Based on these facts, the scientific community and animal welfare groups support animal experiments in medical research where it is found to be absolutely necessary.
To counter the main argument in favor of animal experiments, animal rights groups contend that all sentient creatures are capable of feeling pain and, therefore, conducting experiments on animals is the moral equivalent to using brain damaged humans or infants before the age of reasoning (Goodwin & Morrison, 2000). In addition, they argue that animal experiments can be misleading since the organs of animals react differently to that of humans. As proof, animal rights activists point to examples such as the failure to find anything similar to the cholera process in animals or the fact that all tests on animals failed completely in the case of the drug Thalidomide (Mather, 2003). To further strengthen the case against the use of animals in medical research, other arguments that are commonly used are: the existence of alternatives such as test tube studies on human tissue cultures, statistics, and computer models; the fact that the stress endured by animals in laboratories can affect experiments, making the exercise meaningless; and the use of animals to test items like cleaning products simply cannot be justified on the grounds of benefiting humankind (BBC, 2004).
One conclusion that can perhaps be drawn after a critical examination of all the arguments in favor of and against the use of animals in medical experiments is that both sides display a concern for animal welfare. Therefore, the nub of the issue really lies in whether animals have
On the latter issue, there can be little doubt that the health of both animals and humans has benefited from such past research. On the first issue, however, perhaps the matter can best be settled by pointing out that the principle of "valuing all forms of life" is one that is well accepted, which is why the effort to replace the use of animals is well under way. Therefore, hopefully the day is not far off when alternative methods can be successfully used in all medical research. Till such time, however, the use of animals in medical experiments is necessary to advance the frontiers of knowledge that will surely benefit all forms of life.
Works Cited
AMP. "Animal Welfare or Animal Rights? Americans for Medical Progress Web site.
Accessed March 22, 2005: www.amprogress.org/ResearchOpposition/ResearchOppositionmain.cfm
BBC. "Science & Nature: Hot Topics. Animal Experiments." BBC Web site. August 17, 2004. Accessed March 22, 2005: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/animalexperiments/alternatives.shtml
FRAME. "The Aims of FRAME." Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical
Experiments Web site. Accessed March 22, 2005: http://www.frame.org.uk/
Goodwin, F.K., & Morrison, a.R. "Science and Self-Doubt: Why animal researchers must remember that human beings are special." Reason Online. October 2000. Accessed March 22, 2005: http://reason.com/0010/fe.fg.science.shtml
Mather, H. "Medical Experiments on Animals Mislead and hold back Progress." Vegan
Views 96. Spring 2003. Accessed March 22, 2005: http://www.veganviews.org.uk/vv96/vv96medicalexperiments.html
.. it's healthy, it's somebody's way of life, it's somebody's livelihood, it's somebody's business.(ibid) This is a strongly worded statement and indictment of an uncaring humanity. However, bearing in mind the daily evidence of cruelty to animals one cannot but feel that there is an element of truth to this argument. Commercial reasons for abuse One of the central reasons or "justifications" for animal abuse and possibly why so many turn a blind
Animals in captivity, for example, have often been genetically, behaviorally or anatomically manipulated in order to enhance acclimation to the new environment. Similarly, animals have been neutered, declawed or defanged to be more compatible with their human keepers. Those who are in support of captivity of animals need to revisit such earlier condoned behavior and ensure that animals receive necessary care, nutrition and exercise and live in proper caging
Moreover, the researcher who falsifies the data is prone to legal action as has been the case in the past when researchers have falsified research results (Normile C, 2006). Therefore, in order to deal with this grave issue, it is important to ensure that the data being incorporated in the research paper has been properly handled and it is being reported correct. Ensuring this would satisfy the ethical standards
These abilities are inclusive of memory emotion, belief, desire, intentional actions and an awareness of the future. With these things being understood this theory asserts that mammals not only have physical bodies that are alive but they also function as psychological beings whose existence can get better or worse. Proponents of this theory argue that other mammals have this capacity even though they cannot use human language to articulate
The Moral Equation: Observations of animals, whether in the wild, in captivity, or in experimental cages reveal undeniable evidence that they perceive physical pain and discomfort as well as pain as acutely as we do (Tangley 2000). Anecdotal evidence of numerous well documented instances seems to suggest that many animals also experience emotions such as grief from of loss of companionship (Moussaieff-Masson 1995). Not uncommonly, it is scientists and medical researchers themselves
life on earth depended upon a fragile balance of well being in the lives of all living things. As humanity became more civilized, technology and research have provided people with the means to artificially enhance their own chances of survival. The problem with this is that it destroyed the natural balance of life on earth. Not being as susceptible as before to illness and early death, humanity soon became
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now