Use of animals in medical research - Essay Example

Animals in medical research Use of animals in medical research Introduction This paper will present the background and statistics of the use of various animals in medical research all over the world, it shall also establish different perspectives based on animal welfare and animal rights proponents through the use of peer-reviewed articles and books. This will show the different points of view held by various personnel and experts in the medical research field. Animals have been used for biomedical research since the historical times of Aristotle, the scientists performed experiments on living animals in order to advance their understanding of anatomy, pathology and physiology among others, this even led to the introduction of animal testing as an experimental method for testing surgical procedures before applying the to humans. In recent years, there has arisen several criticism and heated debates by animal rights activists and this has led to passing of various legislations that aim to make this practice more humane and ethical (Hajar, 2011). The statistics put forward by various research centers show that 95% of the animals used in medical experiments are not protected by Federal Law; another poll showed that only two countries in the world allow experimentation on Chimpanzees that is the United States and Gabon. Most biomedical scientists are of the opinion that the use of animals in medical research is essential and necessary. Scientist use animals due to their complex living system that is comprised of cells, tissues and organs and this gives them the idea on how a certain stimuli will react in a human body that comprises of the same complex living system. 95 percent of all animals used in research are rats and mice. Animal welfare perspective The first perspective is the animal welfare that is generally proposed and furthered by the animal rights groups. Most countries have laws to protect animals from unnecessary cruel. However, these animal rights groups maintain that the various legislations that have been put in place have not succeeded in prevent many horrific cases of animal abuse witnessed in research laboratories. They are of the opinion that most medical breakthroughs would still have been made without the use of animals and other solutions and alternative to animals can be found because research on animals often yields irrelevant results. The animal welfare view exists in respect to human’s right to use animals for human benefits but with the responsibility of doing so in a humane way. Animal rights activists believe that animal rights directly compare to those of a human being and therefore it is wrong to perform a procedure that sacrifices the animal’s life or puts it in danger even if the procedure is to help save a human life. Various organizations support research procedures if it means there is a regular refining technique that causes minimum discomfort and use of painkillers and anaesthetic for invasive procedure. There have been minimal restrictions on animal experimentations with various laws broadening the mandate to use appropriate pain-relievers, include commercially bred and exhibited animals and providing the necessary laboratory animal-care standards and the reduction of unnecessary animal research experiments. For researchers, the cornerstone of animal welfare principle is defined by the use of the Reduction, refinement, and replacement (the 3Rs) in terms of research. Most biomedical journals ask authors to submit and indicate the institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of the laboratory animals that were followed before publishing their documents. The contributions of animal research are undisputed and therefore there should be a demand for rigorous attention to details in the research methods employed and reports of potential scientific as well as ethical implications. Essential information involving animals should be provided and experiments that involve animals should be well designed, thoroughly analyzed and reported in a transparent way. This will garner public support due to transparency and accountability (Galley, 2010). Ethical perspective The question posed here is that if it is ethical to use animals in biomedical research, there are various proponents as well as opponents to this perspective and in order to remove any bias this perspective will address both. Various states have implemented ethical frameworks in matters of using animals in research like the UK .this is to ensure that the all the animals used in the research are fully assessed in terms of harm and there is a detailed examination of the procedures performed, the number and type of animals used. Researchers must carry out the experiments with extreme care in order to eliminate or minimize suffering, where necessary this is done through the use of painkillers and anaesthetics. Research animals are cared for veterinarians among other animal health technicians who ensure that the animals are treated humanely both for the sake of the animal and to ensure production of reliable test results. Researchers propound that stopping animal research would be unethical because it would affect the development of new understanding and various treatments to those with health conditions that need such treatment. They add that without the use of animals, the alternative would be using humans and it would prove difficult to get volunteers and may at times be fatal. Therefore the use of animals is necessary where ethical considerations prevent the use of human as test subjects. Animal rights activists and public opinion accept that animals have rights and based on this it is unethical to violate these rights in any way, the experiments are morally wrong and the benefits to humanity are completely irrelevant. Furthermore the harm done to these test animals is certain while the harm done to humans by not experimenting on animals is unknown. In brief, animal-rights extremists believe that experimentation on animals is cruel and pointless, regardless of its function or benefit while the scientists and the bioscience community accepts controls on the use of animals in research and that animals should be used for research only within an ethical framework (Festing & Wilkinson, 2007). The ethical perspective undermines the animal researchers as cruel and corrupt, the activists view them as consumed by their desire to publish papers and apply for grants rather than being fully invested in medical development for the sake of humanity. Various ethical dilemmas arise from the fact that there is no concrete way of judging whether an experiment will yield positive results or prove useless, in this case animals will be subjected to harm and even loss of life for nothing. Another dilemma arises in the testing of toxicity on animals in laboratories, these tests are used to identify the organs most susceptible to damage by a particular chemical, his is done to protect the general public but it is not easy to justify the fatality of the animals used in such an experiment even if it saves human life. Necessity of animal experimentation Scientists insist that animal experiments are necessary and have put forward various theories to support their stand. There are various diseases that require a complex living physiological process to be studied as a whole like asthma, therefore the use of animals is necessary in this process in order to gain the necessary reliable results. The use of these animals to test the drugs is done for safety purposes before they can be administered on human beings; this reduces the risk of the drug proving fatal on humans and minimizes side effects through animal testing first. This way animal testing has resulted to a substantial number of life saving cures and treatments. Researchers also advocate for the use of animals because they are similar to human beings in the genetic combination and physiological processes, however they have a shorter life cycle as compared to human beings. Animal testing not only benefits humans but the animals as well, the vaccines tested on the animals have prevented various animal deaths and extinction. This is why The American Veterinary Medical Association endorses animal testing (AVMA). The use of animals in the safety testing of chemicals and drugs help in the reduction and avoidance of pollution and associated health hazards, this ensures a healthy and proper maintenance of the environment. Some animals may also have the same genetic disorder as humans and they play a vital role in understanding and treating such genetic disorders. Therefore medical research has facilitated many ways of treatment and prevention of diseases in humans as well as in animals, and the development of most medical treatments has largely depended on animal research (Giridharan,2000). Some of the researchers are of the opinion that without the ability to use animals in research, the efforts of scientists would be greatly hampered in the development of new treatment and the basic underpin of all biomedical knowledge. However the animal right movement advocate for alternatives to animals and argue that the causing animals suffering is not justified by the end result of increased biological knowledge and understanding or the relief of human suffering. Conclusion This paper has looked at different perspectives given by proponents and opponents, the position that is the most persuasive is based on the fact that there is need for use of animals in medical experimentation so as to ensure and maintain medical advancements and treatments for various diseases. The emphasis must be that the use of animals in research is necessary and inevitable and therefore cannot be abandoned. Animal experimentation has proved necessary at the present level of knowledge for the studying and understanding different diseases, undertaking drug trials and generating vaccines that have eradicated various diseases and alleviated human and animal suffering as a whole. Reducing the number of animals is necessary as is minimizing the suffering, pain and degradation that the animals have to endure during these experimentations. This will ensure compliance with the various regulations that have been put in place both nationally and internationally. However there should be a continuous effort to find alternative solutions to animals. The main beneficiary to these medical advancements is the general public; however this may be lost in the battle between the animal researchers and animal activists leading to massive casualties. Therefore a balancing act is necessary so that both sides understand and appreciate the opposing point of view, the animal activists on their theory that animals have rights and that experimentation is a violation of these rights has been well illustrated by the distinction brought forward on the animal’s welfare and animals rights. The rights and welfare then places a responsibility on the researchers to treat the animals with dignity and not as machines. They should thus aim to keep the animals well and treat them with respect; this is done by adhering to the various welfare measures that have been put in place by the law and social norms. The middle ground involves the anima right groups putting their concern forward and the animal researchers addressing them accordingly because the groups seek to persuade the responsible parties for animals to provide the best conditions possible for their living and testing within the set limitations and within the existing framework of animal laws. References: American Veterinary Medical Association, "Use of Animals in Research, Testing, and Education," avma.org (accessed Sep 29, 2015). Festing, S., & Wilkinson, R. (2007). The ethics of animal research. EMBO reports, 8(6), 526-530. Galley, H. F. (2010). Mice, men, and medicine. British journal of anaesthesia, 105(4), 396-400. Giridharan, N. V., Kumar, V., & Muthuswamy, V. (2000). Use of animals in scientific research. Indian Counc Med Res, 1-27. Hajar, R. (2011). Animal testing and medicine. Heart views: the official journal of the Gulf Heart Association, 12(1), 42. Read More