Antivivisection

“The apparent willingness of the medical profession to assume some of the responsibility for going first and the impressive record of medical heroism and martyrdom in the early decades of the twentieth century persuaded many Americans that human experimentation was not the horror that antivivisectionists claimed. Although experiments on orphans continued to be problematic, few Americans shared antivivisectionist concerns about the professional subjects, prisoners, soldiers, and the other adult populations who participated in research. . . . Taking responsibility for the welfare of the subject, obtaining prior consent of the subject or guardian, and being willing to go first continued to be essential to professional definitions of appropriate human experimentation. By the 1930s, the public’s confidence in medical research and admiration for the medical profession in general made the task of defending medical