Science is currently pushing for more free access with the first set of serious, high level "free access" journals (PLoS) in opposition to exorbitant fees for access to information. As the anti vivisectionists successfully push their agenda future work will be undertaken elsewhere and in private - the data collected by that work although valuable will only be in the hands of the corporate sponsors and governmental agencies engaged in getting the data. Creating a secretive world of science is exceptionally dangerous as it will create a ready environment for far more questionable scientific aims than that which already exists. An example of this is genetic engineering whereby corporate sponsors took hold of the technology, we do not wish to see corporate sponsors engaging in pharmaceutical experiments on "social pharmacology", that is the manipulation of group dynamics by drugs. We do not wish to see secretive testing on "pain" and ways to engage and inhibit it. Or secretive testing on biological contaminants and viral infections. These things, however unpleasant should be open to scrutiny.

Consider a current aspect of science already conducted under secrecy. We know that the police do statistical analysis on crowd control and crowd behaviour so as to improve their tactics. You cannot stop them doing such analysis, they would be negligent not to, if such analysis was conducted in the public arena I think we would be much happier, at least we would know as much as they did. This analysis is not, and never will be conducted in the public arena but that is no reason to give authorities and power more excuses to do more in private and abroad.

leptin