The Use of Animals in Medical and Behavioral Studies - Research Paper Example

December, Should Animals be used in Medical Research? Introduction Though highly debated, animals have been an integral part of medical research. Although the awareness about health and hygiene has played an important role in increasing the life expectancy of human beings, the role of medical research using laboratory animals cannot be denied. The discovery of insulin and the development of polio and rabies vaccines are some medical breakthroughs that can be credited to the use of animals in medical research. Since scientists are still unclear about the way human body functions, animals like cats, mice, frogs, pigs and primates have been frequently used to determine its effect and efficiency in addressing specific medical conditions. When preliminary tests on animals provide promising results, only then these studies are conducted on human beings. Therefore, the use of animals in medical research has been extremely useful in understanding the human body and the changes in functions when dealing with a disease. Hence, animals provide a good testing ground to conduct medical research and should continue to be used within the limits of the code of ethics. This paper will examine the historical background concerning the use of animals in medical research and closely examine the different perspectives pertaining to it. It will also elaborate my arguments supporting the use of animals in medical research and why I feel it is especially critical to do so in this day and age. Relevant History and Background The use of animals in medical and behavioral studies can be traced back to ancient Greek writings which record that Aristotle, the Greek philosopher conducted experiments on live animals. In fact, Aristotle argued that, “animals, having sense perception but lacking reason, fall below humans in a natural hierarchy and are therefore appropriate resources for human purposes” (DeGrazia 3). He also argued that since animals do not have rational souls, using them in medical research is not an issue concerning justice (DeGrazia 3). Although, other Greeks like Pythogoras believed that animals are incarnations of human beings and Theophrastus believed that animals had the ability to reason to some degree, most western theologians and philosophers agreed with Aristotle (DeGrazia 3). Traditionally, the moral status of animals has been shaped by religion and philosophy. The Bible mentions that God created human beings in His own image and gave him authority over all that was created – including animals. According to DeGrazia, the Bible reinforces the Aristotelian view of animals of using them for human purposes (3). Christian philosophers like Augustine and Thomas Aquinas also emphasized that since animals cannot reason, they are subordinate to human beings (DeGrazia 3). However Hinduism and Islamic beliefs consider animals to have some degree of rationality and at times consider them on par with human beings (DeGrazia 3). Current medical research practices ensure only the least number of the most appropriate animal is used. Again, the U.S. federal law requires all animals to be treated humanely and that they should experience the least amount of pain and distress when used in medical research. For as long as animals have been used for medical research, there have been people and groups fighting for animal rights through writings and peaceful protests. However, as the experimentation on animals increased over the years, so did the controversy and criticism concerning it, especially with respect to the practice of vivisection – a process which involves conducting surgery on living organisms, usually animals, for physiological or pathological investigations (DeGrazia). Overview of Different Positions on This Issue Broadly there are two opposing positions concerning the issue of the use of animals in medical research: In Favor of Animal Research: The major argument of people favoring animal research is that using animals for medical research is acceptable if the suffering is minimized in all experiments and the benefits from the research cannot be achieved by any other means. This group believes that animals used for medical research have no rights and therefore they can be used to test drugs and medical procedures before introducing it on human beings. While using animals for medical research, they may experience pain or even loose their life in this process. However, on considering the bigger picture, these medical research findings would prove to be extremely beneficial to both animals and human beings; therefore it is morally acceptable to harm a few animals. On the positive side, this position helps to reduce the risks on human beings by first testing the drugs and medical procedures on animals. On the negative side, a significant amount of animals are reared for the purpose of medical research and during this process, most of the animals experience suffering and pain or experience lower quality of life. Against Animal Research: The major argument of people who do not favor animal research is that any kind of experiments on animals is unacceptable because it causes some degree of suffering in animals. They contend that the benefits of the research to human beings are not proven. They strongly believe that any possible benefits from these medical research studies can be produced by other means. This group believes that animals have rights just like humans and they should not be used as scapegoats in conducting medical research. This group believes that the extent of pain and suffering that the animals undergo during various medical research processes and the number of animals used for this purpose are extremely high. Therefore, the benefits to humanity cannot be morally justified. The animal activists believe that using animals for the purposes of medical research violates the respect to animals as they are and is not good science practice. They believe that such practices disregard the lifestyle and religious orientation of people and depict irresponsibility towards environment and future generations. On the positive side, this position helps to ensure that animals are not exposed to pain and suffering and they would experience a better quality of life under normal circumstances. On the negative side, major breakthroughs in the field of medicine will be limited due to the inability to use animals for testing purposes. Again, testing new drugs and medical procedures directly on human beings can be extremely risky as the consequences are typically unknown. My Position I strongly believe that animals should be used in medical research because the benefits of using them far outweigh the risks. The use of animals in medical research has proved to be extremely beneficial in developing important and crucial breakthroughs in the field of health care. The knowledge that we have gained over the years through animal research has helped to narrow the knowledge gap in this area and has benefited both human beings and animals. For example, Syrian hamsters have proved to be very useful in the field of cancer research. Compared to other rodents, Syrian hamsters have been found to have remarkably lower incidence of naturally occurring tumors (Gibson and Brady 7). According to Gibson and Brady, hamsters are “highly susceptible to viral oncogenesis by experimental inoculation of viruses from other species” (7). These animals have therefore been extensively used to gather important information concerning the role of cancer causing agents and cell-mediated defense mechanisms against tumors (Gibson and Brady 7). In fact the Syrian hamster has been used as an animal model for pancreatic carcinogenesis because the induced tumors in the animal are clinically and physically similar to the pancreatic carcinogenesis seen in human beings (Gibson and Brady 7). Again, I strongly believe that animals do not have rights like that of human beings. If they did, the consequences of it would significantly limit human beings. This would mean that there cannot be breeding and killing animals for food and clothing, no selective breeding or use of animals for hard labor. Research over the years has revealed that animals act on instincts rather than rational thoughts like human beings. Therefore, the argument concerning animal rights seems illogical. In fact, Michael Allen Fox, a professor of philosophy at the Queen’s university in Kingston, Ontario has written a book in which he provides evolutionary and philosophical basis to describe the unreasonable argument against using animals in medical research. He describes the “moral status of animals” as “ambiguous” and emphasizes that very often animal research is the only means to collect scientific and medical information that are important to improve the well being of human beings (Fox). Medical research using animals are guided by the three Rs (DeGrazia 111): 1. Reduction – decrease the number of animals that are used for medical research by improving research methodologies and by sharing information with other researchers. 2. Refinement – streamline the process of medical research by using less invasive techniques, proper living conditions and medical care for the animals. This will help ensure that the animals experience less pain and suffering. 3. Replacement – replace the use of animals in medical research with experiments on cell cultures, using computer models or using human volunteers. Therefore, I strongly believe that in order to make medical advancement for the benefit of human beings and animals, the use of animals for medical research should continue. However, it should be done within the limits of the code of ethics. Conclusion Using animals in medical research has been a highly controversial issue. However, the use of animals for medical research purposes has been proved to be very important as it allows researchers to weed out any unforeseen negative effects before testing them on human beings. Several drugs and medical procedures in the past have been successfully developed following animal research and have led to the improvement in the overall life expectancy of human beings and animals. The future of animal research is very promising and can be proved by the numerous medical milestones achieved in the past. In fact, animal research holds promising results in the field of stem cell research, gene therapy and drugs for treating diseases like HIV/AIDS. However, scientists should ensure that they use the least amount of animals and in an efficient way while conducting medical research. I do not believe that any responsible researcher would support the careless use of animals for medical research. However, to suggest that no animals should be used in any kind of medical research is being highly irresponsible and irrational. Works Cited DeGrazia, David. Animal Rights: A very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print. Fox, Michael A. The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Print. Gibson, Susan, and Brady Alan. Hamsters: Use in Research. University of South Alabama, n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2011. < http://ehs.uc.edu/lams/data/pdfs/9027.pdf> Read More