Can the animal testing done to find cures for diseases be done humanely or is it by nature inhumane - Essay Example

Humane animal testing has been a scientific concern for as long as scientific research has promised cures to human health problems. Indeed, animal testing plays an important role in determining the appropriate course of action for biological diseases and ailments. Given the importance of scientific research on animals within a laboratory, the question then becomes how much inhumanness humankind is willing to accept before it gives up on the medical breakthroughs that animal testing provides. It seems that, in the past, mankind was not willing to give up animal testing because much more relaxed standards on what a researcher could do to his animal were in place that allowed for very torturous acts to be undertaken in the name of science.

It is extreme cases like that which prompt modern opposition to animal testing. However, research institutions much more tightly regulate live animal testing today in order to protect the interests of animals when they are being tested, and there is no reason to believe that animal testing cannot be conducted in a humane fashion.Animal testing endures a great number of regulations in order to protect the interests of animals. At Stanford University, scientists adhere to the Animal Welfare Act and must submit proposals for how they will use their animals in experimentation.

This requires a researcher to think beforehand about the best way to use his animal resources to achieve his intended outcome, and this allows other scientists to criticize that method if it is cruel. Scientists also sit down to discuss concepts of cruelty and the appropriate use of animals in a laboratory (Stanford News Service). With grant money depending on these scientists’ abilities to understand and apply these concepts of humane treatment, there is a strong incentive to treat animals with a measure of respect they have not been given in centuries prior.

The Canadian Council on Animal Care proposes additional practical ways in which animal tested can be conducted humanely, summarized as the “three R’s” (CCAC). The first “R” refers to “replacement,” or the preferred use of an inanimate system or model instead of a live animal model. Cell and tissue cultures are sometimes even better than a full-scale live animal model because there are fewer variables to consider. “Reduction” is the second “R,” which means decreasing the number of animals used in experimentation.

This is a good scientific practice anyway, regarding the number of confounding genetic variables that may arise in a larger population. Lastly, “Refinement,” the third “R,” refers to changing some aspect of the experiment that results in the death or pain, stress, and distress of animals. Early endpoint is an example of a method a researcher may use to refine his or her experiment. Each of these strategies represents not only a humane way of conducting scientific research, but also a more effective and reliable way of conducting research.

Although there are methods in place for researchers, one may argue, how do we know that they actually follow them? First, it should be noted that the same ethical principles do not apply to all scientists and that there is a wide variability in how scientists treat their live animal subjects. With that said, however, scientific researchers should be entrusted to conduct their work in a humane fashion, even if they do not live up to this ideal at times. For non-scientists, we do not expect moral perfection at all times or even at most times.

For scientific researchers, it is clear that animal testing can be conducted humanely, with respect for animals; however, pointing to cases of animal abuse is an unproductive exercise that equates the extreme with the usual.Animal testing can be conducted humanely and with respect for the test subjects. Live animals provide an important tool for scientific researchers as they attempt to understand and potentially cure diseases. To remove this tool is a hazard both to humans and to animals themselves, who may benefit from such research.

There are numerous regulations and strategies in place to prevent inhumane treatment of animals during scientific research. Although one may object that some especially cruel scientists may eschew these rules, this is not an argument against research on animals as such, but an unproductive argument against science as such. Our true focus should be on saving human and animal lives by replacing, reducing, and refining experiments, but using animals when it is necessary.Works CitedCCAC. "CCAC training module on: the Three Rs of humane animal experimentation." 2005. Canadian Council on Animal Care.

10 October 2011 .Stanford News Service. "Animal research at Stanford: How do we know its done humanely?" 15 October 1992. Stanford News Service. 10 October 2011 .