"Are there alternatives to vivisection? Of course not. There are no alternatives to vivisection because any method intended to replace it should have the same qualities; but it is hard to find anything in biomedical research that is, and always was, more deceptive and misleading than vivisection. So the methods we propose for medical research should be called ‘scientific methods’… they are not ‘alternatives’."
- Prof. Croce M.D, Vivisection or Science: A Choice To Make, page 21.

The British law says that all "alternatives to animals used in vivisection laboratories must be tested on animals before they can be called alternatives".

Animal experimentation is a methodological error. And a science that is based on a false methodology can only be a false science.

The abolition of vivisection would allow a true health service to focus attention on the many valid healing therapies which are harmonious, non-invasive and compatible with other life-forms. Briefly they incorporate:

• A search for patterns and causes of dis-ease and dis-harmony;
• Integration and concern with the patient as a whole;
• Focus on caring as a component of healing;
• Minimal intervention with technology;
• The adaptation of totally non-invasive techniques including psychotherapies, diet and exercise;
• Study of the individual and family patterns;
• Provision of substantial, thorough and comprehensive therapeutic programmes and surveys;
• Investigation and rectification of pollution points;
• Education of self-esteem and responsibility.

A focus on clinical research and prevention, together with the abolition of vivisection, is the only way to turn the present sickness service into a health service.

Guardians' article: Real Scientific Methods