only 13 pounds. It has "been
nursing its puppies," and is very cross. Duration of experiment, one
and a half hours. Manipulation of ovaries caused slight RISE OF
BLOOD-PRESSURE.
EXPREIMENT 76. Dog. Among other procedures, the vivisectors "APPLIED
A LARGE GAS-FLAME to the posterior extremities in the region of the
knee; a slight rise. Repeated the application for a longer time;
slight rise.... APPLICATION OF A BUNSEN FLAME TO THE NOSE, PRODUCING A
SLIGHT RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 82. A small female dog; weight oly 9 pounds. Time of
experiment, one hour and fifty-five minutes. "One-third of a grain of
CURARE and one-twelfth of a grain of morphia were injected into the
jugular vein." After various manipulations, there was "APPLICATION OF
BUNSEN'S FLAME TO THE RIGHT HIND-FOOT," causing "AN APPRECIABLE RISE
IN THE BLOOD-PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 87. Dog. Time of experiment, two hours and forty-five
minutes. "Injected CURARE and morphine into the jugular vein;
artificial respiration maintained.... The sciatic nerve was exposed
and stimulated by a faradic current. A SHARP INCREASE IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE during the period of stimulation was noted."[1]
[1] Concerning the rise of blood-pressure as the sign of an animal's
sensibility to painful impressions, when under the influence of
CURARE, see testimony of Professor Gotch of Oxford University, quoted
on a preceding page.
EXPERIMENT 94. "Electrical stimulation of sciatic nerve produced
MARKED INCREASE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.... Application of Bunsen's flame to
the foot; RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.... REPEATED APPLICATION OF BUNSEN'S
FLAME FOR A PERIOD OF TWO MINUTES PRODUCED DECIDED RISE IN BLOOD-
PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 95. "Application of Bunsen's flame to the paw produced but
slight rise.... Bunsen's flame applied to the foot, CAUSING RISE IN
BOTH PRESSURES.... Application of BUNSEN'S FLAME NOW PRODUCED A SHARP
RISE IN THE PRESSURES." Then the blood-pressure fell, and though the
vivisector applied flame to the intestines, it produced no effect so
far as the blood-pressure was concerned.
EXPERIMENT 97. "Application of A BUNSEN'S FLAME PRODUCED THE
CHARACTERISTIC INCREASE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.... Stimulation of the
sciatic nerve by the faradic current produced an INCREASE IN BLOOD-
PRESSURE.... Repetition of the stimulus produced A FURTHER RISE IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE...."
EXPERIMENT 110. "Application of Bunsen's flame PRODUCED A SHARP
RISE...."
EXPERIMENT 113. "Bunsen's flame applied to the posterior and anterior
extremities PRODUCED A MARKED RISE IN PRESSURE.... BUNSEN'S FLAME OVER
REGION OF THE HEART PRODUCED A GRADUAL RISE."
EXPERIMENT 131. "Bunsen's flame to the right hind-foot was followed by
A RATHER MARKED RISE IN CENTRAL BLOOD-PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 132. "BUNSEN'S FLAME TO THE NOSE CAUSED A GENERAL RISE IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE."
In the year 1900 the same vivisector published an account of certain
experiments on the respiratory system, 102 in all. We have the usual
assurances of anaesthesia, which, of course, can only be regarded as
the operator's opinion. Fire is an element of some of these
experiments. We are told that "a large blow-flame burner used for
glass-blowing supplied a flame that could be adjusted to a very great
range of intensity." Of this statemnet one can have no doubt upon
reading some of the experiments described. Upon "a healthy little
poodle," weighing only ten pounds, with a blood-pressure of 120
millimetres, the following experiment was made:
"The mouth was held wide open, and THE BLOW-FLAME DIRECTED INTO THE
PHARYNX AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. The immediate effect upon the blood-
pressure was A TEMPORARY RISE. Again the flame was applied; THE
BLOOD-PRESSURE ROSE TO 204 MILLIMETRES, CONTINUING AT THIS HIGH RATE
FOR SOME TIME."
Probably this little creature was the pet of some child. From whose
door, one day, did it wander, to be snatched up by some thief, sold to
a laboratory, and sent to a death like this?
In another experiment a Newfoundland dog "CONTINUOUSLY BREATHED THE
FLAME FOR TWELVE MINUTES." In a similar experiment that followed, "the
results were practically identical. In this case THE FLAME WAS SO
INTENSE AS TO MELT THE ADIPOSE TISSUE AROUND THE TRACHEA." The animal
was broiled alive.
During the first year of the twentieth century the same writer
presented the public an account of an "Experimental and Clinical
Research into Certain Problems," a work containing a considerable
number of experiments of a nature similar to those before published.
We are again told that in all cases "the animals were anaesthetized,
usually by ether, occasionally by chloroform," alone or combined with
other substances, although, in a few cases, "CURARE and morphine were
used"--neither of which is an anaesthetic. A curious statement seems
to imply a confession that all these experiments were not absolutely
painless, for the writer says:
"Every precaution was taken to inflict AS LITTLE PAIN OR DISTRESS AS
POSSIBLE."
Is not this an admission that in some experiments there was pain? How
senseless is such statement! When Ridley and Latimer were burnt alive
at Oxford, the executioner might have protested with equal assurance
that "every precaution was taken to burn the condemned with as little
pain and distress as possible."
Between the experiments recorded in this volume and those which have
been reviewed, there is no very great difference. There is a rise of
blood-pressure after any mutilation or stimulation calculated to cause
pain, except in the few cases where a sufficiency of the anaesthetic
appears to have been given; to these attention will be called. A new
procedure seems to have been the use of the injection of a hot salt
solution into the blood. Some of the results of experiments were as
follows:
EXPERIMENT 12. "Burning right hind-foot caused a slight RISE IN BLOOD-
PRESSURE.
"Ten minims (drops) of chloroform on inhaler produced a DECIDED FALL
in blood-pressure."
EXPERIMENT 56. "Dog. Hind-foot burned, FOLLOWED BY A RISE IN BLOOD-
PRESSURE.... Burning the nose caused A VERY MARKED RISE in
blood-pressure. The animal, after the injection of cocaine, WAS NOT
UNDER FULL ETHER ANAESTHESIA, CUNJUNCTIVAL REFLEX BEING PRESENT."
EXPERIMENT 27. "Dog. Ether anaesthesia. Hind-foot was burned,
producing A SHARP RISE in the blood-pressure.
"Right paw again burned, and ARTERIAL PRESSURE ROSE.... Animal
subjected to FURTHER BURNING, which was followed by ADDITIONAL SLIGHT
RISE IN PRESSURE."
A considerable number of experiments involved the adding of hot salt
solution to the blood.
EXPERIMENT 34. Dog, in good condition. Saline solution in jugular
vein.... In this and in preceding experiments with the hot saline, the
animal, THOUGH UNDER SURGICAL ANAESTHESIA, STRUGGLED.
That shows the worth of the "surgical anaesthesia." When Professor
Starling was asked how he might know that the anaesthesia was passing
off, he told the Royal Commission that it was by noting the SLIGHT
MOVEMNET of the the animal, IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RISE OF BLOOD-
PRESSURE.[1] Scalding water in the blood seems to have given both of
these signs:
[1] Evidence before Royal Commission, Question 4,054.
EXPERIMENT 11. At 3.35 saline at 64 degrees C. (this is 147 degrees
F.). THE DOG STRUGGLED SOMEWHAT. The blood-pressure ROSE MARKEDLY.
3.45. Saline in jugular vein. Slight fall, then a quite ABRUPT RISE
in blood-pressure.... THE DOG AGAIN STRUGGLED VIGOROUSLY.
3.48. Saline at 60 degrees C. (140 degrees F.). Slight RISE in
blood-pressure. DOG STRUGGLED SOMEWHAT.
3.54. Saline at 60 degrees C. An immediate RISE in blood-pressure.
4.12. One-half drachm of chloroform on inhaler.
4.13. MARKED FALL in blood-pressure.
4.13. CHLOROFORM TAKEN AWAY. BLOOD-PRESSURE IMMEDIATELY AROSE to
previous level.
EXPERIMENT 32. A few drops of chloroform were given instead of ether,
the BLOOD-PRESSURE FALLING immediately.... After a few minutes,
several drops of chloroform were again administered, a marked FALL (of
blood-pressure) following.
One-half drachm of chloroform given, PRODUCING A GRADUAL FALL IN
BLOOD-PRESSURE. On removing the chloroform, the blood-pressure
recovered.
At 5.30, saline stopped. Eye reflex not gone. At 5.36 THE
ANAESTHESIA REMOVED. SLIGHT RISE in blood-pressure. REFLEXES NOT
ABOLISHED.
Does all this seem obscure to the reader? At all events, he can see
that the effect of even a "few drops of chloroform" is a fall of the
blood-pressure, and that when the "anaesthesia is removed" there comes
the rise which is so constantly associated with sensibility.
Some of the experiments related to the effect of cocaine in "blocking"
sensation. These effects have long been known; the necessity of all
this burning of flesh is not apparent.
In another experiment, a large dog was reduced to "surgicla
anaesthesia," and both sciatic nerves exposed. In one nerve cocaine
was inject, in the other salt solution.
The cocaine paw was subjected to burning by a Bunsen flame, UNTIL THE
PAW WAS CHARRED. There was no effect on the blood-pressure. But on
applying the Bunsen flame to the other paw, "THERE WAS A DELIBERATE
DRAWING UP OF THE LEG, AS IF TO REMOVE THE PAW FROM THE FLAME." The
writer tells us elsewhere that "under general anaesthesia--no matter
how deep--if the paw of an animal is subjected to the flame of a
Bunsen's burner, after the lapse of a short time, the leg is drawn up
... in a deliberate but rather forceful manner, removing the foot from
the flame." When cocain is injected into a nerve trunk, we are told
that an effectual physiologic "block" is produced. The difference is
manifest. Yet the vivisector would have us believe that in all cases
of his "anaesthesia" the dog is unconscious. May it not be rather
that there are phases of agony so great that the anaesthesia of the
laboratory does not suppress them? Is this a matter of uncertainty?
Then why not permit the vivisected dog to have the benefit of the
doubt?
Here is a most significant experiment:
EXPERIMENT 17. "... The animal was allowed to come out of the
influence of the general anaesthesic sufficient (sic) to make a slight
struggle.... THE FEET WERE BURNED just previous to the application of
cocaine, and ... BLOOD-PRESSURE WAS INCREASED. More cocaine was then
applied; THE ANIMAL BECAME TOTALLY ANAESTHETIZED, THE CORNEAL REFLEXES
WERE ABOLISHED, and on applying a Bunsen flame to the paws, NO EFFECT
WAS PRODUCED."
Here we have an instance of a dog allowed to come out of the influence
of the anaesthetic and to struggle; the feet burned; and finally, such
a degree of total anaesthetization as to prevent the usual phenomena.
But why are we told that "the animal became TOTALLY ANAESTHETIZED, and
that the corneal reflexes were abolished"? Is it a confession that in
other experiments such a state of deep insensibility was not
invariably produced?
What is the necessity for all this burning? The smell of scorched and
charred living flesh may have hung as heavily in the laboratory of the
hospital as before the altars of Baal; it could hardly have been an
attractive savour. Here are other instances:
EXPERIMENT 62. "Dog, in good condition; fox-terrier. As a control,
THE RIGHT HIND-FOOT WAS BURNED BEFORE THE CONJUNCTIVAL REFLEX WAS
ABOLISHED. There was RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE."
Here, then, was sensation; the eye responded to the touch.
EXPERIMENT 72. Dog; weight 12 pounds. (Spinal) cord exposed.
5.5. Burning foot was followed BY RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE.
5.10. BURNING FOOT. "A RISE IN BLOOD-PRESSURE FOLLOWED."
Cocaine was then injected, and burning of paws "produced no effect."
There was a difference in the phenomena produced.
In the year 1909 the same vivisector published stll another volume
recording experiments upon haemorrhage and the transfusion of blood.
To many of these experiments we should take no exception on the ground
of inutility or excessive production of pain. Others, however, are to
be criticized, particularly when studied in connection with the claim
put forth of complete absence of animal sensation. In his
introduction the experimenter seems to assert in the most distinct and
emphatic way the complete unconsciousness of each victim. He says:
"No experiment was performed in which the particular animal used was
not reduced to complete insensibility by means of ether, or some other
equally efficient anaesthetic. If the statement is made that the
anaesthetic was stopped during an experiment, it does not mean that
the animal could suffer pain, but that death was threatened from too
much anaesthetic, more being given as soon as signs of revival were
shown. In every experiment in which necessary mutilation was
performed, the animal was killed before coming out of the anaesthetic;
therefore absolutely no suffering was undergone. Very few recovery
experiments were performed, no more than were necessary to prove a
given fact."
What is the scientific value of this assurance--that "absolutely no
suffering was undergone"?
It can have no value, except as an opinion on the part of one
extremely interested in the maintenance of a particular view. So far
from being a series of painless experiments, we do not hesitate to
suggest that IF RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE BE A SIGN OF PAIN, then, in all
probability many of them involed torments as exquisite as it is
possible to imagine.
Take, for example, the folloowing vivisections:
EXPERIMENT 10. The subject was a dog, said to be in a good
condition. From time to time blood was abstracted from the body.
4.26. ON BURNING A PAW UNDER LIGHT ANAESTHESIA, THERE WAS A RISE OF
PRESSURE OF 16 MILLIMETRES.
10.16. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE.
11.13. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE of
13 millimetres.
1.42. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE of
13 millimetres.
EXPERIMENT 33. "ON BURNING A PAW UNDER LIGHT ANAESTHESIA, THERE WAS A
RISE OF PRESSURE OF 19 MILLIMETRES."
What is "LIGHT anaesthesia"?
It is a condition which a few drops of chloroform will produce; a
state in which the loss of consciousness is so slight that any pain
may be as keenly felt as if no stupefying agent had been given. What
are we to think of a statemnet that in a condition of such light
slumber the keenest of pains--THE BURNING OF LIVING FLESH--INVOLVED NO
SUFFERING? How can one speak with authority on a matter like this
against the evidence of the "one obvious sign" of sensibility? When
the paws of the miserable animal were burned, was there not the rise
of blood-pressure which indicated suffering? "Pain would cause a rise
of blood-pressure," said the professor of physiology of the University
of Cambridge. Should we find the significant rise of the
blood-pressure in other experiments where fire was used for the
"stimulation" of the nerves? Let us see.
EXPERIMENT 2. "On burning a paw, there was a RISE OF PRESSURE OF 10
millimetres. Stimulation of sciatic nerve resulted in
A RISE of systolic pressure."
EXPERIMENT 4. "11.45. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE.
" 1.27. Sciatic nerve stimulated; RISE OF
BLOOD-PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 6. "Burned a paw. A RISE OF PRESSURE of 4 millimetres
resulted."
EXPERIMENT 12. "On burning a paw, there was a RISE OF PRESSURE of 16
millimetres."
EXPERIMENT 14. "On burning a paw, A RISE OF 12 MILLIMETRES, followed
by a temporary fall, and then a rise to a higher level.
"On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE
OF 2 MILLIMETRES."
EXPERIMENT 15. "11.12. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE
OF 8 MILLIMETRES.
"11.36. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE
OF 12 MILLIMETRES."
EXPERIMENT 16. "Dog. Condition good.
"11.22. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE
OF 22 MILLIMETRES.
"11.33. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF 29
MILLIMETRES.
"11.44. Contrl. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF
24 MILLIMETRES.
"12.26. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE
OF 8 MILLIMETRES.
"12.35. On burning a paw, there was A STEADY RISE OF
PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 22. "Dog. On burning a paw, there was A RISE IN PRESSURE
OF 36 MILLIMETRES."
EXPERIMENT 24. "On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE
OF 12 MILLIMETRES.
"12.19. On burning a paw, there was A RISE OF PRESSURE
OF 18 MILLIMETRES."
EXPERIMENT 29. "2.13. Blood-pressure 43. On burning a paw it rose 12
millimetres.
"2.30. On burning a paw, THERE WAS A RISE OF BLOOD-
PRESSURE."
"3.6. On burning a paw, THERE WAS A RISE OF BLOOD-
PRESSURE."
EXPERIMENT 31. "3.35. On burning a paw, THERE WAS A RISE OF PRESSURE.
"4.14. On burning a paw, THERE WAS A RISE OF
PRESSURE."
The foregoing experiments are not quoted in full; in many of them, at
intervals, the animals were bled; and these observations of the
effects of "burning a paw" were incidental to others. BUT WHY ALL
THIS BURNING AND STIMULATION TO PROVE A PHENOMENON SO UNIFORM?
One exceptional experiment must not be overlooked. On one occasion
two dogs were vivisected at the same time. At the outset a paw of
each dog was burned, causing A RISE of blood-pressure in each case. A
little later the sciatic nerve was stimulated:
"11.25. On stimulating the sciatic nerves of each dog, Dog A showed a
rising and falling pressure, and Dog B (MORE ETHER WAS GIVEN JUST
THEN) showed an initial FALL, and a rise, with a sudden second FALL
and a rise.
"11.32. BOTH DOGS WERE DEEPLY ANAESTHETIZED. Dog A: Stimulation
PRODUCED NO EFFECT. Dog B: On stimulating the sciatic nerve, there
was A FALL OF (BLOOD)-PRESSURE, WITH SLOW RECOVERY."
Here we have recorded by the experimenter himself the difference in
the effect of stimulation of nerves in an animal "deeply
anaesthetized" and the results produced when the anaesthesia was
light.
It has seemed necessary to examine at some length these peculiar
experiments. The volumes describing them are not easily to be seen;
some appear to be out of print; even Sir Victor Horsley; in whose
laboratory in London some of the experiments were performed, confessed
that he did not know about the vivisections made in the United
States--whether or not they differed from those performed in England.
In the vast number of these vivisections, so far beyond anything
previously reported in our country by a single experimenters; in the
ingenuity and variety of the mutilations to which the victims were
subjected--mutilations and stimulations calculated to cause the
extremest agony, unless the anaesthesia was perfect; in the seeming
affirmation of absolute insensibility of the wretched animals,
although contradicted by the only sign of suffering that in some cases
could possibly be seen; in the apparent uselessness of experiments,
repeated again and again simply to elicit precisely the same
phenomena; above all, in the absence from criticism which some of
these "investigations" have managed to secure--all this constitutes a
claim for especial consideration. There can be little doubt that they
merely illustrate what goes on to-day, in many a laboratory in the
United States, in secret--as these were made in secret--and untouched
by the criticism of the outer world.
Of the absolute uselessness of the vast majority of these experiments
much might be said, but it is aside from this inquiry. The question
of utility is not here raised. The one matter of inquiry is the
existence of pain.
If a vast number of the experiments recorded may have involved the
keenest agony of the victims, how are we to explain the repeated
assertions that sensation was absolutely removed? Among
antivivisectionists there are those who belive that any human being
who could thus subject animals to torment would not find it impossible
to deny the fact. Such explanation implies an inveracity which it is
not necessary to impute. Mankind is still liable to error; the false
deductions of honest men have more than once led to mistaken
affirmations of facts; and the most illustrious scientist that ever
lived can hardly claim infallibility in matters of opinion. A
distinguished philosopher and vivisector of three hundred years ago,
Rene Descartes, put forth the theory that animals, being without
souls, cannot suffer pain, and that their cries under vivisection were
simply as the whirring of wheels in an intricate piece of machinery.
We can easily imagine a modern follower of Descartes declaring, as the
philosopher would have done, that "NO SUFFERING WAS FELT." A professor
of physiology in Harvard Medical School, in course of an address
before a State medical society, laid down the theory that "it is
ENTIRELY IMPOSSIBLE to draw conclusions with regard to the sensations
of animals by an effort to imagine what our own would be under similar
circumstances"; and when a vivisector has reached the stage where he
can hold that belief, he may define pain as something pertaining only
to human beings, and feel himself justified in declaring that
"VIVISECTION OF ANIMALS NEVER CAUSES PAIN," according to his
definition of the word. It is well for the world that with this
theory the vast majority of thinking men and women have no sympathy
whatever. The organized efforts for the protection of animals from
cruelty have no meaning if animals are without capacity for that
anguish which cruelty implies. We believe, on the contrary, that
many, if not all, of the higher species of animals, especially those
nearest to man in structure and intelligence, receive, when subjected
to the torment of fire or steel, precisely the same sensations that,
under a like infliction, a human being would suffer. At any rate, if
doubt be possible, should they not have the benefit of it?
If one were asked whether he surely could demonstrate the emotions of
any animal made incapable of movement, fixed immovably as in a vice,
and subjected to the stimulation of fire, he might confess that
inference and not proof was all he could offer. But if one goes
farther, and inquires whether in any of the experiments recorded in
this chapter there was evoked any sign of sensibility which delicate
instruments could detect and record, then, assuredly, we are on safe
ground. With startling uniformity we find recorded by the
experimenters themselves the fluctuations of blood-pressure following
the stimulation of exposed nerves, the crushing of pawes, the burning
of the feet, the scalding with boiling water, and other mutilations.
What is their significance? If, as Sir Lauder Brunton tells us, "the
irritation of sensory nerves tends to cause contraction of blood-
vessels AND TO RAISE THE BLOOD-PRESSURE"; if, as Straus affirms, "PAIN
INCREASES BLOOD-PRESSURE," so that in a healthy person the pressure is
increased even by pinching of the skin; if, as the physiologist Dalton
declares, the irritation of any of the sensitive nerves induces a
constriction of bloodvessels indicated by icreased arterial pressure;
if the professor of physiology at University College, London, being
asked if there were any means, other than the cries or struggles of an
animal, by which one could tell if the anaesthesia of an animal was
passing off, answered with scientific accuracy when he replied, "YAou
can tell by the blood-pressure," adding that when sensibility was
returning "THE PRESSURE GOES UP"; if it be true, as Professor Dixon,
of King's College, London, told the Royal Commissioners, "you can see
whether you are giving enough (of the anaesthetic) BY LOOKING AT THE
BLOOD-PRESSURE"; if the professor of physiology at Oxford was correct
in stating that "A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE" would tell an experimenter
whether or not an animal undergoing vivisection was feeling pain, even
though curare had rendered it so helpless that it could not even wink
an eye, and that this rise of blood-pressure was the "ONE OBVIOUS WAY"
of determining such sensibility; if we may depend upon the evidence of
the professor of physiology at the University of Cambridge, that "PAIN
WOULD CAUSE A RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE"; if the agreement of all these
scientific authorities concerning the rise of blood-pressure as an
indication of pain or returning sensibility can be accepted as
scientific truth--then may we not be sure that all of the living
animals whose vivisection we have here reviewed, in whose bodies, by
fire and steel and every phase of mutilation, there was so constantly
elicited this RISE OF BLOOD-PRESSURE, cannot be said to have attained
a painless death? "A man about to be burned under a railway car begs
somebody to kill him, yet iti s a statemnet to be taken literally,
that a brief death by burning would be considered a happy release by a
human being undergoing the experiences of some of the animals that
slowly die in a laboratory." So wrote Dr. Bigelow of Harvard
University, the most eminent surgeon that New England has yet
produced; and were he living to-day, it is not improbable that he
would point to some of the experiments here reviewed as examples of
the vivisections he intended to condemn. It may be that although the
present generation be indifferent, posterity will not condone, and
that one day it will hold up some of the experiments of the twentieth
century as involving the most prolonged, the most useless, the most
terrible, the most cruel torments, that the annals of animal
vivisection have ever supplied.