BARBARA Davies, of the Research Defence Society (Letters, June 10), is misleading in her opinion that major advances in cancer treatment have depended on animal experimentation. She should show caution in riding the current bandwagon of false hope.

She refers to the recent discovery of substances that shrink tumours in mice but fails to mention that Dr Klausner, the man behind the discovery, has admitted that while he has been curing cancer in mice for decades, he is unable to cure the same cancer in humans.

A fundamental problem of animal experimentation in cancer research is that a tumour induced in a rodent in the artificial conditions of a laboratory, bears little resemblance to that which occurs in the human body,

The National Anti-Vivisection Society does not wish to halt medical progress. It wants to see advances based on the principles of better science and better medical research. A combination of epidemiological studies, examining environmental and lifestyle effects upon the human body and the use of human cell lines would prove more efficient in working towards effective cancer treatment.

Furthermore, while Ms Davies reassures us animals are only used when "there is no alternative," the secrecy currently surrounding licence applications for animal research projects means that we have no way of even questioning whether there really is no other alternative to animal research in new project licence applications. This is hardly reassurance.

SHELLY SIMMONS, National Anti-Vivisection Society, Goldhawk Road, London W12.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.