Shirley 1

Collin Shirley
Adam Padgett
ENGL 102-063
February 28, 2016
Annotated Bibliography
Inquiry: Are animal rights preventing science and medicine from advancing?
Proposed Thesis: Animal rights are making it difficult for scientists to work in the fields of
science and medicine.

Hickman, James C., and Judith S. Weis. Animal Rights. BioScience 35.3 (1985): 138138.
Web. February 29, 2016.
Throughout this text Hickman explores the questions he has pertaining to animal rights,
activist morals and contradictions in certain practices. His main focus however is on what
life should be considered sacred, he asks if Eating a cow is intrinsically no better or
worse than eating wheat (Hickman 138). Later in this piece he describes how animal
rights are only targeted toward mammals even though everything from plankton to a
sponge is considered an animal to scientists. Information in this article is credible as
Hickman works in the department of botany at the University of California, Judith is part
of the department of zoology and physiology at Boyden Hall. The bias in this source is
against animal rights as the writers allude to it in the text as an extra step they have to
take in research that no one really understands. I believe that the information in this
source will be useful in my paper as a means to explore the thinking behind animal rights
and how animal rights effect scientists in different fields.

Shirley 2

Miller, Greg. Animal Extremists Get Personal. Science 318.5858 (2007): 18561858. Web.
March 1, 2016.
The following article explores the events surrounding animal extremist groups and how
they terrorized innocent scientists involved in animal research. These groups vandalize
the homes and workplaces of various researchers in attempts to stop animal testing.
Believing their goal is righteous these groups sent threats, planted bombs and protested
outside scientists homes late at night in order to discourage further research. Being
published in a collection of scientific works by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science makes this a credible source, however the author is unknown.
The bias in this piece shows extremists groups as criminals who go after helpless scientist
in attempts to prevent possible animal cruelties. This source is relevant to my paper as it
depicts the lengths that some activists will go to in order to stop animal testing.
Furthermore the information concerning the scientists work can also be used as evidence
in my paper to show research that has been stopped by the extremist harassment.
Altogether this article is useful for showing extremist tendencies, research prevention and
the progression of laws to protect scientists in the future.

Palca, Joseph. Famous Monkeys Provide Surprising Results. Science 252.5014 (1991): 1789
1789. Web. February 29, 2016.
The purpose of this article was to inform the reader of the events concerning a group of
monkeys used in research and their contribution to the scientific community. The
research that was being conducted with these monkeys was stopped when a lab
technician questioned if these animals were being treated humanely and convinced the
police to take them into custody. Years of legal stalemates halted any research that would

Shirley 3

have been done with these creatures. Animal rights organizations had managed to keep
them alive until they became the source of another scientific inquiry concerning sensory
inputs. The information provided by this article is credible as it was published in a
scientific work and peer reviewed. Bias in this work shows organizations such as PETA
in a bad light for halting research and having valuable subjects taken away. The
information in this document is relevant to my paper as it describes an event pertaining to
my inquiry in which an animal rights group prevents the acquisition of potentially useful
medical data. Altogether this source provides decent situational data in which to
reference in my final paper. A good amount of data showing how information retrieved
from animal testing can benefit both human and animals is also available.

Paal, Peter et al. MEDICINE AND THE MEDIA: Animal Rights Activists Bury Avalanche
Study. BMJ: British Medical Journal 341.7764 (2010): 133133. Web. February 29,
2016.
Within this article a team of researchers have decided to study the effects of hypothermia
on avalanche victim survival. To accomplish this task they employed piglets as a
substitute for humans, but knowledge of this study reached media outlets in Austria,
Germany and Italy. These outlets published misinformation concerning the study that
made it appear as if the researchers were committing acts of animal cruelty. The
misinformed public then proceeded to send more than 35,000 protest emails, threats of
violence and even a bomb threat without looking into the actual purpose or process of the
experiment. The study had to be dismissed due to the publics overwhelming concern for
these piglets who were being closely supervised by the research team involved. Being
published in a medical journal in 2010 and describing a study that was approved by the

Shirley 4

Austrian Federal Minister of Science and Research makes this a credible source. The bias
in this text targeted media as the cause of the studies cancelation with activists being a
secondary problem created by the misinformation. Bias was also made the researchers
seem like they had no control over what happened when they could have informed people
of their intentions beforehand. Information throughout this article can be used in my
paper for evidence concerning motivations for both activists and researchers alike.
Support for activist preventing a study from producing data is the more common
information in this piece, but I can also make use of how the media influences activists in
order to support a counter argument.

Plous, S. An Attitude Survey of Animal Rights Activists. Psychological Science 2.3 (1991):
194196. Web. February 29, 2016.
The following article is an analysis of data gathered at an animal rights event held in
1990 by a team of people lead by S Plous. A survey was conducted in response to
members of the medical and scientific communities relaying the stereotype that anyone
who supports animal rights is a terrorist. Its purpose was to show the varied opinions of
activists and non-activists who attended this event. A large amount of the data collected
by this survey shows many of the activists in a less violent and stubborn way than their
stereotyped counterparts. The contrasting opinions of these activists can be seen when the
author states how that When asked what the single highest priority of the animal rights
movement should be, nearly half of the activists checked categories other than animals
used in research (Plous 195). Knowing this one can begin to see just how different
activists can be from what they are portrayed as. The credibility for this source is
validated as the leader of this survey was Plous a member of the department of

Shirley 5

psychology for Wesleyan University and this article was part of a scientific publication.
However, this document was published in 1991 and because of this the data is considered
dated but is still usable. The bias in this article doesnt seem to lean toward either side of
the animal rights debate as the data was anonymous and was collected with no influence
by the author. But the data collected can be used to show that many activists support
some aspects of animal testing while still retaining their beliefs towards animal rights.
Altogether this article is useful for my paper as it supports the opposition of my initial
claim, allowing a counter argument to be made in favor of animal rights.

Woolverton, Michael. The Animal Rights Battle. Rangelands 11.1 (1989): 2525. Web.
February 29, 2016.
The purpose of this article is to inform the reader of the involvement of animal rights in
farm culture and how they affect everything on a farm from chickens to the farmer
themselves. The text describes how animal rights may be needed in large scale farms as a
way to make sure animals are not mistreated. An example given is that of putting hens
into wire cages stacked from floor to ceiling extending from one end of the long building
to another (Woolverton 25). This shows a particularly offensive form of farming that
some large producers use, where they have complete control over all conditions of their
livestock. The bias in this article focuses on the benefits of animal rights in farming while
showing a dark side of large population production. The information in this article seems
very knowledgeable about farm culture concerning animal rights but with no way to
accredit this source outside of it being published in a larger document known as
Rangelands this article is not credible. However, this document would be useful in my

Shirley 6

paper if I were to talk about animal rights influence on other industries besides that of
science and medicine. Altogether this source could be used for evidence to support why
animal rights should be in affect and as a way to show how large farmers treat their
animals as little more than a product. But, this text could also be used to show how
activist can resort to crime to get their point across as it does list a few examples of this
occurance.