Madam, - John Banville is well known to be erudite and well educated in many subjects, not least in science and its philosophy.
His books on Copernicus and Kepler are wonderful explorations of the intellectual, academic and moral challenges encountered by two of the world's greatest scientists, while The Newton Letter, which I had the pleasure of reading for the first time only three weeks ago, obliquely describes the fear of every scientist (and indeed every artist), namely the possible meaninglessness of their work.
It was therefore a shock to see this aware, intelligent and understanding individual resort to emotional and ignorant hectoring in an attempt to suspend an activity about which he is clearly ill-informed and illogical. A particularly extraordinary aspect of John Banville's stance is his apparent determination not to educate himself about the facts surrounding animal experimentation in the Ireland of 2008 - the legislation, controls, value and full extent of the surrounding ethical dimensions.
If he did, he would learn that many of the scientific community and beyond are already challenged and engaged by the moral and ethical issues surrounding animal experimentation. Some scientists are reluctant to use animals and choose instead to work exclusively on human tissues, cell lines or computerised model systems, often devoting whole careers to developing better alternatives. But others recognise that these approaches are still limited and several decades from accurately replacing animals.
Many scientific and medical researchers are therefore convinced that careful, considered, scrutinised use of animal models is a justified, critical step to development of therapies and procedures required to rid this planet of human and animal disease and suffering.
If we are to continue our march towards becoming a mature, reflective, cultured and moral society, it is critical that we are all prepared to grapple with complex moral and intellectual issues such as this. Only then will we come to informed, democratic decisions based on rational thought, discussion and argument among many, rather than the ill-informed emotion of a few. - Yours, etc,
CLIONA O'FARRELLY,
Professor of Comparative
Immunology,
Trinity College,
Dublin 2.