Solomonow's attempts to use four-legged animals to study back pain in humans are worthless. The physiological differences between cats' spines and humans' spines are significant, and we have ample scientific data based on human studies.

Explains Marius Maxwell, M.D., Ph.D., "As a neurosurgeon focused on human spinal injuries, I can say that it makes no sense to use cats in studies designed to learn about human back issues. Solomonow's experiments are redundant and the applicability to humans is non-existent... This work is already being done in human subjects and should not be conducted in animals."

The whistleblower contacted the university's animal care and use committee, but the experiments continue, with no lasting change made.

The University of Colorado's animal care and use panel approved the use of chloralose even though its guidebook, The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Handbook, states, "Chloralose is not a modern anesthetic agent... newer anesthetic techniques may provide acceptable hypnosis or anesthesia without the potential for pain or distress that chloralose has been cited to cause ..." Ned Buyukmihci, D.V.M., explains, "Chloralose is archaic and is absolutely contraindicated for use, particularly where animals will be subjected to surgery which would be expected to cause moderate or severe pain ... there could be no medical justification for using it."

The drug was approved to be administered through an injection directly into cats' abdomens, a method that has been discouraged by Lab Animal Anesthesia because it is "very irritating to the GI tract... Therefore, IV [intravenous] use is the only route recommended. These drugs should not be used if any other alternative is available."