The Bloggers With The Most To Say
Is Animal Research Justified?
Recently at UCLA there were dual protests by the animal rights activists and rivaled by the UCLA Pro-Test group, a collection of scientists and other that were demonstrating FOR the use of animals in research as well as in coalition against extremist groups that have been committing acts of terrorism against animal researchers such as firebombing cars and houses and making threats on the individuals and their families.
This is nothing new, an ongoing debate, yet people tend to have strong feelings either for or against it. To simply say that extremists are isolated, this is not true as I know of people who have had mail-bombs sent to their homes - thankfully no one was injured. But the extremists take the stance that by killing one to four humans will prevent the deaths of _______ (insert absurd number) of animals.
Anyone who uses modern medicine should recognize that all of these medications would likely not be available without animal research. There are people out there that refuse to eat meat, wear leather, use animal products, or use anything that has been tested on animals.
Where do you stand?
This is nothing new, an ongoing debate, yet people tend to have strong feelings either for or against it. To simply say that extremists are isolated, this is not true as I know of people who have had mail-bombs sent to their homes - thankfully no one was injured. But the extremists take the stance that by killing one to four humans will prevent the deaths of _______ (insert absurd number) of animals.
Anyone who uses modern medicine should recognize that all of these medications would likely not be available without animal research. There are people out there that refuse to eat meat, wear leather, use animal products, or use anything that has been tested on animals.
Where do you stand?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Sarah on -
As a pescatarian (vegetarian who eats fish), I find that people often assume I'll fall into the category of being someone who is strongly against this.
However, although I'm against animal testing when it comes to cosmetic products, as someone whose life has been saved by modern medicine that was undoubtedly available to me, partly due to animal testing, I can't say I'm really against it.
I know it's unpleasant, and I hope that more and more, we're able to develop ways to test medicine without harming animals, but for now, if it's between my life, and that of a lab rat, I'll definitely choose mine.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlee on -
I totally feel you Sarah--I'm a vegetarian and sometime/aspiring vegan, and people are forever on my case about the fact that 'I think animals are equal to humans' etc. etc., which is certainly not the case!
I agree that animal testing shouldn't be done for the purpose of cosmetics, but for the purpose of medicine, there really isn't any viable alternative--that said, I do think there are certain methods that are a bit more inhumane than I'm comfortable with and I think establishing more stringent guidelines would be ideal, but it would also create more cost in a very financially-driven sector, so I'm not going to hold my breath.
And as for people becoming violent...that is terrifying. Kind of reminds me of the crazy people taking lives for the sake of their 'pro-life' ideology. Utterly asinine.
-
Permalink Reply by David Stehle on -
I'm an animal lover, mostly a dog lover, mostly an English Bulldog lover. But...
Is it bad that I would be very against this if say it was tested on a dog, but when it's tested on a rat, I don't really care? Sorry Mr. Rat, I don't value your life as much as I do my four-legged BFF Diesel's.
I know, I know. A life is a life, whether it is dog or rat. However, we are taught that a human life is more valuable than that of an animal. Still, scientists should do everything in their power to find different methods of testing and/or harm the smallest amount of animals possible when conducting their tests. I'm not sure that's even possible? But it's something to work towards.
-
Permalink Reply by Oats on -
A lot of people feel strongly against working on higher animals: dogs, cats, pigs, monkeys, whereas they don't really care about mice, rats, rabbits.
If it makes you feel any better, research is done with the cheapest effective model. This means that if you can find results with mice, use mice. If not you work your way up to a model system that is compatible for the work. Furthermore, before any human testing can be done, they often work their way up in animals that are more similar to humans, but whatever is being tested has been refined many times before in rats. Use of primates is usually exclusively for pre-phase I trials or studies in the neurosciences or psychology. If you can imagine, those are the most hated of the animal researchers.
Lab animals, while they aren't adopted and have a home to run about in, are treated better than most other animals or even people. They are provided with good food, purified water and air. They, by law, must be anesthetized before anything can be done with them and post surgery, they must be administered with pain-killers to reduce any amount of suffering the animal may endure. Laws governing animal research are very strict - approval will not be granted unless a clear and direct plan of action is in place using the fewest animal models possible to get statistically significant data. Any animal that must be put down are put down in a humane manner - either using isoflurane (puts them to sleep) or sodium pentobarbitol (which is what vets use to put animals to sleep).
There are horror stories out there of labs that do crazy things... Usually these are exaggerations of the truth, and if not, I question whether the lab is still up and running. Because if you violate any of the laws on animal treatment - your days as an animal researcher are over.
-
Permalink Reply by Erini CS on -
As someone who works in a research facility -- we just provide the instruments and some preparation tools/chemicals, we don't actually do our own experiments -- I can say that there are indeed very strict rules about animal care and use in research. I've got a whole file folder on it... though I've never read it since it doesn't pertain to my particular job.
A lot of people sometimes assume I'm vegetarian because I tend to be a bit of a wildlife nerd... But I'm not. I don't buy meat very often though, especially certain fish and other animals that would have to be shipped far. (I also don't each much fish because I don't agree with a lot of the industry's practices.) While I do value animal life, I do appreciate the advances we've made in medicine due to animal research.
I think a lot of animal rights groups go too far. I'll support the ASPCA before I'd think about donating any time or money to PETA. My friends who do research on animals aren't monsters. And I'd defend them against any crazy extremist. (We do have at least one week a year when security is really high on campus do to animal rights protests.)
-
Permalink Reply by Charlee on
-
I haven't personally done any research on animals, so I don't know for certain to what extent the rules consider the animal from a compassionate standpoint, but it is my impression that the guidelines are mostly in reference to ethical treatment and therefore too vague regarding how far one should go to reduce the animals' pain/discomfort.
For example, the apa guidelines state:
Procedures involving more than momentary or slight aversive stimulation, which is not relieved by medication or other acceptable methods, should be undertaken only when the objectives of the research cannot be achieved by other methods.
I think this leaves room for interpretation in terms of the other methods it refers to--meaning, I don't think enough has been done (historically) to find ways of doing things that are considerate of the animals' perspective. Though, as I said before, I don't think that is generally of high priority.
There are a few other examples that I feel are indicative of some grey area, but again, as research that involves animals isn't my thing, perhaps I am incorrect in my view on this...
also I suppose my impression of what constitutes an acceptable alternative is somewhat skewed due to my orientation toward animal welfare...
I just know that I have subjectively heard of things being done that I consider wrong (and think there could be other ways of doing if people were committed to finding these 'other methods')--and though I don't know if they were in violation of any guidelines, I do know that the researchers were people who are generally highly regarded so I don't think they'd do anything to jeopardize the research.
(Sorry that was so long, this interests me quite a bit!)
-
Permalink Reply by Erini CS on
-
Research on animals isn't my thing either. Most of what I know is what others have told me who do work with animals.
I've just been told numerous times about all the rules and regulations they've got to go through... I mean, I could just pull out the notebook and look through it... Anyway. Most of the regulations I've heard of have to do with disposing of animals... Trying to do so in the most humane ways possible.
One of my boss's old facilities made sure that all parts of the animal were utilized (or sacrificed, as my boss calls it) -- which I appreciated quite a bit. I don't know if my current employer does that, but I really wish they would. I tend to agree with the idea of using all/the absolute most of an animal as possible...
-
Permalink Reply by cooper on -
I also fall into the pescatarian category, and am not against animal research for life saving therapies. There are less cruel ways to do some of this research though, and I still have qualms about some of research done. I don't see any other way at this time.
I wonder often of the morality of torturing a lower functioning creature over a higher functioning creature. I just don't really know.
-
Permalink Reply by chad on -
I'm all for it since there is no viable alternative. I am also obviously biased since I'm a biologist who has been killing animals for research purposes for five or six years now, but the fact remains that if we want science and medicine to advance then animals are going to have to give their lives in order to make that happen.
We don't like doing it, but doing nothing and remaining stagnant just so some animals can live is much worse.
-
Permalink Reply by Oats on
-
I don't think being a biologist working on animal research makes you biased...
My thought process: You have gone through the extensive training, required ethics, and other courses - be them online or seminar style - that bring you to a place where you have to decide: I am going to do this work because I feel it is justified or I don't think this is justified research, and I believe it is ethically wrong.
This is an educated decision you have made, unlike the uneducated and misinformed decisions others often make. I only know of a handful of people who have gone through animal work training only to back down and say, I can't do this.
And of those people, their reasoning wasn't because the research wasn't justified, it was because they personally didn't think they could handle killing animals.
-
Permalink Reply by Nat on -
I fall into that category of people that refuse to eat meat, wear leather, use animal products, or use anything that has been tested on animals where possible (vegan). I understand that within the medical sector this is an issue. My biggest problem I have with animal testing and research is vivisection. i feel there is no way to justify cutting open an animal while it is alive/concious can feel pain etc. I think this needs to end and should totally be illegal. Cosmetic testing is unnecessay and I refuse to use any cosmetic that has been tested on animals.
I accept and respect others choices in life and as much as I disagree with something I would never hurt someone or act in a malicious way to make a point. i don't agree with threatening ones family as it does nothing for a case and . PETA do go overboard sometimes and distract from the point they are trying to make with theatrics.
My friend studying neuroscience needed to test on rats. To be able to do this though they needed to go before a board and discuss their plans for the research. These rats were not being killed but had to have surgery. They were granted permission on the basis that the rats were sedated pre-op and provided with painkillers etc post surgery. That the research was conducted in a humane manner. I think that if this is something that is going to continue to happen I would rather it happen humanly as possible. That the animals are shown the same respect as we would show anyone.
My apologies for the massive rant. Hopefully I managed to say something productive. ha ha. :)
Welcome to 20 Something Bloggers!
© 2012 Created by Lisa.
