Comments on the House of Lords Select Committee Proposal for the Establishment of a Centre for the Three Rs

Combes R.D. , & Balls M. (2002). Comments on the report of the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures. ATLA 30, 605–615.

House of Lords (2002). Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume I, Report. HL Paper 150-I, 82 pp. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

House of Lords (2002). Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume II, Oral Evidence. HL Paper 150-II, 411 pp. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

ABPI (2002). Report by the House of Lords’ Animals in Scientific Procedures Committee, 13 pp. London, UK: Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.

The Boyd Group. (2002). A National Centre for Alternatives? Comments from the Boyd Group on the House of Lords Select Committee's Proposals for a Centre for the Three Rs, 10 pp. Edinburgh, UK: the Boyd Group.

Langley C.K. (2002). A National Centre for the Replacement of Animal Experiments. A Proposal Prepared by the Lord Dowding Fund for Humane Research and the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research, 18 pp. London, UK: Lord Dowding Fund and Dr Hadwen Trust.

House of Lords (2002). Proceedings of the Conference held in the House of Lords, 21st May 2002. In Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume I, Report. Appendix 4, HL Paper 150-I, pp. 66–75. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

House of Lords (2002). Evidence of Professor Alan Goldberg. In Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume II, Oral Evidence. HL Paper 150-II, pp. 311–320. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

House of Lords (2002). Evidence from European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods. In Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume II, Oral Evidence. HL Paper 150-II, pp. 290–296. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

House of Lords (2002). In Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume I, Report. Appendix 3, HL Paper 150-I, pp. 51–65. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

Combes R.D. (2001). Why the US Department of Agriculture should be allowed to insist on inclusion of rodents and birds in the Animal Welfare Act. ATLA 29, 85–988.

Spielmann H. , & Liebsch M. (2002). Validation successes — chemicals. ATLA 30, Suppl. 2, 33–40.

de Silva O. (2002). The contributions of the European cosmetics industry to the development of alternatives to animal testing: dialogue with ECVAM and future challenges. ATLA 30, Suppl. 2, 189–193.

Balls M. (2002). The future of ECVAM — a personal perspective. ATLA 30, Suppl. 2, 239–241.

House of Lords (2002). In Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, Volume I, Report. Appendix 3, HL Paper 150-I, 62–63. London, UK: The Stationery Office.

Festing M.F.W. , Overend P. , Gaines Das R. , Cortina Borja M. , & Berdoy M. (2002). The Design of Animal Experiments. Reducing the Use of Animals in Research through Better Experimental Design. Laboratory Animal Handbooks No. 14, 112 pp. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press, for Laboratory Animals Limited.