Animals in Medical Testing

Ethics & Behavior, 1991

It is correctly asserted that the intensity of the current debate over the use of animals in biomedical research is unprecedented. The extent of expressed animosity and distrust has stunned many researchers. In response, researchers have tended to take a strategic defensive posture, which involves the assertation of several abstract positions that serve to obstruct resolution of the debate. Those abstractions include the notions that the animal protection movement is trivial and purely anti-intellectual in scope, that all science is good (and some especially so), and the belief that an ethical consensus can never really be reached between the parties. It is widely held that the current debate on the use of animals in research is unprecedented with respect to its intensity and to the extent that it has captured the public consciousness (Dewsbury, 1990). The debate is elaborated regularly in newspaper articles, editorials, personal help columns (e.g., "Dear Abby"), news magazine cover stories, television specials, and prestigious professional journals in a variety of specialties. It has also been stated by Dr. Charles McCarthy, Director of the Office of Protection from Research Risks, that Congress has received more mail on this issue than any other topic in the entire history of the country (C. R. McCarthy, personal communication, January 15, 1988). Although many authors (e.g., Feeney, 1987) have drawn attention to the similarities between the current debate and the vivisection arguments of the past century, these comparisons fail to capture the broader issue base of the present concerns. Additional questions relating to the use of and treatment of animals in product testing, clothing, sport hunting, entertainment, and intensive agriculture have been raised and related to the general topic of environmental relationships and the meaning and importance of the human-animal bond (

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA

This is a very bad time indeed for animals in Great Britain, be they on farms, on the Brecon Beacons, or in laboratories. Wholesale slaughter or ruthless exploitation is the order of the day, on the twin altars of agricultural economics and scientific progress. The Home Office statistics on laboratory use in Great Britain in 2000, which have just been released, 1 show an overall 2.2% increase in animal procedures, from 2.66 million in 1999 to 2.71 million in 2000, and a 14% increase in the number of procedures involving genetically modified animals, by 70,000 to 582,000. In her first public statement on animal experimentation since her appointment as the Home Office Minister responsible for the administration of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, Angela Eagle MP is reported to have said: 2 "The use of animals remains key to the development of scientific research that can lead to new medicines or test the safety of chemicals. However, their use must be regulated, and the UK has the toughest legislation in the world. Under this legislation, even taking a blood sample is recorded as a procedure and included in the statistics published today. In addition, we remain committed to applying the Three Rs principle in relation to animal testing." *This editorial represents only the personal views of its author.

Medical Principles and Practice, 2013

Throughout history, researchers have been solving medical and other challenging problems, developing new techniques and treatments, and curing diseases -largely by conducting animal experimentation. Animal testing gives researchers the opportunity to control in vivo the genetic and environmental factors that may influence the development of disease and establishment of its complications, and thus gain new information about its handling and treatment in humans. Most experiments are carried out on rodents, though other species with human-like biological characteristics are also used. In this review, an overview of ethical considerations in the use of animals in research, which have become highly topical and contentious, especially in recent times, are presented. The usefulness and contributions of animals in biomedical research are equally highlighted with some historical perspectives. INTRODUCTION Animal testing is the use of non-human animals for the purpose of scientific experiment...

2015

This paper is a brief summary of a report by the working group of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, which offers a new assessment of whether animal experiments can be justified morally. The Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics was founded in 2006 to pioneer ethical perspectives on animals through academic teaching, research, and publication. The centre is independent, and is not under the aegis, control, or sanction of the University of Oxford. The centre comprises an international fellowship of more than ninety academics drawn from the sciences and the humanities, and more than one hundred academic advisers.

Pharmacology & Toxicology, 1997

ILAR Journal, 1993

the two principal federal documents setting forth requirements for animal care and use by institutions using animals in research, testing, and education. One of OPRR's primary functions is to assist institutions in implementing PHS Policy by responding to policy-related questions. The following represent several frequently asked questions from institutions and the OPRR responses:

The use of animals in scientific research has always generated intense public debate and remains unacceptable in principle to some laymen as well as some scientists even today for many reasons These reasons range from the concern for the welfare of laboratory animals used for experimentation, failure of animal models to adequately represent human disease and, to some laymen and scientists, questioning the very notion that initial animal experimentation of new drugs is of any benefit to mankind However, most objective scientists and many members of the public agree that animal research should be permitted as long as it is carried out for good reason, using humane conditions as much as possible, where there are no feasible alternatives and under strict regulation This is because most scientists agree that experiments involving the use of animals have great potentials like facilitating innovation, developing platform technologies and very often providing a link with clinical trials. In addition, animal experimentation is useful in exploring disease mechanisms, in validating and testing new targets for drug research and in providing insights into drug toxicity and interactions Historically, animals have been used for a wide range of scientific research that has proved beneficial to mankind, particularly in relation to the advancement of scientific knowledge, drug development for use in animals and humans, training in surgical techniques, the safety of chemical products and, very importantly, the safe development of vaccines Animal experimentation was frowned upon by laymen and scientists primarily because of the pain and suffering to which some scientists subjected experimental animals between the 19th and mid-20th centuries. At the present time, most non-scientists (including many people with concerns for animal welfare) and scientists agree that a world in which the important benefits of scientific research can be tapped but without causing undue pain, distress, suffering or death to the animals being used for research should be the ultimate goal The use of laboratory animals can still be justified today in the following areas of research: basic scientific research, use of animals as models for human diseases, pharmaceutical research and development, toxicity testing and surgical skills training or simulation This is because there are inherent limitations in the use of alternatives like in vitro study, human clinical trials or computer simulation. It should be noted that there are problems of transferability of results obtained from animal research to humans. Efforts are ongoing to find suitable alternatives to animal experimentation. Among the methods being explored are cell and tissue culture, computer simulation and postmortem research