Appendix to First report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, October to December, 1906.

  • Great Britain. Royal Commission on Vivisection.
Date:
1907
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Appendix to First report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, October to December, 1906. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    77/168 (page 67)
    and even fits, were caused by the application of elec- tricity. That is stated in the British Medical Journal of August 12th, 1899. 1911. There is an account of that, I suppose, in that journal at somewhat greater length than you have given us ?—It is a brief statement in a collection of statements. 1912. Does it refer at all to the question of anaes- thetics ?—Not at all; they are not referred to. 1913. It is not said that it was under, or it was not under anaesthetics ?—No, it is not said. In the Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology ” for March, 1904, is described a series of experiments in which ink was injected into the eyes of living animals. The animals used were dogs^ cats, rabbits, and monkeys. After the injections the animals were kept alive for periods varying from three to twenty-four hours. We are all sufficiently aware of the extreme sensitiveness of the eye to understand what must have been the agony of having a needle driven into the eyeball, and ink squirted in and left in it. The experimenter makes this remark : “ The monkey’s eye appeared to be much more sensitive to the presence of the foreign sub- stance in the vitreous ” (a part of the inside of the eye) it caused inflammation, which “ seemed to inter- fere ” with the operation. These experiments were made by Dr. Paterson in the laboratory of the Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh. 1914. Is there anything about amesthetics there ?— Nothing whatever. Mr. Bayliss describes experiments on the spinal cord in the “ Journal of Physiology ” for February 28th, 1901. These consist of experiments on dogs, in which parts of the spinal cord were cut out or divided, and the roots of the nerves excited by electric shocks. These experiments are of the most cruel character. The vivisector says (page 191): “ In one experiment . . . the whole lumbar cord ” (which is a part of the spinal cord) was removed. Nine days later the experiment was performed—that is to say, the exciting with electric shocks. In the descrip- tion of another experiment (page 190) he says he cut through the roots of the nerves close to the spinal cord in seven female dogs. I wish to call special atten- tion to this operation, because Mr. Bayliss says : “ The operation was done under antiseptic precautions.” As he is very careful to mention it when the animals are anaesthetised, and does not say so on this occasion, we have a right to assume that this agonising operation was performed only with antiseptic precautions, which would in no way lessen the pain. 1915. There is nothing, I think, in the Act about compelling antiseptic precautions ?—No. 1916. But there is about using anaesthetics except when dispensed with by a certificate ?—There is nothing in the Act about antiseptic precautions. 1917. That may be the reason why he stated the one and took the other for granted. It may be that he had a certificate to do it without anaesthetics ?—I do not know if he had at that date. After an interval of from 8 to 14 days the animals were anaesthetised, and the nerve roots excited by electric shocks. A very great number of animals were used for these experiments. Even if they were under anaesthetics for the prelimin- any operation, they had to be kept alive after the effect of the anaesthetic had passed off, for a varying number of days (8 to 14) in a mutilated and suffering condition in order that the experiments should be completed. In the same number of the “ Journal of Physiology ” there is an account of experi- ments on dogs and cats by Dr. Levy, in which the brain and various parts of the spinal cord were stimulated and excited by electric shocks and currents until they were so much exhausted that they no longer answered to the shocks. The nerve trunks, and the muscles to be observed being first laid bare, Dr. Levy remarks that the experiments were performed under “ narcosis induced by mor- phine,” which he speaks of as producing a state of anaesthesia. [Although morphine is not an anaesthe- tic.] He adds: “ It cannot be claimed that the ccartex ” (which is a part of the brain) “ will remain in an absolutely constant degree of anaesthesia.” These experiments were made at University College, London. In the “ Journal of Physiology ” of July 21, 1902, Mr. Bayliss, in describing certain experiments, says there were some desired results which he was unable to obtain owing “ to the fact ” (these are his own words) that the prolonged and severe operative procedures caused the nerve roots to become incapable of being g Cook excited.” The animal was cut open, one set of nerves in the abdomen extirpated, and other nerves irritated, 28 Nov. 1906 for long periods at a time. He used A.C.E. mixture and curare in these experiments. The effect of the curare would be that when the dog recovered conscious- ness and sensibility to pain, it would be unable to make the slightest movement to show that it felt the knife and the electric shock. In the “Journal of Physiology ” for May 28th, 1902, Mr. Bayliss describes some experiments he made at University College in which a dog was used which had already served for a previous experiment. Some of the abdominal nerves had been extirpated and the spinal cord cut. In this condition it was kept alive and then subjected to a further and separate experiment. I very much wish to draw your attention to this, because there is nothing in the Act which permits an animal to be used for two experiments. Proviso 3 on page 2 releases the vivi- sector from the obligation to kill the animal before its recovery from the anaesthetic, but requires that the animal be killed so soon as the object of the experi- ment has been attained. It is, of course, well known that animals are used for more than one experiment ; but proof of this is difficult to find in the writings of the vivisectors. Mr. Bayliss has provided us with it. 1918. (Colonel Lockwood.) Is that the dog whose cas was brought up in the House—the brown spaniel ?— No, it is another one. 1919. (Sir Mackenzie Chalmers.) Is it the case that was brought up in the action ?—It is another one—not the one brought up in the action. In the “ Journal of Physiology ” for May 28th, 1902, Drs. Brodie and Halliburton report ex- periments on dogs which were carried out in the fol- lowing manner : The abdomen was opened, the spleen exposed, and the nerves of the spleen laid bare and a length of nerve dissected out; then the nerve cut and the spleen enclosed in a box. When the nerve is excited by an electric current the spleen contracts. The spleen is of course all this time still connected with the living animal. The vivisectors go on to say that simultaneously with the experiment on the spleen they also measured the blood pressure in the carotid artery, because, as they explain, “ Most of our experi- ments lasted many hours, and the condition of the arterial pressure furnished us with a convenient means of gauging the general condition of the animal.” At the beginning of the experiment we are told that the animal was anaesthetised with morphia and A.C.E. mixture, but it is, to say the least of it, most unlikely that the animal was kept in a state of complete uncon- sciousness of pain during the “ many hours ” that it lay cut open with the spleen in a box, while its nerves were being irritated by electric currents. In one experiment they continued this stimulating of the bare nerve for six hours, with occasional brief stoppages. In one the hind leg of a dog was used instead of the spleen. The animal was anaesthetised and sufficient curare was given to prevent the contrac- tion of voluntary muscles when their nerves were stimulated, which shows that the animal was not sufficiently under the anaesthetic to be unable to feel the pain of a nerve being touched. The leg was enclosed in a box and cut open so as to expose the sciatic nerve, which was then excited by electric shocks or currents. This agonising excitation was kept up in one animal for four and a half hours, and in another for five hours. I submit that no medical man who has performed operations himself on human patients, or seen them performed, will believe that those animals were in a condition of insensibility to pain for the four and a half, the five, and the six hours during which this tormenting of bare nerves was being carried on. In the August number (1904) of the “ Journal of Phy- siology ” there is an account of a number of experi- ments carried out by Professor Starling at the Physio- logical Laboratory of University College. These experi- ments were performed on cats, the reason for this choice of animals being given by the vivisector in the following words : “ Endeavours to expose the gasserian ganglion in the dog were ttnsuccessful, owing to the severity of the operation reguired. In the cats the scalp and the muscle under the scalp were skinned off one half of the skull; then the skull itself was sawn through and the bone removed, leaving a part of the brain with its covering membrane exposed. Plugs of cottonwool were packed in between the brain and a part of the skull which had not been removed, so as to