Medical Research On Animal Research

The moral status of animals is an issue of much debate in Science. According to The Royal Society, the oldest scientific academy nowadays, it would have been impossible for science and medicine to develop so without animal research (“The Use of Non-Human Animals in Research”, 2004). Nevertheless, do the human medical benefits really justify the animal suffering in animal research? If so, what should are the possible considerations and limitations related to the matter? It appears to be a challenge to find common ground concerning the above questions. This paper will first present the current guidelines of animal research, and what is being done to help preserve the suffering and health animals as much as possible. In order to have a

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” (Mahatma Gandhi). Scientists have been using animals for biomedical research for centuries. They provide a source to get information scientists can not get without harming humans. A lot of debate is spread about whether it is good or bad. Animal experimentation is a controversial topic because it is helpful to humans, but it is also cruel and inhumane.

Animal Research is topic that is highly debated by several people, especially those in the medical and the vet world. Why is this such a debatable topic to individuals? Many people consider animal research to cruel and inhumane, and others believe that it is for the greater good to help find cures for humans. Ron Karpati, a former pediatrician and who is now a medical researcher, agrees that animal research is used for the greater good even though it inflicts pain on animals. Karpati wrote an article called, “ I am the Enemy,” and in this article he states several points that prove his belief on animal research.

Imagine being poked and prodded with a needle, all to test for a new drug against

Where would we be without antibiotics or vaccines? The medical advances made to overcome medical obstacles were a massive impact in improving public health and medical research. Though there are medical general practitioners that have concerns about reliability of the animal data,” it is good scientific practice to maintain a healthy degree of scepticism and avoid over-reliance on any one set of data or research method”(Festing, Wilkinson, 2007). Some of the most impactful events that occurred with animal researching lead to the development of vaccines, antibiotics, diabetes research and organ transplants which includes the heart valve and the kidney.

Their main claim conveyed is animals “will continue to be necessary as researchers seek to alleviate existing ailments and respond to the emergence of new disease” (Botting and Morrison 1). They state that animal research has aided in providing cures and medicines for several diseases and life threatening illnesses’. The authors acknowledge claims made for the opposing viewpoint, such as “the alleged differences between species…that supposedly render animal experiments redundant or misleading” (Botting and Morrison 17). They counterattack each of the claims with providing valid evidence to justify their reasoning. They begin the article by providing information on the issue and move toward the positive effects it has had over the years. They rely heavily on several studies and experimentations to defend their claim. Therefore the dominant appeal is logos because it refers to several studies and experiments that have contributed to the world of medicine. The authors cite a study that affirms that “Experiments using animals have played a crucial role in the development of modern medical treatments” (Botting and Morrison 1). Pathos was used in helping make the article more effective. It was able to prove that the results are not only for that one specific use, but the overall idea. The article was strengthened with its use of deductive reasoning since it develops a conclusion from the information and facts listed. It follows a classical model since it has an introduction, information, evidence, and a conclusion. This balanced approach of logos and pathos they maintain throughout provides the reader the correct impression that they are being unbiased in the analysis. Botting and Adrian’s purpose was to acknowledge all the contributions that animal testing has had on the medical field throughout the

Debates about animal research are often polarized. On one hand, increased knowledge, medical treatments or enhanced animal production are seen to justify any harm. On the other, animals have rights (Fisher, 2014). Ethics, alongside a more informed understanding of the benefits of research and of the aims of animal rights, may in fact produce a more sophisticated common ground between both sides of the debate.

Stated by Mahatma Gandhi, “The greatness of the nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”. Medical research on animals is an effective way for scientist to test different medical discoveries and experiment before using them on humans to check their result. This technique has been used for centuries dating back to people such and Aristotle and Erasistratus. What exactly is medical research on animals? When we take a deeper look into the experiment that are preformed we can conclude that animals are a living model of humans in these laboratories. It is a necessity to harm and test animals with new drugs in order to market them in the medical industry to aid human illnesses. In order to better comprehend and regulate drugs one must understand what medical research on animals is described as and its benefits to pharmaceutical companies for humans. Exposure to the trials and tribulations that animal testing reveals how important it is for scientists to understand the negative effects they contribute to an animal’s welfare and life. In contrary animal testing has been used to save many human lives from consuming or using a drug that could have caused them life threatening illnesses.

The aim of this presentation is to highlight why animals research exists in the field of psychobiology and psychology. Firstly, an explanation of the benefits of conducting animal research, with research examples targeted at the central nervous system (CNS). Then, the focus is to highlight the ethical issues surrounding animal research, such as cruelty to animals and their rights. Thirdly we will be looking at the extent to which animal research has increased our understanding of human psychology. This is then followed by a brief summary of the main points covered in the presentation.

As we discover treatments for diseases such as rabies, feline leukemia, tetanus, anthrax, and much more, animals also bear the advantage of protection. In fact, humans share hundreds of diseases with animals. We also share similar organs allowing scientists to use animals as an essential model for the study of illnesses. Therefore, the work researchers perform sets a platform for an end result where both parties benefit. It can thus be concluded that those against animal research are covered by a counterintuitive notion because, without animal research, the animals whom they are fighting for would die due to a potentially curable disease. To deal with the ethical dilemma of animal research, countries like the United Kingdom have placed regulations that require the research scientists to show how and if they have considered alternative ways before they are given a license to continue with their research projects. Given these circumstances, we can conclude that the rise in animals used in research must mean that in the near future there may be major medical

The scientific use of animals is one of the most controversial political policies in the world. It contains a long history dated all the way back to the vivisection performed by Descartes in the seventeenth century1. In today’s society, the evolution of animal testing has changed to a mass scale use, anaesthetizing then with ethers and chloroform. Despite the fact that a well conducted animal experiment could generate great benefits for humans, there is an increasing dilemma when reviewing moral disagreements surrounding this topic. Animal activists feel that there may be a lack of legitimate reasons to permit animal testing for human benefits. In contrast, many scientists believe that the practice of using animals plays a vital role in advancing health and medical researches. In this essay, I argue that the government should construct a policy allowing scientific animal experiments, only when the benefits of the research exceed the harm caused to animal.

A life can be taken or created in a matter of seconds and with that has come the miracles of modern medicine. People have come to expect science to save lives, prevent illness, relieve suffering and improve the quality of life. The means of curing, treating and preventing diseases are not achieved by magic or accident. Medical advances are gained through years of intensive research -- research in which laboratory animals have played, and continue to play, a critical role. Opponents of animal testing are wrongfully determined that this process is completely unethical.

Cohen argues that humans may morally use animals for biomedical research, the study of biological processes and disease, because animals lack rights. He defines rights as moral claims that one human can hold against another, which are bound in both law as well as in comprehension of right and wrong. As animals lack self-conscious placement in a higher ethical order with the ability to weigh needs of self against the needs of others, they therefore lack the ability to have rights. (Cohen 1986: p. 215) To support the morality of animal research, I will show how it has led to many successful treatments of disease in humans, due to the common physiology that we share with other animals. Furthermore, I will argue that the pain caused on research

Scientists use animals in order to make medical advancements to help humans however, it is often difficult to get the same results in both animals and humans. The biology of humans and animals is not the same, although there are some similarities. According to Akhtar, in an article titled “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”, “Annually, more than 115 million animals are used worldwide in experimentation or to supply the biomedical industry” (Akhtar). Millions of animals are used, against their will, to try to help humans. Although there are some instances in which the experiments have helped humans, is it really worth the pain and suffering that all of those animals have had to suffer. Akhtar also stated “Although it is widely accepted that medicine should be evidence based, animal experimentation as a means of informing human health has generally not been held, in practice, to this standard” (Akhtar). There has been some cases in which testing medicine on animals has benefitted humans, however this type of result is hard to duplicate. Often when a result is achieved in the lab, there are many influences that can cause these

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.