IN HIS letter (Chronicle, May 1) John Murphy wilfully misrepresents science and parades his ignorance of it as if it were a badge of honour.

His ridiculous characterisation of 'satanic' scientists would be considered totally unacceptable if he was referring to people of another religion, so why is it considered acceptable to slander scientists in this way?

I have no problem with criticism of science (by its very nature, science cannot exist without criticism), but the would-be critic should at least show some kind of basic understanding of science rather than attacking it with absurd statements about cow/human hybrids and 14-day senility.

Mr Murphy's crude medieval rant marks him out as a religious fundamentalist.

How else to describe a person who thinks that medical researchers are deliberately trying to undermine human dignity with their experiments?

Medical science is about restoring health and human dignity, not taking it away.

Alzheimer's disease is a cruel and terrible illness that destroys the dignity and lives of those who have it.

I hope Mr Murphy never has the experience of a loved one suffering from such a terrible disease, but if he does I hope he rethinks his position.

DR SIMON JONES Hook Road, Surbiton.