More handpicked essays just for you.
Moral and ethical issues of animal testing
Negative aspects of using Laboratory Animals
Negative aspects of using Laboratory Animals
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Moral and ethical issues of animal testing
Over 61,000 dogs suffer in U.S laboratories every year. More than 21,000 cats are forced to endure painful experiments in U.S laboratories anually. Animals have been used repeatedly for scientific research throughout history. However, not all animal studies have been successful when humans were involved. Animal testing torments many innocent creatures for unreliable and costly research that is not necessary.
The new standards stated that three requirements had to be satisfied: (1) “the voluntary consent of the person on whom the experiment is to be performed,” (2) “the danger of each experiment must be previously investigated by animal experimentation,” and (3) “the experiment must be performed under proper medical protection and management” (Washington, 2006, p. 221). These standards were violated when doctors injected Elmer Allen, a black man who had escaped the South and made a good life for himself and his family in Chicago, with plutonium-238 (Washington, 2006). Plutonium-238 is an even more intensely radioactive isotope than plutonium-239, which was given to most of the other patients (Washington, 2006). Allen suffered a similar experience
The harm brought to these animals is clear but can be justified by the delivered knowledge of the development of attachment. The results found are impossible though to generalize to human beings, despite having similarities to the monkeys it is still quite different. The monkeys of the experiment, however, have later shown significant difficulties to interact with other monkeys, which can be seen as unethical. In addition, the fact that they were in isolation and not in their natural environment makes the experiment less valid, and so less reliable. Nowadays these kind of experiments would be much more difficult, since they are restricted by ethical
Since 2000, around 16 million in government funds have gone to Wayne State University, or WSU, for animal research, specifically for experiments that use dogs to attempt to simulate or replicate cardiovascular conditions in humans. However, Wayne State’s methods of research have concerned Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, who aims to file a lawsuit against WSU. These dogs are used to simulate cardiovascular conditions. For example, “The dogs have the blood flow to their kidneys obstructed to create hypertension.”
The lack of this information leads anti-animal testing individuals and groups to discuss how the experiments animals are forced to suffer are more than often flawed and limited without
Animal testing goes as far back to greek philosophers such as Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) and Erasistratus (304 – 258 BC). Whom once performed testing on animals to advance behavior of something or who aspired to alter brain activity. However there was scientists such as Galen (129 – 199 / 217 AD), who used animals in order to attempt to improve various human activity within the body. Specifically focusing on cures and treatment for those who don't have them. Later, Ibn Zuhr began to use animal testing to benefit humans in which he would perform surgeries on them to ensure that the procedures would not harm humans.
New studies are being published on the ethical failings of researchers to adequately represent data in a variety of contexts. This could have serious implications for the veracity of certain information germane to deliberations on whether or not studies should progress to the next stage, among other things. One new American study, for example, has found that placebo groups are used often in clinical trials despite a lack of appropriate guidelines for how they can be used, and the study shows how problematic that is. Meanwhile, a German and Canadian study is showing what is perhaps an even bigger deal, which is that inadequacies in the designs of animal studies as well as insufficient reporting of said studies are proving to be a circumvention
Considering the external validity in terms of using rats and mice are harder to generalize to humans than say chimps I would say that it does make a difference. Ask most people and I think you would find that experimenting on rats as opposed to chimps is a long leap ethically. Although both are mammals I believe that the closer the animal’s mind comes to the human mind the more ethical concerns are raised, even though the closer correlation would make them more generalizable. I would have to say that I did not have any strong opinions on the ethical nature of animal research, so other than informative the statistic did not impact me one way or the other.
Animal research, a debate for animal rights. Several experts believe the idea valid to debate, while numerous deem the idea absurd. Richard L. Cupp Jr., professor of law at Pepperdine University School of Law, states in his article,¨Animal Cruelty Laws Don't Depend on Animal Rights,¨ that,¨ Rather than focusing on rights for cats and dogs, we should focus on human moral responsibility.¨ People are arguing that we should give animals personhood. ¨Biomedical researchers must study laboratory animals to discover new medicines and therapies, and deem them safe and effective,¨ says Frankie Trull, president of the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR). She says this, stating that without animal research, there would be no cure for
Supporters of animal experimentation argue in favor of the important role testing on animals plays to medical advancement. Advancements in the treatments of many diseases have occurred thanks to animal experimentation, including “...understanding the pathogenesis of periodontitis. This new information has been made from… animal experiments… some cases are directly applicable for the problems of treating humans with periodontitis” (Pal 3). Periodontitis, a gum infection that can damage and even destroy the jawbone, is found in both humans and animals, so researchers conducted experiments on animals with the disease to find better treatments, cures, and ways to prevent it. If they had not tested on animals with this disease, the cures and treatments
The time of the Holocaust was viewed by most as one of the darkest times during human existence. Many other people view this time as a time of medical brilliance and much innovation. The Nazis in particular were determined to create the faultless human in order to have the upper hand over other militaries or countries that they viewed as threats. The Nazis believed that in order to achieve this human experimentation was necessary. The people that suffered the most repercussions were those that they viewed as unfit or non-beneficial to the human population; such as Jews, homosexuals, handicapped, and gypsies.
Expanding Beyond Animal Experimentation Even though animal testing was the best method for testing cosmetics and medicines in the older days, today it is an outdated, ineffective, and abusive method. Many people would say that humanity would not be like it is today if it was not for the use of animal testing. It is hard to say that animal testing was never useful, but it was not always necessary. However, with technology advancements, animal testing is no longer morally acceptable. Animal Testing is an outdated method.
There are many things the government keeps to themselves, one of them being animal testing. Most of the products used on a daily basis by the general population have been tested on animals. But, this testing isn't something any animal should have to experience. Although many people disagree with scientists about whether or not alternatives for animal testing are necessary, the government still requires unnecessary testing. There is obvious controversy between whether or not animal testing is beneficial or not.
They also assert that animal testing involves the inflicting distress, pain or even death of animals in the name of medical and academic research. Similarly, Cochrane(2007) notes that most of the experiments conducted on animals are painful and sometimes worsen the animal’s quality of life. During the experimentation process the scientists
To whom this may concern, Human experimentation has raised a lot of questions and concerns with regards to human subjects being ethical or unethical. These ethical concerns also implicate a variety of ethical concerns such as dignity, bodily integrity, and privacy. There are cases that subjects are not aware that they are being tested, no consent has been given, or any warning that there may be some potential harm. Is this right? Is it going against human rights?
