Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine (CHSTM), University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
School of History, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2021 Dec 2;43(4):126. doi: 10.1007/s40656-021-00478-4.
This article argues that the movement of dogs from pounds to medical laboratories played a critically important role in debates over the use of animals in science and medicine in the United States in the twentieth century, not least by drawing the scientific community into every greater engagement with bureaucratic political governance. If we are to understand the unique characteristics of the American federal legislation that emerges in the 1960s, we need to understand the long and protracted debate over the use of pound animals at the local municipal and state level between antivivisectionists, humane activists, and scientific and medical researchers. We argue that the Laboratory Animal Care Act of 1966 reflects the slow evolution of a strategy that proved most successful in local conflicts, and which would characterize a "new humanitarianism": not the regulation of experimental practices but of the care and transportation of the animals being provided to the laboratory. Our analysis is consistent with, and draws upon, scholarship which has established the productive power of public agencies and civil society on the periphery of the American state.
本文认为,在 20 世纪美国的科学和医学领域中,犬类从动物收容所转移到医疗实验室的过程扮演了一个至关重要的角色,不仅因为它让科学界越来越多地参与到官僚政治治理中,还因为它引发了关于动物使用的辩论。如果我们要理解 20 世纪 60 年代出现的美国联邦立法的独特特征,我们就需要了解反活体解剖主义者、人道活动家和科学与医学研究人员在地方市政和州一级对使用收容所动物的长期而持久的争论。我们认为,1966 年的《实验动物照顾法案》反映了一种策略的缓慢演变,这种策略在地方冲突中被证明是最成功的,并将成为“新人道主义”的特征:不是规范实验实践,而是规范提供给实验室的动物的护理和运输。我们的分析与已经确立了美国州政府边缘的公共机构和公民社会的生产力的学术成果一致,并从中汲取了灵感。