Sir

I would like to comment on the News item “Salk Institute investigated after claims of inhumane research” (Nature 394, 709; 1998). Since this matter is still in litigation, I will not address the specific allegations presented in the article. It is important to note, however, that most of these allegations are part of a continuing civil lawsuit brought by a former Salk employee who was dismissed for cause. They are not fact and should not be treated as fact.

That said, the first paragraph of your article omits the word “alleged” when describing “past inhumane treatment and faulty experiments” at Salk, while the term “exposed” is also argumentative. Other statements in the article do not accurately represent testimony or court record, or are presented without appropriate caveats. You state that our faculty was divided on the plaintiff's performance, but neglect to inform the reader that only one of 55 supported her and testified on her behalf.

The Salk Institute welcomes an investigation of our animal research department by responsible outside agencies, including the US Department of Agriculture and the NIH. We have run, and continue to run, a first-rate facility that meets all federal guidelines for the humane use of animals in research.

Not only is it in the animals' best interest that we operate in this manner, it is in our own best interests as well. We cannot conduct the kind of research with which we've been entrusted unless our labs and animal facilities are a match for the outstanding scientists we have assembled here.