- Science Communications Officer at the Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society International (HSUS/HSI)
- Con to the question "Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?"
“Animal research certainly fails animals, in terms of the distress and suffering caused, and just as importantly, animal research often fails people, too, in terms of the slow, unproductive route to useful treatments. More than 90 percent of drugs that have passed animal trials for safety and efficacy are not successful in treating the human disease for which they are intended…
[S]urely we can all agree that replacement of animals in testing and research is morally, ethically and scientifically the only way forward.”
“Science in Transit; The Move Away from Animals in Research,” huffingtonpost.co.uk, Dec. 16, 2016
- Theoretical Expertise Ranking:
Individuals with PhDs, MDs, or equivalent advanced degrees in fields relevant to animal testing issues. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to animal testing issues.
- Involvement and Affiliations:
- Science Communications Officer, HSUS/HSI, Aug. 2016-present
- Senior Lecturer in Immunology, Aston University, Aug. 2004-Aug. 2016
- Writer, Huffington Post
- PhD, Biology, Dundee University, 1998
- MSc, Experimental and Molecular Pathology, Dundee University
- BSc, Biological Sciences, Stirling University
- Twitter handle: @HumaneScientist
- Quoted in:
- Pro & Con Quotes: Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?