Extended Annotated Bibliography

In this post, I will make an annotated bibliography for Project 3.

papertrix "bibliography" 8/28/05 via flickr. Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic.

1. Alternatives in Animal Testing. Environmental Health Perspectives. March 1996, p. 250-252. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.library.arizona.edu/stable/3432876

This source talks about alternatives to animal testing. Contains information on three R's. Has a method by which scientists do not need to repeat a test for different organizational approvals. This helps answer the second question.

2. Kessler, Rebecca. Filling a Gap in Developmental Toxicity Testing: Neural Crest Cells Offer Faster, Cheaper, Animal-Free Testing. Environmental Health Perspectives. August 2012, p. A230. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.library.arizona.edu/stable/41553114

This source also talks about alternatives to animal testing. It contains the neural crest cell testing which shows promise in replacing animal testing altogether. This source helps answer the second question.

3. von Roten, Fabienne Crettaz. Mapping Perceptions of Animal Experimentation: Trend and Explanatory Factors. Social Science Quarterly. June 2008, p. 537-549. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.library.arizona.edu/stable/42956328

This source discusses cultural opinions on animal testing. It found that opinions in Switzerland shifted to be more negative toward animal testing from 1994 to 2005. This answers my third question.

4. Macnaghten, Phil. Animals in Their Nature: A Case Study on Public Attitudes to Animals, Genetic Modification and 'Nature'. Sociology. July 2004, p. 533-551. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.library.arizona.edu/stable/42856638

This source also discusses cultural opinions on animal testing. It found that opinions on animal testing are negative because people reject genetically modified animals as going against nature. Article published in 2004. This answers my third question.