March 21, 2005
The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301
Dear Secretary Rumsfeld,
As practicing physicians and as board members of The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which represents more than eight million members and constituents, we are writing to express our serious concerns with the development of pulsed energy projectiles (PEPs). We are concerned about the suffering and harm these weapons will cause not only to the animals used in the testing but to the people who will be the ultimate targets of PEPs. We are also concerned about the scientific relevance and need for such testing.
The Office of Naval Research has funded and continues to fund projects aimed at developing and testing PEPs ("Maximum Pain is Aim of New US Weapon," New Scientist, March 5, 2005). A 2003 review indicated that a number of PEP tests conducted on animals were found to cause pain and temporary paralysis. It is our understanding from the report of the New Scientist that one PEP weapon, currently being tested at the University of Central Florida, is meant to deliver a "bout of excruciating pain from up to 2 kilometres away." The study aims to maximize the pain delivered by the weapon without damaging tissue.
We believe that subjecting animals to such severe pain for the purpose of testing these weapons is unacceptable, and we are confident that the American public would similarly disapprove. A recent opinion poll indicates that 75% of the public opposes research that causes severe animal pain and/or distress even when it is health-related. We suspect that public opposition would only increase when the research in question was weapons-related.
The human welfare issues raised by this research are also significant. Already, pain researchers, psychologists and others have raised a variety of ethical concerns, such as the potential use of these weapons by the military for torture purposes and the long-term psychological impact on victims.
It is also highly relevant that data gathered from the use of animals for such testing does not adequately predict what will happen when the weapons are used on humans. As physicians, we have witnessed the difficulty of directly applying the results of animal research to humans and the negative consequences of relying on such animal tests. Misleading results could lead to the waste of lives, both human and nonhuman, as well as the dissipation of millions of taxpayer dollars. The PEP project at the University of Central Florida alone will cost a minimum of $500,000.
We urge the Office of Naval Research to end the use of animals for the testing of PEP and similar energy-directed weapons. We would be happy to elaborate upon our concerns if you or one of your designees would like to meet.
Sincerely,
David Wiebers, M.D.
Chairman of the Board
Jennifer Leaning, M.D.
Member, Board of Directors
