|
| |
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION.
Term Paper ID:21965
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Argues against use in scientific research on moral grounds & offers alternatives.... More...
|
9 Pages / 2025 Words
8 sources, 13 Citations,
APA Format
$36.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Argues against use in scientific research on moral grounds & offers alternatives.
Paper Introduction:
The use of animals in scientific research cannot be justified on moral grounds. Animals have rights; philosophers have debated the extent of these rights for centuries. Recently, the American public has made significant strides in re-examining the inhumane treatment given to nonhuman creatures in the name of scientific advancement.
The current debate about animal rights is based on precedent set by Cartesian and utilitarian philosophers. Rene Descartes, the French philosopher, likened animals to machines because nonhuman creatures lacked the ability to reason and think. Animals, who learned only by experience, were inferior to human beings, who possessed the ability to learn through a variety of means. To Descartes, the inferior status of animals justified their exploitation as experimental research subjects. Descartes'
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
To avoid speciesism we must allowthat beings which are similar in all relevant respects have a similar rightto live" (Watson, 1992, p. The Ames test screens for mutagenicity andcarcinogenicity using strains of salmonella bacteria. The prudential argument contends that, if humanstreat animals as insentient machines, humans might be conditioned to treatfellow human beings the same way. According to Richard Watson, four standard arguments form the basisof the current debate regarding the rights of animals. Regan, T.; Singer, P. eds.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Wilson. According to its opponents, the animal rights movement has alienatedsociety through its radical approach to this controversial issue. In addition, millions ofanimals are used annually for "pure" biological research: "Frequently,investigators have no particular medical aims in mind but, rather, aretrying to advance scientific knowledge" (Gendin, 1989, p. ed. If animals were notused in the confirmation of drug and therapeutic safety, the burden ofproviding clinical test subjects would fall to humans. Reports 76: pp.23-31. Oxford: Clarendon. Goldberg, A. 197-2 8. Among the mostextremist of these organizations are the Animal Liberation Front (ALF),People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Earth First, and LastChance for Animals. Authors such as Roslind Godlovitch et al., RichardRyder, and Peter Singer raised the consciousness of the public regardingthe status of animals as victims. Animal Rights andHuman Obligations, pp. With public support generally in favor of eliminating certain typesof animal research, what alternatives to animal testing exist? et al. Such cells can be kept alive and cultured for-decades. Regan, T. Animal pain. Scientists use animals for long-termmedical research in tests for disease cures. 171). An ecologist's view of animal rights.Am. Suchactivists advocate civil disobedience, vandalism, theft and terrorism topromote their agenda. Tissuecultured cells are vital in disease research. Animals cannot fathom the cause of their pain, nor dothey have knowledge of when cessation is likely to occur. Animals serve a wide variety of purposes in scientific research.Animals are used to test the safety of consumer products, e.g., thetoxicity of pesticides or household cleaners. Williams, J. Thebasic principle of utilitarianism is that decisions should maximize utilityeven though the maximum utility is not always best for everyone concerned.The appeal of utilitarianism to animal rights supporters is egalitarianismin which discrimination based on nonhuman status is disallowed. ed. Rodd, R. Biology, ethics, and animals. The use of human subjects in scientific research would not onlyeliminate the need for animal testing, it would provide more direct answersto questions related to human toxicity. Regan, T.; Singer, P. The sentimental argument claims that all sentient creatures possessmoral rights. Animal rights gained prominence as a movement in the United Statesduring the 197 s. Tom Regan bases his assertion of animal rights on a moral theorycalled the "rights view." Regan concedes that animals lack many of theintellectual abilities of human beings; however, it is the basic similaritybetween the two that forms the crucial issue. Research animals probably experience more suffering than human beings(Rollin, 1989). Teacher 56: pp. References Compton, D. W. Vaccines for polio andrabies, once cultured in live animal tissue, are now normally grown incultured human cells. Animal rightsand human obligations pp. 175). 86). 111). Animal experimentation occurs under strict scrutiny bygovernments and institutions. Descartes' basicarguments have been extrapolated by modern scientific researchers torationalize their use of laboratory animals. Support for this argument is found inthe scientific research atrocities of Nazi doctors on human subjects duringthe reign of fascism in Germany. (1989). The average life span of laboratory animals islonger than the life span of wild animals. The most well-knowntesting method is the Ames test which originated at the University ofCalifornia at Berkeley. The majority ofanimals are unable to act in similar emotional capacity. The majority of the sample (63 percent) called for an end totesting in cosmetics research, 36 percent felt that psychological testingshould be eliminated, and fewer than 2 percent believed that a ban onmedical research was appropriate (pp. Estimates of the number of animals used annually forbiological research alone range from 15 million to 12 million (Gendin,1989, pp. To Descartes, the inferior status of animals justifiedtheir exploitation as experimental research subjects. Anestimated 4 groups are active in animal concerns in the United States;their combined budgets exceed $2 million (1:23). 85-94. Scientists argue that animalexperience is related exclusively to the present. 2nd ed. Granted, abuses occur, but these are theexception rather than the rule. Thus,animals should not be made to suffer because it is morally wrong to makefellow human beings suffer. Animal rights opponents argue that scientific research is dependenton the use of animal testing. Animal rights organizations estimate that approximately 5 millionanimals are killed annually as a result of their use in science. Howard, W. Watson quotes Singer's assessment of this argument: "Therecan be no reason--except the selfish desire to preserve the privileges ofthe exploiting group--for refusing to extend the basic principle ofequality to members of other species. E. NewYork: H. Regan contends that theinherent value of animal life is equal to that of humans. They contend that laboratoryresearch animals lead relatively humane existences compared to theircounterparts in the wild. 6 ). Self-consciousness and the rights of nonhumananimals and nature. The foundation of this basicsimilarity is that both human and nonhuman creatures are each the"experiencing subject of a life" whose welfare is important regardless ofits utility to others (Regan, 1989, p. The Association ofVeterinary Teachers and Research Workers classifies the suffering oflaboratory animals on a scale of increasing severity that ranges fromphysiological stress (e.g., raised heartbeat), to overstress (diversion ofresources to adapt to the stressor), to distress (Rodd, 199 , p. Theecological argument states that "the land" (e.g., animal, mineral,vegetable) has an inherent right to exist. The natural world ischaracterized by predation, disease, or other life-threatening naturalphenomena. . Therefore, the mishandling of laboratoryanimals would be counterproductive to the goals of the scientificcommunity. Theiropinions were compared to a group of 226 men and women not attendingcollege. Rollin, B. 2nd ed. Animal Rights and Welfare, pp. Physicians employ animals in emergency medicine as temporarytransplant donors for human patients. 199). 2nd ed. Thepharmaceutical industry uses animals to test new drugs and vaccines with invivo tests. (1995, February). Human acts of kindness, mercy,and compassion to animals are contrary to nature's laws. Hargrove, E. In contrast, the goal of animal rightsactivists is to halt all scientific research involving animals. Animals used in behavioral research are usuallysubjected to psychological deprivation or distress as opposed to physicalpain. The study found that, although high schoolstudents were significantly more likely to identify themselves as animalrights activists than the general population, almost 3 percent of combinedrespondents believed that animal research is immoral regardless of thebenefits. Bernard Rollin cites ethical research on pain:"Understanding the cause of an unpleasant sensation diminishes its severity. The contractual argument regards nature asproperty. According to Sidney Gendin, "Onesimply cannot automatically extrapolate information from animal studiesthat yields either necessary or sufficient conditions concerning theirsafety for humans" (Gendin, p. The discomfort that anesthetized animalsexperience is outweighed by the benefits of medical advancement in solvingproblems such as cancer, AIDS, and genetic disease. (1992). The contractual aspect of thisargument is between human beings who have obligations to treat each other'sproperty as though it possessed inherent rights. The use of animals in science. This method isinfinitely more humane than current research procedures which inducecancers in laboratory rats. Animal exploitation was seen as a formof prejudice as reprehensible as fascism, racism, or sexism. 2 4). It has become a catchall phrase that encompasses a"battery of living systems--bacteria, cultured animal cells, fertilizedchicken eggs, frog embryos--that can be employed to evaluate the toxicityof chemicals in human beings" (Goldberg, 1991, p. Organizations which voice concern about animals generally fit intotwo categories: animal welfare and animal rights. Bentham argued that the key issue waswhether or not animals could suffer. For example, a baby chimpanzee might be taken from its mother toprovide scientific observation of emotional stress. The use of lower organisms is often referredto as in vitro testing. Therefore, animals lackthe capacity to anticipate pain or to recall past suffering. Approximately 25 percent of the respondents felt violatinggovernment laws to disrupt animal research was acceptable. The majoralternatives are mathematical and computer modeling, the use of lowerorganisms, tissue culture research, and human studies. Test animals are injectedwith the product, force-fed it, have it rubbed on their skins, or have itdropped in their eyes. Human beings have an interest in this property because of thepleasure and utility it affords them. (1989). Rene Descartes, the Frenchphilosopher, likened animals to machines because nonhuman creatures lackedthe ability to reason and think. Animal rights opponents are wrong in their assumption that theradical nature of the movement has alienated large segments of society. It is logical to assume that research animals, restrained intheir ability to escape, experience significant emotional distress as wellas physical suffering during experimentation. Watson, R. The utilitarian argument in favor of animal rights was led by theEnglish philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Further, allliving beings equate pain with danger or injury and respond with a desireto escape. Psychol. found that members of the academiccommunity, ranging from teenagers to professors, support the agenda ofanimal rights activists in varying degrees (1995). by the same token, not understanding its cause can increase itsseverity" (p. eds.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 197-199). Nature's "death ethic" maintains ahealthy environmental balance by the survival of the fittest. The use of animals in scientific research cannot be justified onmoral grounds. Computersimulations have been used successfully for tests such as glucosetolerance, for the instruction of students in anatomy departments, and fordemonstration of "hands-on" techniques in the treatment of cardiac arrest. (199 ). . 2 2-2 5. Regan, T.; Singer, P. 6 -65. 2 2). Biol. In tissue culture research, scientists use cells outside of the totalorganism. The current debate about animal rights is based on precedent set byCartesian and utilitarian philosophers. Theacceptability of animal research varied depending on the type of researchinvolved. Utilitarianism is based on the concept of society as an impartialbenevolent observer who, regardless of conflicting interests andconsequences, is equally sympathetic toward all affected parties. Ina study of levels of activism and perceptions of the need for animalresearch, David Compton et al. 1-35. Animal rights activism andanimal welfare concerns in the academic setting: levels of activism and theperceived importance of research with animals. Proponents of the use of animals in research base their opposition toanimal rights on a variety of arguments. A survey of 12 questions concerning animal rights and their usein research was administered. Scientific research using organs fromhuman donors or cadavers is, in many instances, much more reliable thananimal testing. (1989). Albany: State U ofNew York P.----------------------- 1 Animals have rights; philosophers have debated the extentof these rights for centuries. Animal welfare groupsseek to minimize the number of animals used in research and the amount ofdiscomfort inflicted on them. Some animals are usedfor instructional purposes, such as frogs in the biology classroom. Animals, who learned only by experience,were inferior to human beings, who possessed the ability to learn through avariety of means. Recently, the American public has madesignificant strides in re-examining the inhumane treatment given tononhuman creatures in the name of scientific advancement. This viewpointis shared by animal rights organizations throughout the world. 1 5-114. Extremists in the movement routinely resort tobreaking and entering laboratory facilities and "liberating" researchanimals. Computersimulations allow scientists to explore a wider range of situations thanpossible with animal experimentation (Gendin, 1989, p. Animal Rights and HumanObligations, pp. M. The majority of the public believes that thestatus of animals is closely related to that of human beings and,therefore, that animals should not be subjected to needless suffering forresearch purposes. Gendin, S. The use of lower organisms to replace animal testing has foundincreasing acceptance in the scientific community. eds. Animals dying as a result of natural phenomena usually do sounder conditions of intense suffering. As Rosemary Rodd puts it, "The use of animals is onlyjustified if there is good reason to believe either that the animals derivesufficient benefits to compensate them for any restraints or harms imposedby humans, or that using animals is the only way to preserve humans fromdeath or significant harm" (Rodd, 199 , p. (1991). The case for animal rights. The use of animals in scientific research violates the common sensemorality of human beings. 2 2). The land makes possible theexistence and survival of human beings, and through this function the landearns its moral rights. 14). These arguments arethe ecological, the prudential, the sentimental, and the contractual. (1994, April). Assuming that animals could, thennonhuman creatures possessed the same rights as human beings to lives freeof suffering, pain, and death at the hands of others. The subjects of thestudy were 729 teenagers and adults attending high school or college oremployed as professors at academic institutions in central Georgia. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Alternatives to animals in toxicitytesting. As oneecologist puts it, "Life actually depends on nature's death ethic; henceresponsible killing of sentient animals can be a sacred act when done inbehalf of nature's laws" (Howard, p. Althoughthis figure accounts for 5 percent of all animal deaths by humanintervention, clearly the impact of scientific research on animal mortalityis significant. The Animal Rights/Environmental Ethics Debate: TheEnvironmental Perspective, pp. 28-3 ).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
