I Read Jo Tanner's reply to my letter about animal experiments with some amusement.

I have been told before by proponents of animal testing that each of us uses two mice and half a rat during a lifetime, but what always confuses me is who gets the monkeys, puppies and kittens?

What Jo failed to mention is that the organisation she represents was set up purely to promote animal experiments.

I also found it interesting that she mentioned three studies into the efficacy of animal testing, but failed to mention who they were done by, and who commissioned them.

It is true that we share 90 per cent of our DNA with some animals, in fact we share up to 99 per cent with non-human primates, but what an enormous difference that other one per cent makes on the cellular level (I would encourage readers to look at the website of Americans For Medical Progress for the in-depth science on this: www.curedisease.com).

I would also like to recommend a brilliant book written by two ex-vivisectors, Ray and Jean Greek, called Sacred Cows And Golden Geese: The Human Cost Of Experimenting On Animals.

I wonder if Jo has urged her MP to sign EDM 92 (animal testing of drugs) which calls for "an independent inquiry into the scientific aspects of animal testing".

There has been pressure on MPs from the pro-vivisection lobby not to sign this. An independent inquiry is what those who oppose animal experiments want, but the problem is that it will show once and for all that relying on data from animals is as useful as the proverbial chocolate teapot.

Sarah Bramley,

Gordon Street, York.

Updated: 10:13 Wednesday, April 19, 2006