The media needs to be seen to be balanced and impartial. That is why minority pressure groups get so much media coverage for their views. It is an inevitable part of a free and fair democracy that those who challenge the status quo get their voice heard.

But it is also frustrating in the debate about animal research that those with little relevant expertise get quoted as if they had equivalent status of those carrying out the research and caring for the animals. This is why it is easy to look at the Guardian article about experiments on monkeys and wonder why the first quotes are attributed to Dr Jane Goodall, somebody who opposes research on non-human primates for scientific medical benefit, but by her own admission is no expert in that field.

This simply reflects the fact that such work is controversial, and does have ethical aspects which say something about how we as a society look after animals. It is the opposition to the course of action which makes it newsworthy in the first place.

As we pointed out in our last blog, the onus is on us—the research community—to make (and keep making) the case for properly regulated and humanely conducted animal research. Please feel free to add any comments to the Guardian blog on this topic, which as is often the case, is dominated by the antivivisectionists.