Is the Use of Animals in Research Ethical - Essay Example

 Is the Use of Animals in Research Ethical? The use of animals in as specimens in scientific research has a long history. The same has also been subject to a hot debate between those argue that the use of animals in research is unethical and those who support the use of animals in research. Those who believe that the use of animals is unethical a normally base their arguments on the fact that such animals are exposed to pain and inhuman procedures for example brain damaging and some of them die, become sickly or deformed/incapacitated. These arguments are true in some cases. However, it is almost impossible to stop using such animals because their use is of great importance for the survival of man and animals as well. This paper analyses the ethics of using animals during research, the anticipated audience being animal health experts. Animals are often used as substitutes for human volunteers and are important specimens through whom scientists can monitor reaction to various stimuli and other significant variables in complex organs and tissues. They are therefore important for the development of medicine or testing medicine before use in the large human and animal population. If this is not done, a large population of human beings and animals would have died from diseases or affected by certain drugs that were not tested before being released and this would have been more unethical. Basing on these evidences and facts, I hold to the position that that the use of animals in research is ethical. This research is important because it will help to bring to an end or minimise the strife that exists between scientists and groups that argue that the use of animals in research is unethical. For example, its results and recommendations will form the basis of formulating a resolution that will end the threats that researchers or laboratories receive from animal rights activists who want such laboratories to be closed. It will also act to convince animal right activists to consider the un-replaceable roles played by such animals in the sustenance of life even as they fight for their rights. Evidences supporting the use of animals in research According to the British Royal Society (2004), virtually all achievements in the field of medicine during the 20th century are credited to the use of animals. Through their use, there have been great breakthroughs in the development of vaccines, antibiotics, anaesthesia and numerous medicines for treating various diseases. Biomedical research would have required the use of human volunteers for testing. However, it should be noted that some of the experiments are very risky and the subjects could die and this could led many legal issues. Therefore, animals provide a good alternative that allows scientists to observe reactions and do experimental manipulations on them in order to investigate mechanisms of normal functions and disease. This is the rationale behind the use of animals use in research. Apart from the risky nature of some experiments, there are also some other reasons that make the use of animals in research inevitable. The idea of shifting to the use of non-animal subjects in scientific experiments is very attractive and agreeable. However, there are some types of experiments that cannot be performed through the use of such alternatives. According to the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (2004), even the most sophisticated type of computers are not able to model the interactions between cells, tissues, organs, molecules and organisms, and the environment. There are many types of researches in which animals have been used. These are toxicology testing, pure research, basic or pure research, applied research, drug testing, education, defence and breeding. Basic/pure research is used to investigate how organisms function, develop and behave. Other uses of animals in pure research also experiments for understanding embryogenesis and developmental biology, genetics and evolution, and the behaviour of organisms in the environment. The aim of applied research is to solve problems that human beings go through in life like diseases. In this area, animals have been used to understand disease conditions and conduct pre-clinical trials. They have also been used in genetic modifications that facilitate the study and understanding of diseases. In addition, animals used in Xenotransplantation research are used to obtain xenografts for transplantation as a response to shortage of human organs that can be utilised in organ transplants (Platt and Lin, 1998). This is an area that is still under extensive exploration so that it can be fully exploited in dealing with shortage of human organs. Animals used in research are also important in conduct various tests like toxicology/drug safety testing, metabolism and efficacy tests and cosmetic testing. Toxicology tests/drug safety testing are used to analyse the safety of finished products like medicines, food additives, medicine, air fresheners, packaging materials and various chemical ingredients. They also include acute toxicity tests for medicines. Animals used in research have also been used in breeding, production of monoclonal antibodies. From a summation of the above discussion, it is evident that animal models constitute an important component and play an indispensable role in scientific research. Today, there are improved health standards, increased productivity in livestock and many human and animal lives have been saved due to researches involving animals. Examples of animals used in research are mice, rats, insects, rabbits, sea slugs, fruit flies. In genetics, for example, the major breakthroughs were achieved through studies involving fruit fly Drosophila spp (Black, 2001). There are also other important factors that make the use of animals in research a suitable alternative to human specimens. One of them is that animals share at least 200 common illnesses and diseases with humans and therefore, results from such experiments are bound to be more valid. Common counter-arguments on the use of animals in research There are many ethical concerns that have been raised in regard to use of animals in scientific research and these have generated strong arguments against their use in research. Some of these concerns are those pertaining to pain, discomfort and suffering as proposed by Tom Regan. There are examples of major cases regarding the use of animals in scientific research that have drawn attention. Animal activists have alleged that during these experiments, there were considerable violations of animals rights. However, such allegations are worth refuting because appropriate methods of euthanizing laboratory animals are normally used to induce rapid death or unconsciousness and this helps to avoid the infliction of pain or distress on the animals. Some of the arguments against the use of animals in research are based on moral issues on the use of xenografts and introduction of pathogens to the animals, as well as religious and personal beliefs (Carbone, 2004). Although euthanasia has been adopted to solve the issue of pain and suffering, some of the activists state that the lives of such animals have intrinsic value. They claim that scientific research involve wanton killing of animals. However, it should be clearly noted that such experiments are regulated by scientific guidelines that require the use of as few animals as possible (Yarri, 2005). Most scientists or laboratories therefore work with the most practicable minimum number of animals. Some of the animal welfare associations and animal activists question the legitimacy of the argument stating that even the most sophisticated type of computers are not able to model the interactions between cells, tissues, organs, molecules and organisms, and the environment. They argue that medical process is being held back by poor and poorly regulated scientific practice, use of outdated tests and misleading animal models (Croce, 1999). They also support this by arguments stating that the use of animals in experiments aimed at improving human health is not a good alternative since they cannot predict effects of the various variables on human beings reliably (Rowan et al, 1995). In addition, they state that some of the results have failed to reflect the exposure of persons in the real world. A good example of this is the Draize test. However, such general claims may be partly refuted as well because animals share a lot of common diseases with human beings. Their reaction to various variables like medicine therefore is a good picture of the potential reactions that can be witnessed in human beings. The ethical justification of the use of animals in research is based on the fact that the benefits outweigh the costs. On their part, animal welfare associations and animal activists claim that the costs of using animals in research is higher than the benefits accrued from them. This is a contrast to the reality. Many experiments involve the use of few animals who are a representation of the billions of people of earth as well as billions of their related animal species. It is therefore less painful and less costly to loose of use a few of them as compared to exposing the billions of people and animals to untested drugs. It is also more costly if scientists do not move swiftly to develop the most effective medicine for various life threatening diseases medicine in the name of protecting a few animals. A problem relevant to animal activists One of the problems relating to the use of animals in research is invasive and injurious use of animals. Animal activists have staged claims that many of the experiments in involving the use of animals are characterised by invasive and intrusive use of animals. By invasive, they mean that these animals are used in an offensive way during these experiments. It is true there are evidences of injurious use of animals for example in experiments involving brain damaging. However, it is not justified to call them offensive. Some types of biomedical researches allow the use of human subjects. However, some of them are risky and involve a great deal of surgery to the subjects. Even these animal activists cannot agree on the use of human subjects on such experiments. Therefore, claims advocating for a ban of the use of animals in research presents a dilemma that requires animal activists to revise their stand on this. Animals used in scientific research are normally handled with care, before during and after the experiment. Before the experiment, such animals are normally fed were the practical does not require a starving of the animals. As pointed out in earlier discussions, the care of laboratory animals during the practical entails the use of the most effective euthanizing methods to induce rapid death or unconsciousness. This means that no matter the type of surgery or process they undergo, no or minimal amount of pain or distress is normally inflicted on these animals. Discomfort levels are also monitored after the experiments to ensure the animals do not go through pain. They are given anaesthesia In addition, such kind of experiments are normally used where non-animal method cannot produce results of significance to medical advancements. This discussion is an assurance to animal activists that animals involved in scientific are not used offensively and their comfort is normally a big concern for scientists. Conclusion The use of animals in as specimens in scientific research is under a heated debate between those who support the use of animals in research and those who feel that it is unethical. However, there are strong and justifiable evidences indicating that the use of animals in scientific research is indispensable and therefore, it is morally and ethically justifiable. For example they have helped to save many lives, both human and animal. From this, it is evident that without the use of animals in research, there could be severe consequences in the health sector and thus it is logical and justifiable to state that the use of animal models in scientific research is ethical and it should be allowed. Today, there are mortalities and morbidities due to diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer disease, Parkinson’s disease and heart failure. Because of the value attached to human life, the use of animals in research should be justified as a means of getting medical breakthroughs to alleviate these life-threatening conditions, and consequently reduce mortalities and disability adjusted life years (DALYs). However, some of the tests cosmetic-related animal testing should e banned. people can do without cosmetics but not medicine. Recommendations There are many animal activists such as an Animal Liberation Front which fight for animal rights and their views should be put into consideration to avoid future challenges in scientific research. At the same time, scientific research should not be interfered with because it is the backbone to human survival and without which, availability of food will be of no value to man. Therefore a consensus has to be reached and interests of both sides addressed adequately. One of the strategies is to ensure strict imposition of the guidelines governing the use of animals in scientific research. These are regulations and protocols, which should be strictly followed (Institute for Laboratory Animal Research, 1996). For all experiments, there should be proper understanding and explanation of validity of each model used, adherence to regulations and acceptable practices regarding the use of animals in research. The adoption of alternatives to animals in research is also an important remedy in addressing the some of the ethical issues on the subject. Important strategies for achieving this are replacement, refinement and reduction. Replacement involves the use of non-animal methods like cell cultures instead of whole animals to achieve the same scientific goals. Computer models for simulation purposes can also be used. Reduction is the use of fewer animals to obtain comparable results or using the same number of animals to obtain more scientific information. Reduction is important in situations where the use of animals cannot be avoided. Refinement involves the use of methods that minimize or alleviate possible suffering, distress and pain. These include the use of analgesics and anesthesia, proper handling of animals, assessing the effects of each substance on animals (Hester el al, 2006). More research should be conducted on the achievement of medical advances without a use of animals in experiments. Potentialities of this have been evidenced by advances in scurvy, small pox, and most recently Helmlich maneuver. References Black, E. (2001). Drosophila melanogaster: The fruit fly. New York. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. Carbone, L. (2004). What Animal Want: Expertise and Advocacy in Laboratory Animal Welfare Policy. Oxford. Oxford university press. Croce, P. (1999). Vivisection or Science? An Investigation into Testing Drugs and Safeguarding Health. New York. Zed Books. Hester, R, Harrison,R. et al. (2006). Alternatives to Animal Testing: Issues in Environmental Science and Technology. Cambridge. Royal Society of Chemistry. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. (1996). Animal Research A guide for the care and use of laboratory animals. (8th Ed). Washington DC. National academy press. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. (2004). Science, Medicine, and Animals. Washington DC. National Research Council of the National Academies. Platt, J. and Lin, S. (1998). "The future promises of xenotransplantation". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (862) pp 5–18. Rowan, A. Loew, F. and Weer, J. (1995). The Animal Research Controversy. Protest, Process and Public Policy: An Analysis of Strategic Issues. North Grafton. Tufts University. The British Royal Society. (2004). “The use of non-human animals in research: a guide for scientists.” Online: http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2004/non-human-animals/. Viewed on 4th November, 2011. Yarri, D. (2005). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Read More