n analysis of the Bateson Review of research using nonhuman primates Commentary (6056) Total Article Views Authors: Greek R, Hansen LA, Menache A Published Date December 2011 Volume 2011:1 Pages 3 - 22 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MB.S25938 Ray Greek1, Lawrence A Hansen2, Andre Menache1 1Americans for Medical Advancement, Goleta, 2Department of Neurosciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA Abstract: An analysis of the use of nonhuman primates in biomedical research in the UK, the Review of Research Using Non-Human Primates (the "Bateson Review") was released in 2011. The review was applauded, to varying degrees, by most of the stakeholders in the controversy over using nonhuman primates in biomedical research. However, there has not been a scientific analysis of the review. In this paper, the Bateson Review is examined for both methodology and the science relevant to the use of nonhuman primates in biomedical research. The relevant science includes complexity theory, evolutionary biology, genetics, empirical evidence regarding the reliability of interspecies extrapolation, and the value of basic biomedical research in general in making discoveries that lead to human treatments. The authors of this paper conclude that the Bateson Review does not meet the criteria for a scientific assessment, in part, because it fails to consider the current science that impacts on the practice of using animals, in general, and nonhuman primates, specifically, in biomedical research. This lack of scientific consideration has legal and ethical ramifications. Since the Bateson Review fails as a scientific evaluation, the ethical and legal recommendations that are based on science are also suspect.