But (re just this survey's chosen questions) lumping altogether: the animal guinea-pigs for (often capricious 'studies' invented by grad-students to get-the-Degree) and much unnecessary-yet-cruel uses in *training MDs, Vets, other $300/hr. white-coated ones -vs- the cases where drugs must be assessed via living creatures, all into that 89% Total: buries the issue of the many unnecessary events, apparently done via habit from times when no one was looking on. Well, just a few ... always labeled as Cranks/dismissed condescendingly. Or worse.

* See PCRM for just one org which has challenged various Universities' eschewing of models, not live animals, deemed by many other U's to be quite adequate for demonstrating techniques. They've won a few, too, but the beat goes on.

Anyway, that 9/10 number needs some granularity to reveal anything about scientists aware of the matters now being challenged, or it's bogus. From my POV the GMO matter may also not be dismissed by a survey of %scientists agreeing that It's unreservedly kewl; we don't need more steenkin information.

Color me Crank, too, if you like; crankiness may have been implanted re the event of a PhD thesis with some errors (wherein only a few trillion 340 MeV electrons were sacrificed) but where the mindset of a necessary-Degree trumped ... that vaunted search-for-Truthiness. It only takes one such, to peer more acutely at how-things-get-done, actually.

Of course for the science-deficient or anti-'science' tribes, probably words fail, of whatever conciliatory kind, when you're quite Certain of your ken already. That, to me, is the dis-USA's main problem: fuck the planet: I've Got my Stuff and I want more.. (Am sure you have your contingent too, except maybe not quite so proud? of knowing shit-all about how most things/processes work.)

This nascent Congress should provide amusement + horror for all concerned. Call us in early '16, eh?