Council of Europe (1986). European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, ETS No. 123. Web site http://www.coe.fr/eng/legaltxt/123e.htm. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.
3.
NabJ. (1990). Reduction of animal experiments in education in The Netherlands. ATLA18, 57–63.
4.
BallsM., GoldbergA.M., FentemJ.H., Broad-headC.L., BurchR.L., FestingM.F.W., FrazierJ.M., HendriksenC.F.M., JenningsM., van der KampM.D.O., MortonD.B., RowanA.N., RussellC., RussellW.M.S., SpielmannH., StephensM.L., StokesW.S., StraughanD.W., YagerJ.D., ZurloJ., & van ZutphenB.F.M. (1995). The Three Rs: the way forward. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 11. ATLA23, 838–866.
5.
ZinkoU., JukesN., & GerickeC. (1997). From Guinea-pig to Computer Mouse: Alternative Methods for a Humane Education, 229 pp. Leicester, UK: EuroNICHE.
6.
JanuschA., van der KampM.D.O., BottrillK., GruneB., AndersonD.C., EkwallB., HowaldM., KolarR., KuiperH.J.D., LarsonJ., LoprienoG., SauerU.G., SmithA.J., & van der ValkJ.B.F. (1997). Current status and future developments of databases on alternative methods. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 25. ATLA25, 411–422.
7.
StraughanD.W. (1994). First European Commission report on the statistics of animal use. ATLA24, 289–292.
8.
EC (1998). Decision No. 2179/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 1998 on the review of the European Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development “Towards Sustainability”. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL275, 1–13.
9.
EC (1986). Council Directive of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL358, 1–29.
10.
RowanA.N. (1984). The use of animals in education: a failure to deal with contradictory values. In Of Mice, Models and Men: A Critical Evaluation of Animal Research (ed. RowanA.N.), pp. 93–108. Albany, NY, USA: State University of New York Press.
11.
van ZutphenB.F.M., & van der ValkJ.B.F. (1995). Education and training: a basis for the introduction of the Three Rs alternatives into animal research. ATLA23, 123–127.
12.
van ZutphenB.F.M. (1991). Education and animal experimentation. In Replacement, Reduction and Refinement: Present Possibilities and Future Prospects (ed. HendriksenC.F.M., & KoëterH.B.W.M.), pp. 119–125. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
13.
DewhurstD., & JenkinsonL. (1995). The impact of computer-based alternatives on the use of animals in undergraduate teaching: a pilot study. ATLA23, 521–530.
14.
BalcombeJ.P. (1997). Alternatives in education: overcoming barriers to acceptance. In Animal Alternatives, Welfare and Ethics (ed. van ZutphenL.F.M., & BallsM.), pp. 441–444. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier
15.
BalcombeJ.P. (1997). Student/teacher conflict regarding animal dissection. The American Biology Teacher59, 22–25
16.
SmithA.J., & SmithK. (1997). The NORINA database of audiovisual alternatives. In Animal Alternatives, Welfare and Ethics (ed. van ZutphenL.F.M., & BallsM.), pp. 511–515. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
17.
RuscheB., & SauerU. (1994). A reviewed literature databank for alternatives to animal experiments — Gelbe Liste. In Alternatives to Animal Testing: New Ways in the Biomedical Sciences, Trends and Progress (ed. ReinhardtC.), pp. 85–88. Weinheim, Germany: VCH.
18.
UhlR., & GruberF.P. (1992). Ersatz von Ganztiermodellen in der biomedizinischen Aus-bildung. In Tierschutz durch Alternativen; Ersatz-und Ergänzungsmethoden zum Tierversuch (ed. Livaditis, & Vogt), pp. 286–290. Berlin, Germany: Verlag Gesundheit.
19.
DewhurstD.G., HardcastleJ., HardcastleP.T., & StuartE. (1994). Comparison of a computer simulation program with a traditional laboratory practical class for teaching the principles of intestinal absorption. American Journal of Physiology – Advances in Physiology Education267, S95–S103.
20.
LeathardH.L., & DewhurstD.G. (1995). Comparison of the cost-effectiveness of a computer assisted learning program with a tutored demonstration to teach intestinal motility to medical students. Association for Learning Technology3, 118–125.
21.
Van WilgenburgH. (1997). Computer simulations in education. In Animal Alternatives, Welfare and Ethics ed. van ZutphenL.F.M., & BallsM.), pp. 469–475. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
22.
GruberF.P., & SpielmannH. (1996). Der Myograph im Physiologie-Unterricht: praktische Validierung in Deutschland. ALTEX13, 190–194.
23.
LilienfeldL., & BroeringN. (1994). Computers as teachers: learning from animations. American Journal of Physiology — Advances in Physiology Education267, S47–S54.
24.
GuyJ., & FrisbyA. (1992). Using interactice videodiscs to teach gross anatomy to undergraduates at the Ohio State University. Academic Medicine67, 132–133.
25.
BalcombeJ.P. (1996). Comparative Studies of Dissection and Other Animal Uses in Education, 2 pp. Washington, DC, USA: HSUS.