This well-known phrase is used to illustrate a leading question; who would answer yes?! The approach is quite common in the dubious fringes of public polling. The collection of these suspect polls has just been enhanced by no less than the European Commission [smile … you paid for it :-( ]

The questions asked of the public on animal experimentation included:

Title: Increasing the welfare of animals used in experiments
Question: Do you believe that more needs to be done by your government to improve the level of welfare / protection of animals used in experiments?
Question: Do you believe that more needs to be done to improve the level of welfare/protection of animals used in experiments by action at EU level?
Question: More specifically, for each of the following animals used in experiments, how important do you believe is it to improve their current level of welfare/protection?
Question: Should there be more transparency and public participation in determining when and how animals are used in experiments?
Question: Should there be more transparency and public participation in determining when and how animals are used in experiments?

As context, of the respondents to the public questionaire, over 55% said they would not agree with the use of animals ‘To develop treatment for disease and medicines, and test their safety prior to placing on the market’, and 85% got their information from animal protection organisations.

The replies to the experts questionaire trashed many of the Commission’s suggestions, in particular condemning the ‘scientific advice’ received from the European Food Safety Agency. My particular favourite from this ‘advice’ was:

Spiders may be clever, if allowed enough time ...

Now cry … you paid for this as well :-(