Sir

In your Editorial “Taking a stand on animal-rights violence” (Nature 438, 1; 200510.1038/438001a) you suggest that US Senator James Inhofe (Republican, Oklahoma) should be applauded for supporting legislation that would make it easier to protect researchers against the threat of violence from animal-rights activists.

Some readers might get the impression from your Editorial that Inhofe is a friend of science and scientific research. I strongly disagree with this.

This is the same Inhofe who has told the US Senate, and repeats on his website, that the threat of catastrophic global warming is the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people”. He has worked hard to discredit legitimate research in this area (see http://inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleases/climateupdate.htm) and has fought to exclude the findings of such research from public policy in the United States. He is co-sponsor of the Bush administration's energy bill (see http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:s485) which you have previously — and justifiably in my opinion —characterized as inadequate (Nature 435, 247; 200510.1038/435247a). Inhofe has also taken strong stands against “all types of cloning” and has called embryonic stem-cell research “inconsistent and unreliable and ... unethical” (see http://inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleases/content-healthcare.htm).

Any calls to applaud Inhofe should be considered in the context of his broader — and in my view much more negative — record on scientific issues.