It is a sorry state of affairs when so many of our elected representatives cannot tell the difference between genuine scientific expertise and antivivisection pseudoscientific nonsense.

A prime example of this is Ann Widdecombe MP who has just written for the Oxford newsletter Cherwell. Ms Widdecombe is a fan of the well-known American antivivisectionist Ray Greek, whose books have been exposed as some of the most systematic and disingenuous distortions of animal research ever published. (See for instance this comprehensive review of Greek’s book Sacred Cows and Golden Geese).

Ann Widdecombe has previously described Ray Greek (ridiculously) as a “world expert on animal research”. We have his CV, and he is nothing of the sort. He barely has any publications at all, let alone in the field of animal research. He certainly has no credibility as a research scientist, although he has a loyal following of antivivisectionists.

Ann Widdecombe complains that those who oppose animal research are ‘casually dismissed’. We wonder if she has looked at any of the in-depth and independent inquiries into animal research which have been carried out in recent years. These include The Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report (2005), (The Ethics of Research involving Animals); the Animal Procedures Committee Report (Review of Cost-Benefit Assessment in the use of Animals in Research); and lastly the House of Lords Report, (Animals in Scientific Procedures). All of these took extensive evidence from antivivisection groups – but rejected their ill-informed arguments.