原文

To paraphrase 18th-century statesman Edmund Burke, all that is needed for the triumph of a misguided cause is that good people do nothing. “One such cause now seeks to end biomedical research because of the theory that animals have rights ruling out their use in research. Scientists need to respond forcefully to animal rights advocates, whose arguments are confusing the public and thereby threatening advances in heath knowledge and care. Leaders of the animal rights movement target biomedical research because it depends on public funding, and few people understand the process of health care research. Hearing allegations of cruelty to animals in research settings, many are perplexed that anyone would deliberately harm an animal.

For example, a grandmotherly woman staffing an animal rights booth at a recent street fair was distributing a brochure that encouraged readers not to use anything that opposed immunizations; she wanted to know if vaccines come from animal research. When assured that they do, she replied, “Then I would have to say yes.” Asked what will happen when epidemics return, she said, “Don’t worry, scientists will find some way of using computers.” Such well-meaning people just don’s understand.

Scientists must communicate their message to the public in a compassionate, understandable way in human terms, not in the language of molecular biology. We need to make clear the connection between animal research and a grandmother’s hip replacement, a father’s bypass operation, a baby’s vaccinations, and even a pet’s shots. To those who are unaware that animal research was needed to produce these treatments, as well as new treatments and vaccines, animal research seems wasteful at best and cruel at worst.

Much can be done. Scientists could “adopt” middle school classes and present their own research. They should be quick to respond to letters to the editor, lest animal rights misinformation go unchallenged and acquire a deceptive appearance of truth. Research institutions could be opened to tours; to show that laboratory animals receive humane care. Finally, because the ultimate stakeholders are patients, the health research community should actively recruit to its cause not only well-known personalities such as Stephen Cooper, who has made courageous statements about the value of animal research, but all who receive medical treatment. If good people do nothing there is a real possibility that an uninformed citizenry will extinguish the precious embers of medical progress.

译文

为了解释18世纪政治家爱蒙德·伯克的话，“被误导的运动要想成功，所需的只是好人不作为。”现在，就有这样的运动寻求终止生化研究，其依据是动物有权要求人们在研究活动中不再被使用的理论。科学家应该对动物权利倡导者做出有力的反击，因为这些人的观点正在蛊惑公众，从而威胁到了保健知识与医疗的发展。动物权利运动的领导者之所以将目标对准生化研究，是因为生化研究依赖公共基金，而且几乎没有人理解保健医疗研究的作用。听到有关在研究中残忍对待动物的断言，许多人感到困惑，以为任何人都会故意去伤害动物。

比如，在最近的一次街头集市上，一位在动物权利保护摊位服务的老太太在分发小册子，鼓励读者不要使用任何来自于动物或在动物身上做过实验的任何东西。当问及她是否反对免疫接种时，她说她想知道疫苗是否来自于动物实验。当确信疫苗是来自于动物试验时，她回答说：“那么，我得说我反对。”当问及如果流行病卷土重来该怎么办时，她说：“不用担心，科学家会利用计算机找到某种解决办法的。”这样的好心人只是不了解情况。

科学家必须用一种富于同情，易于理解的方式将信息传递给公众——用人性化的语言不是分子生物学的术语。我们必须澄清动物研究与祖母的髋骨置换、父亲的旁道管手术、小孩的免疫接种甚至宠物的防疫注射之间的关系。对于那些不了解只有通过动物研究才能研制出治疗方案、才能开发出新方案和新疫苗的人来说，动物研究说得好听一点是浪费，说得难听一点是残忍。

有许多事情可以做到。科学家可以“走进”中学课堂，介绍他们的科研活动。他们应尽快答复邮寄给编辑的来信，以防动物权利组织的错误信息没有引起质疑，从而蒙蔽真理。研究机构也应该向游客开放，以表明实验室的动物受到了人道地对待。最后，因为最有利害关系是病人，所以，医学研究界不仅要邀请像史蒂芬·库伯（他已经就动物的研究价值发表了勇敢的声明）那样的知名人士来支持自己的事业，还要邀请所有接受过医疗的人来支持自己。如果医学研究人员再不采取行动，不明真理的公众真有可能会不灭医疗发展的宝贵火种。

看完了阅读，一起来记单词吧！>>