PETA overreacted to testing

The letter from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals was quite well written, but I think Matthew Mongiello missed the point of the biopsychology lab. He quotes the American Psychological Association by saying that only 7 percent of psychology research involves animals.

But what about that 7 percent? Does he want those students who choose a career in animal research to leave unprepared for graduate school or their careers?

Many opportunities exist for careers involving animal research, which could help discover successful cancer or Alzheimer drugs, etc.

If Mongiello needed surgery, I think he would prefer the doctor had practical experience, not just working on computer models. One role of an animal researcher in psychology is finding animal models that exhibit human illnesses. In doing so, animal models can be tested to find solutions.

I wish Mongiello would channel his energy into a cause that will not harm scientific research.

Inhumane treatment of both humans and animals exists today. I fail to see any reason for PETA to get riled up about a small biopsychology lab teaching students how to conduct beneficial research.

As for implying inhumane treatment of the animals, he is wrong. The animals are treated humanely. Mongiello, for some reason, left out the fact that the rats are put to sleep during the surgery.

It seems as if Mongiello was reluctant to include the whole truth in his letter. I always wonder about listening to someone who only hands out partial truth.

Timberly LaMontagne,