Ull History Centre: Records of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Ull History Centre: Records of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection Hull History Centre: Records of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection U DBV Records of the British Union 1865-1996 for the Abolition of Vivisection Accession number: 1995/09, 1996/11, 2006/03, 2007/05, 2012/32 Historical Background: The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) was founded in 1898 by Miss Frances Power Cobbe (1822-1904). Concern for the welfare of animals was not a new phenomenon: the first wave of anti-vivisection feeling in England commenced around the middle of the nineteenth century. It began as an animal protection movement primarily concerned with the prevention of cruel working class sports such as bull baiting and cockfighting, hence support came from the middle and upper classes who saw nothing wrong with their own blood sports. The first anti- vivisection societies originated in 1875, the year in which a Royal Commission looked into the question of laboratory animals. Perhaps the best known of these societies was the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection which later became the Victoria Street Society (VSS) and then the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), which survives today. Miss Cobbe established the VSS and for eighteen years served as Honorary Secretary, succeeded by Stephen Coleridge (1854-1936) in 1897. It was here that disputes began. Coleridge argued that after some twenty years campaigning for the complete abolition of animal experiments they had failed to achieve any change in the nature of experiments. He therefore proposed that a policy calling for the restriction of animal experiments should be advocated, working on the theory that success of this policy would eventually lead to total abolition. However, Miss Cobbe was outraged, returning from semi retirement in rural Wales to leave NAVS with a small group of the older members, whom she believed had formed the nucleus of her movement, to form BUAV. The society was officially founded in Bristol on 14 June 1898. The events of 1898 served to divide the anti-vivisection movement as Miss Cobbe searched for her successor. The ideal candidate not only had to fight vivisection but to fight Coleridge and his restriction policies. Dr Walter R Hadwen (1854-1932) was chosen, becoming Honorary Treasurer and then, after Miss Cobbe's death, President. During his presidency the gap between BUAV and NAVS widened. BUAV began initially in Bristol, yet through an extensive programme of tours, meetings and lectures they sought support throughout England and Wales. By the end of June 1898 the first branch, Wales, had been established claiming 253 members. The first half-yearly report also stated the intention to engage the services of a Medical Doctor, so they could meet medical opponents on their own ground when either the cruelty or the inadequacy of vivisection was disputed. There seems no doubt that the momentum of the movement helped their word to spread quickly in the early years. The organisation was structured upon a regional basis and by 1899 had eight sections. There does not appear to have been a central structure at the outset of the Union. Perhaps the only national event in the 1890s was the publication of The Abolitionist, which first appeared on 15 April 1899. Campaigning work was undertaken by the branches in the form of the production and distribution of mass publications. Shops were opened for short periods of time displaying placards and staffed by ardent anti-vivisectionists. By 1903 there were 20 federated societies and a Parliamentary Association, formulated to speak on behalf of the abolition cause in the House of Commons. In August of this year BUAV were invited to send a delegate to the second meeting of the International Congress of the World's League for the Protection of Animals against Vivisection, held in Frankfurt. Propaganda work was undertaken in the form of correspondence through the newspapers. This work through the media and the setting up of The Abolitionist so swiftly after the society was officially formulated was due to the refusal of The Zoophilist, published by NAVS, to carry articles regarding BUAV, as it was prepared to do for other anti-vivisection societies. page 1 of 143 Hull History Centre: Records of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection Campaigning for the abolition of vivisection at the beginning of the twentieth century had strong affinities to the campaign against inoculation. They shared the view that animal experiments did not provide reliable results for inoculations which were then to be administered to human beings. Attacks upon universities which were granted licenses under the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Act to practice vivisection were undertaken. On the death of Miss Cobbe in 1904 her plan to move the headquarters of BUAV to London finally came to fruition. The new premises not only served as headquarters for the Union but also as a centre for information. Beatrice Kidd, Organising Secretary since January 1904, took up residence at 32 Charing Cross, on hand to provide visitors with an array of publications advocating the work of the society. By 1906 there were 21 federated societies and the involvement of the Union with other abolitionist societies continued to grow. In March 1906 Dr Hadwen represented BUAV at a meeting of the International Anti-Vivisection Council, which called for the adoption of one parliamentary bill for the abolition party. Although BUAV were at this time advocating their own abolition bill to their supporters in the Houses of Parliament they cooperated with the joint proposals. In July 1909 an official representative was present at the fourth Triennial Congress of the World League of Opponents of Vivisection, an exclusively abolitionist body. By 1912 BUAV boasted 49 branches, making it the largest anti-vivisection society in the world at this time. As they continued to grow The Abolitionist began to be sold on the street and temporary staff were hired at headquarters. In the 1920s Dr Hadwen visited the United States of America in search of support. By 1924 the Union had 91 branches, two in Australia. Attempting to increase their support BUAV had a stall at the Ideal Life Exhibition of July 1921. The 1930s was a decade of change. This was immediately preceded in 1929 by the society's changing status to that of a corporation under the Companies Act of 1929. Its Articles of Association are dated 22 November 1929. This effectively meant that BUAV was now a limited company, governed by company rules, and liable to taxation. This decade witnessed the advance of radiogram technology, with BUAV participating in debates broadcast to the nation. A greater emphasis was placed upon London with a number of new branches opening and an increase in the number of propaganda shops. Vans were also used to spread the abolitionist message. By 1940 the Union reached a peak of 154 branches, including six in Australia and one in New Zealand. The first edition of Junior Section News Sheet, a publication aimed at young supporters, appeared in April 1945. In 1950 it became the Youth Section News Sheet. The Second World War appeared to foster greater ideas of cooperation within the animal welfare movement. The Conference of anti-vivisection Societies first met on 20 November 1942. Five societies were represented at the invitation of BUAV 'for the purpose of discussing and making plans for a joint intensive campaign, after the war, to claim the total abolition of vivisection as a necessary step towards securing for animals their rightful place in the new world order, which it is generally believed will follow the peace'. By 1949 the Conference of Anti-Vivisection Societies was producing joint publications and had adopted BUAV's own Bill for the Prohibition of Vivisection. The immediate post war period began to see a rise in public demonstrations as a medium to spread the anti-vivisection message, in particular these were held outside vivisection laboratories. The promotion of the idea of pets being used in experiments began to be used as a campaign tactic in 1952, attacking the whole trafficking trade of pets to vivisection laboratories. Campaigns were launched attacking the use of animals in satellites and rockets as the space age began. Attempts were also made to focus upon the idea of healthy living as a rational alternative to vivisection, as witnessed in the 1959 campaign, Health without Cruelty. BUAV became a founder member of the British Federation of Animal Welfare Societies in 1952, an organisation affiliated to page 2 of 143 Hull History Centre: Records of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection the World Federation for the Protection of Animals. This steadily increasing cooperation between societies continued with BUAV represented upon five bodies by 1955. A joint committee was created with the RSPCA to produce a film highlighting the position of animals, All Living Things, completed in 1955. BUAV resigned from the British Federation of Animal Welfare Societies in 1958, with a feeling that too many joint organisations within Great Britain were beginning to be counter productive. This was followed in 1959 by new links with the International Conference Against Vivisection in the United States. In 1960 the Conference of anti-vivisection Societies became the British Council of Anti-Vivisection Societies, and a Joint Consultative Council was formed between BUAV and NAVS. Links were maintained with the Conference of Animal Welfare Societies and the British Council of Anti- Vivisection Societies, with a new affiliation with the World Coalition Against Vivisection in 1966. However, references to membership of joint societies in BUAV annual reports began to decrease as the 1960s progressed. The following year amalgamation negotiations between BUAV and NAVS were unable to reach agreement.
Recommended publications
  • An Estimate of the Number of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes
    Research Article Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 1–18 ª The Author(s) 2020 An Estimate of the Number of Animals Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions Used for Scientific Purposes Worldwide DOI: 10.1177/0261192919899853 in 2015 journals.sagepub.com/home/atl Katy Taylor and Laura Rego Alvarez Abstract Few attempts have been made to estimate the global use of animals in experiments, since our own estimated figure of 115.2 million animals for the year 2005. Here, we provide an update for the year 2015. Data from 37 countries that publish national statistics were standardised against the definitions of ‘animals’ and ‘procedures’ used in the European Union (EU) Directive 2010/63/EU. We also applied a prediction model, based on publication rates, to estimate animal use in a further 142 countries. This yielded an overall estimate of global animal use in scientific procedures of 79.9 million animals, a 36.9% increase on the equivalent estimated figure for 2005, of 58.3 million animals. We further extrapolated this estimate to obtain a more comprehensive final global figure for the number of animals used for scientific purposes in 2015, of 192.1 million. This figure included animals killed for their tissues, normal and genetically modified (GM) animals without a harmful genetic mutation that are used to maintain GM strains and animals bred for laboratory use but not used. Since the 2005 study, there has been no evident increase in the number of countries publishing data on the numbers of animals used in experiments. Without regular, accurate statistics, the impact of efforts to replace, reduce and refine animal experiments cannot be effectively monitored.
    [Show full text]
  • Derogatory Discourses of Veganism and the Reproduction of Speciesism in UK 1 National Newspapers Bjos 1348 134..152
    The British Journal of Sociology 2011 Volume 62 Issue 1 Vegaphobia: derogatory discourses of veganism and the reproduction of speciesism in UK 1 national newspapers bjos_1348 134..152 Matthew Cole and Karen Morgan Abstract This paper critically examines discourses of veganism in UK national newspapers in 2007. In setting parameters for what can and cannot easily be discussed, domi- nant discourses also help frame understanding. Discourses relating to veganism are therefore presented as contravening commonsense, because they fall outside readily understood meat-eating discourses. Newspapers tend to discredit veganism through ridicule, or as being difficult or impossible to maintain in practice. Vegans are variously stereotyped as ascetics, faddists, sentimentalists, or in some cases, hostile extremists. The overall effect is of a derogatory portrayal of vegans and veganism that we interpret as ‘vegaphobia’. We interpret derogatory discourses of veganism in UK national newspapers as evidence of the cultural reproduction of speciesism, through which veganism is dissociated from its connection with debates concerning nonhuman animals’ rights or liberation. This is problematic in three, interrelated, respects. First, it empirically misrepresents the experience of veganism, and thereby marginalizes vegans. Second, it perpetuates a moral injury to omnivorous readers who are not presented with the opportunity to understand veganism and the challenge to speciesism that it contains. Third, and most seri- ously, it obscures and thereby reproduces
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Non-Human Primates in Research in Primates Non-Human of Use The
    The use of non-human primates in research The use of non-human primates in research A working group report chaired by Sir David Weatherall FRS FMedSci Report sponsored by: Academy of Medical Sciences Medical Research Council The Royal Society Wellcome Trust 10 Carlton House Terrace 20 Park Crescent 6-9 Carlton House Terrace 215 Euston Road London, SW1Y 5AH London, W1B 1AL London, SW1Y 5AG London, NW1 2BE December 2006 December Tel: +44(0)20 7969 5288 Tel: +44(0)20 7636 5422 Tel: +44(0)20 7451 2590 Tel: +44(0)20 7611 8888 Fax: +44(0)20 7969 5298 Fax: +44(0)20 7436 6179 Fax: +44(0)20 7451 2692 Fax: +44(0)20 7611 8545 Email: E-mail: E-mail: E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Web: www.acmedsci.ac.uk Web: www.mrc.ac.uk Web: www.royalsoc.ac.uk Web: www.wellcome.ac.uk December 2006 The use of non-human primates in research A working group report chaired by Sir David Weatheall FRS FMedSci December 2006 Sponsors’ statement The use of non-human primates continues to be one the most contentious areas of biological and medical research. The publication of this independent report into the scientific basis for the past, current and future role of non-human primates in research is both a necessary and timely contribution to the debate. We emphasise that members of the working group have worked independently of the four sponsoring organisations. Our organisations did not provide input into the report’s content, conclusions or recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Reporting the Implementation of the Three Rs in European Primate and Mouse Research Papers: Are We Making Progress?
    ATLA 38, 495–517, 2010 495 Reporting the Implementation of the Three Rs in European Primate and Mouse Research Papers: Are We Making Progress? Katy Taylor British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, London, UK Summary — It is now more than 20 years since both Council of Europe Convention ETS123 and EU Directive 86/609?EEC were introduced, to promote the implementation of the Three Rs in animal experi- mentation and to provide guidance on animal housing and care. It might therefore be expected that reports of the implementation of the Three Rs in animal research papers would have increased during this period. In order to test this hypothesis, a literature survey of animal-based research was conducted. A ran- domly-selected sample from 16 high-profile medical journals, of original research papers arising from European institutions that featured experiments which involved either mice or primates, were identified for the years 1986 and 2006 (Total sample = 250 papers). Each paper was scored out of 10 for the incidence of reporting on the implementation of Three Rs-related factors corresponding to Replacement (justification of non-use of non-animal methods), Reduction (statistical analysis of the number of animals needed) and Refinement (housing aspects, i.e. increased cage size, social housing, enrichment of cage environment and food; and procedural aspects, i.e. the use of anaesthesia, analgesia, humane endpoints, and training for procedures with positive reinforcement). There was no significant increase in overall reporting score over time, for either mouse or primate research. By 2006, mouse research papers scored an average of 0 out of a possible 10, and primate research papers scored an average of 1.5.
    [Show full text]
  • Ar Calendar.P65
    May 2012 Animal Rights Calendar Sat 12th . West Lancashire Vegan Fair Sat 12th . Global Boycott Procter & Gamble Day (TBC). Uncaged www.veggies.org.uk/arc.htm Sat 19th . Meat Free in Manchester : Vegetarian Society Sat 19th . Hugletts Wood Farm Animal Sanctuary Open Day Sun 20th . Horse and Pony Sanctuary Open Day March 2012 : Veggie Month : Animal Aid Mon 21st - Sun 27th . National Vegetarian Week Mon 5th . Sheffield Animal Friends meeting Fri 25th - Sun 27th . Bristol VegFestUK Mon 5th . Manchester Animal Action! 1st Monday monthly Sun 27th . GM Action Tue 6th . South East Animal Rights meeting. First Tuesday of each month. Tue 6th . Merseyside Animal Rights meeting. First Tuesday monthly June 2012 Sun 10th . Animals in Need Sponsored Walk Wed 7th . Live Exports - Ramsgate (every week) : Kent Action Against Live Exports (KAALE) Sun 10th . Nottingham Green Festival (T.B.C) Wed 7th . Derby Animal Rights. Every two weeks. Tue 19th . McLibel: Anniversary Day of Action Wed 7th . Southsea Animal Action meeting. First Wednesday monthly Wed 7th . Ethical Voice for Animals meeting. First Wednesday monthly July 2012 Wed 7th . Southampton Animal Action. First Wednesday monthly Thur 5th . Mel Broughton's Birthday : Vegan Prisoner Support Group Thur 8th . Nottingham Animal Rights Networking. Every two weeks Sat 7th . Animal Aid Sponsored Walk Fri 13th - Sun 15th . International Animal Rights Gathering, Poland Sat 10th . Demo against proposed cull Lake Windermere Canada Geese Mon 12th . Bath Animal Action / Hunt Sabs. 2nd Monday monthly August 2012 Wed 14th . Bournemouth Animal Aid Meeting. 2nd Wednesday monthly Wed 1st - Mon 6th . EF Summer Gathering, Shrewsbury Wed 14th . Taunton Vegans & Veggies.
    [Show full text]
  • Veterinary Students' Perception and Understanding of Issues
    animals Article Veterinary Students’ Perception and Understanding of Issues Surrounding the Slaughter of Animals According to the Rules of Halal: A Survey of Students from Four English Universities Awal Fuseini * , Andrew Grist and Toby G. Knowles School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK; [email protected] (A.G.); [email protected] (T.G.K.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +44-074-7419-2392 Received: 18 April 2019; Accepted: 27 May 2019; Published: 30 May 2019 Simple Summary: Veterinarians play a vital role in safeguarding the welfare of animals and protecting public health during the slaughter of farm animals for human consumption. With the continued increase in the number of animals slaughtered for religious communities in the UK, this study evaluates the perception and level of understanding of religious slaughter issues by veterinary students at various stages of their studies. The results showed a significant effect of the year of study on respondents’ understanding of the regulations governing Halal slaughter and other related issues. Whilst the prevalence of vegetarianism and veganism were higher than the general UK population, the majority of respondents were meat eaters who indicated that they prefer meat from humanely slaughtered (pre-stunned) animals, irrespective of whether slaughter was performed with an Islamic prayer (Halal) or not. Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate the perception and level of understanding of religious slaughter issues, and the regulations governing the process, amongst veterinary students in England. A total of 459 veterinary students in different levels, or years of study (years 1–5), were surveyed.
    [Show full text]
  • About Animal Aid Animal Aid Is the Largest Animal Rights Pressure Group in the UK
    About Animal Aid Animal Aid is the largest animal rights pressure group in the UK. The society campaigns against all forms of animal abuse and promotes a cruelty-free lifestyle. Animal Aid’s origins The story of Animal Aid began in 1977, when school teacher Jean Pink read a book by philosopher Peter Singer called ‘Animal Liberation’. This book exposed what was happening to animals in laboratories and factory farms. Jean couldn’t get the images of animal suffering out of her head and she decided she had to do something about it. She produced leaflets and petitions at home, and Target groups recruited a small group of supporters to hand them out The key target groups for Animal Aid’s campaigns are: to the public. The numbers of supporters grew, and Jean l the general public decided to give up teaching so that she could devote l politicians such as MPs, MEPs and government all her time to her campaigning work. She rented an l ministers. office in Tonbridge and established Animal Aid as a l the media, including TV, radio and newspapers pressure group. Animal Aid has grown today into the largest animal rights pressure group in the UK with many It is through the media, our website and special thousands of supporters. publications that we communicate our message to the public, who we hope will change their lifestyle and also lobby politicians to introduce laws to bring about change. As consumers, members of the public can also influence companies by, for example, buying cruelty-free products. Campaign methods Animal Aid’s main campaign methods include: l distributing films, leaflets, posters, factsheets, l l l postcards and reports l carrying out undercover investigations to expose l l l animal cruelty l e-campaigning via the internet and social media l lobbying politicians and businesses l organising demonstrations and publicity events l providing teaching resources free of charge to l l l schools Animal Aid’s campaigning policy is strictly peaceful.
    [Show full text]
  • Harnessing Opportunities in Non-Animal Asthma Research for a 21St-Century Science
    WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository 11-2011 Harnessing Opportunities in Non-Animal Asthma Research for a 21st-Century Science Gemma L. Buckland Humane Society International Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/acwp_arte Part of the Bioethics and Medical Ethics Commons, Laboratory and Basic Science Research Commons, and the Research Methods in Life Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Buckland, G. L. (2011). Harnessing opportunities in non-animal asthma research for a 21st-century science. Drug discovery today, 16(21), 914-927. This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Harnessing opportunities in non-animal asthma research for a 21st-century science Gemma L. Buckland, Humane Society International CITATION Buckland, G. L. (2011). Harnessing opportunities in non-animal asthma research for a 21st-century science. Drug discovery today, 16(21), 914-927. ABSTRACT The incidence of asthma is on the increase and calls for research are growing, yet asthma is a disease that scientists are still trying to come to grips with. Asthma research has relied heavily on animal use; however, in light of increasingly robust in vitro and computational models and the need to more fully incorporate the ‘Three Rs’ principles of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement, is it time to reassess the asthma research paradigm? Progress in non-animal research techniques is reaching a level where commitment and integration are necessary. Many scientists believe that progress in this field rests on linking disciplines to make research directly translatable from the bench to the clinic; a ‘21st-century’ scientific approach to address age-old questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Promoting Local Philanthropy and Strengthening the Dear Neighbors and Friends, Nonprofit Organizations in Essex County, MA
    Promoting local philanthropy and strengthening the Dear Neighbors and Friends, nonprofit organizations in Essex County, MA. If ever there were a time for a thriving Community Foundation, this is it. Charitable life in America has reached new levels of challenge and importance this year. When government is in difficult straits, when business is recovering, and when society’s Ayer Mill Clock Tower needs are growing, the nonprofit sector steps forward. Can charities become more effi- Turns 100! cient? Can donors give more effectively? Can they work together? Your Community Foundation is at the heart of the matter. This Report has news of ECCF’s October 3rd, 2010 marked the life in 2011: 100th Anniversary of the larg- est mill clock tower in the 2011 Record participation of leaders county-wide at the Institute for Trustees world. ECCF celebrated Significant increases in the breadth of grantmaking by ECCF Fund Holders the tower and its keeper, report A challenging fundraising year for ECCF and many other nonprofits Charlie Waites, with a A game-changing summit of nonprofit leaders in Lawrence reception at the Law- 6,800 Massachusetts nonprofits and 275,000 nationwide decertified by IRS as out rence History Center. ... Making a difference of business or out of compliance ECCF manages the maintenance of for those who make Record attendance at the Youth at Risk Conference in the face of major public the tower through a difference budget cuts an Endowment Wonderful new Trustees and staff helping ECCF expand its services and impact Fund established at the Foundation. Learn A year like 2011 shows just how essential it is for Essex County to have its Community more about the iconic Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • APVMA Comments on Animal Welfare Policy
    APVMA Comments on animal welfare policy Dangers of relying on animal experiments to determine human reactions. It has already been widely acknowledged that extrapolation from animals to humans can and does result in dangerously misleading outcomes. Species differences occur in respect of anatomy, the structure and function of organs, metabolism of toxins, rates of detoxification and protein binding, absorption of chemicals, mechanisms of DNA repair and lifespan, and more. So if such differences can occur between similar species then it’s negligent to extrapolate from say a rat to a human – two totally different species with a totally different genetic make-up. Another major difference is in the regulation of our genes. A mouse and a human for example, may share 99% of the same genes, however they are regulated differently. Both a mouse and a human have the same gene that enables us to grow a tail. In the case of a mouse that gene is “turned on”, but in humans that gene is “turned off.” The argument that we share a large proportion of genes with another species cannot therefore be used as a reason for selecting a particular animal model to predict human responses. Researchers often claim that animals are used because they need to test in a living system rather than on isolated cells or tissue, however an entire living system creates more variables which can further affect the outcome of any results. A point of interest is that most animal models used in toxicity testing have never been formally validated.1 Regulatory bodies often argue that alternative non-animal tests cannot be relied upon due to them not having been validated.
    [Show full text]
  • The Failure of the Three R's and the Future of Animal Experimentation
    University of Chicago Legal Forum Volume 2006 | Issue 1 Article 7 Reduce, Refine, Replace: The aiF lure of the Three R's and the Future of Animal Experimentation Darian M. Ibrahim [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf Recommended Citation Ibrahim, Darian M. () "Reduce, Refine, Replace: The aiF lure of the Three R's and the Future of Animal Experimentation," University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 2006: Iss. 1, Article 7. Available at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2006/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Chicago Legal Forum by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Reduce, Refine, Replace: The Failure of the Three R's and the Future of Animal Experimentation DarianM Ibrahimt The debate in animal ethics is defined by those who advocate the regulation of animal use and those who advocate its aboli- tion.' The animal welfare approach, which focuses on regulating animal use, maintains that humans have an obligation to treat animals "humanely" but may use them for human purposes.2 The animal rights approach, which focuses on abolishing animal use, argues that animals have inherent moral value that is inconsis- tent with us treating them as property.3 The animal welfare approach is the dominant model of ani- mal advocacy in the United States.4 Animal experimentation provides a fertile ground for testing this model because a unique confluence of factors make experimentation appear susceptible to meaningful regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • 233331564.Pdf
    UNIVERSAL LIBRARY OU_21278 0 Y Y LIBRAR L L UNIVERSA DOCTORS' DELUSIONS CRUDE CRIMINOLOGY SHAM EDUCATION LONDON PUBLISHED BY Constable and Company Ltd. IO-12 ORANGE STREET W.C.2 INDIA AND PAKISTAN Orient Longmans Ltd. BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS • CANADA Longmans, Green and Company TORONTO SOUTH AND EAST AFRICA Lon ;mans Green and Company Ltd. CAPE TOWN NAIROBI DOCTORS' DELUSIONS CRUDE CRIMINOLOGY AND SHAM EDUCATION BY BERNARD SHAW LONDON CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LIMITED First published in the Limited Collected Edition 1931 Revised and reprinted for this Standard Edition 1932 Reprinted 1950 All rights fully protected and reserved PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, EDINBURGH CONTENTS PAGE A Word First xi DOCTORS' DELUSIONS I What is to be done with the Doctors? 3 Orthodox Origin of all the Heresies 5 Science at the Prow and Commerce at the Helm 8 Diagnosis, Sham and Red. 1o Battle Creek and Sir Horace Plunkett . II "My Poverty, but not my Will—" 12 The Eternal Struggle between the Old Ways and the New ....... 13 How these Doctors love one another! . 14 The Case of Sir Herbert Barker . 18 Swedish Therapeutics . 20 Economic Limit to the Period of Training 22 The Advent of the Osteopath . 22 The Electronic Rayman . 24 The Infinitesimal Dose . 29 The Game of Capping Cures . 32 The Ritual of the Guinea-pig . 35 The Osteopath as a Miracle Worker 36 The Unqualified Qualified . 39 The Inevitability of Specialization 41 Wanted: a State Medical Service 42 The Medical Profession and the State . 44 Trade Unionism on Miraculous Assumptions . 44 Lay Representation now Feasible 46 What could Lay Representatives do? .
    [Show full text]