Literature DB >> 25437634

Medical science and the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876: A re-examination of anti-vivisectionism in provincial Britain.

Michael A Finn1, James F Stark2.   

Abstract

The Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 was an important but ambiguous piece of legislation. For researchers it stymied British science, yet ensured that vivisection could continue under certain restrictions. For anti-vivisection protestors it was positive proof of the influence of their campaigns, yet overly deferent to Britain's scientific elite. In previous accounts of the Act and the rise of anti-vivisectionism, scientific medicine central to these debates has been treated as monolithic rather than a heterogeneous mix of approaches; and this has gone hand-in-hand with the marginalizing of provincial practices, as scholarship has focused largely on the 'Golden Triangle' of London, Oxford and Cambridge. We look instead at provincial research: brain studies from Wakefield and anthrax investigations in Bradford. The former case elucidates a key role for specific medical science in informing the anti-vivisection movement, whilst the latter demonstrates how the Act affected the particular practices of provincial medical scientists. It will be seen, therefore, how provincial medical practices were both influential upon, and profoundly affected by, the growth of anti-vivisectionism and the passing of the Act. This paper emphasises how regional and varied medico-scientific practices were central to the story of the creation and impact of the Cruelty to Animals Act.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anthrax; Anti-vivisection; Asylum; Bradford; Ferrier; Wakefield

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25437634     DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.10.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci        ISSN: 1369-8486


  2 in total

Review 1.  Innovative organotypic in vitro models for safety assessment: aligning with regulatory requirements and understanding models of the heart, skin, and liver as paradigms.

Authors:  Chris S Pridgeon; Constanze Schlott; Min Wei Wong; Minne B Heringa; Tobias Heckel; Joe Leedale; Laurence Launay; Vitalina Gryshkova; Stefan Przyborski; Rachel N Bearon; Emma L Wilkinson; Tahera Ansari; John Greenman; Delilah F G Hendriks; Sue Gibbs; James Sidaway; Rowena L Sison-Young; Paul Walker; Mike J Cross; B Kevin Park; Chris E P Goldring
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 5.153

Review 2.  Legal Frameworks and Controls for the Protection of Research Animals: A Focus on the Animal Welfare Body with a French Case Study.

Authors:  Elisa Codecasa; Patrick Pageat; Míriam Marcet-Rius; Alessandro Cozzi
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 2.752

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.