Animal Research: Do the Ends Justify the Means?

Animal Research: Do the Ends Justify the Means?

The use of animals in scientific research has uncountable breakthroughs in various fields of sciences especially in medicine and will continue to create more for the benefit of every leaving creature. Human beings do not only enjoy the successes of animal researches but also the animal kingdom. The question of animal research has been a famous debate subject ever since and it seems that the protagonists are still winning over the antagonists. If we try to read the minds of both sides, We’ll see that the opposition has more things to prove than the supporters in order for them to succeed in trying to stop totally or at least minimize the practice of animal research that is being widely practiced all over the world. They try to search for little failures of animal research and convince the lawmakers to pass a bill discontinuing what they believe a malpractice and a waste of time, money, and effort. That is quite a challenge because in any research, a failure can be a success itself since knowledge can be acquired. On the other hand, the protagonists actually need not to go deeper searching for evidences to support their cause since the successes of animal research are well known to the general public.

We’ll try to hear the creed of the antagonists and evaluate their points of view. Famous reason that inspired them to fight is the tough belief that animals are entitled to the same rights as humans. Educated antagonists argue that animal studies are often trivial and may not apply to humans. They usually highlight that animal testing played no role in many of the most important advances in health. They have noted that improved nutrition, sanitation and other behavioral and environmental factors are more responsible for the decline in death and that animal research had little to do with life expectancy. They also claim that in fact, because animal experiments frequently give misleading results with regard to human health, we’d probably be better off if we haven’t relied on them. And Of course, they pointed out some alternative ways to animal experimentation which includes epidemiology, autopsy, biopsy, physical models, genetic models, clinical research, post marketing drug surveillance, and mathematical and computer modeling. In addition, they argue that this other ways are faster, more reliable, less expensive and more humane than animal test.

Just as apples and oranges are not supposed to be compared, animals and humans should also determine superiority over the other. Taking equality away from the scene, none of these antagonists would be too humble enough and bow to animals. It is true that not every single test done to animals can be applied to humans, but who expects a hundred percent outcome anyway? We are far more than satisfied that some are working. Animal research is not trying to compete with other factors or methods to be named as the leader in promoting medical advancement and increasing life longetivity. Even the least important of all medical advancement achieved through animal research would still be valuable. If we had not relied on animal research, we are probably still in search for cures to certain diseases until now such as vaccine against polio, insulin for insulin-dependent diabetics, blood pressure medication to prevent heart attack, stroke, and kidney failure. Also in the list are hip and joint replacements for those who suffer from arthritis and coronary bypass surgery just to name a few. Although there are alternative ways are available, none of these can level the quality of animal-based studies. One good point is that none of these alternative methods can be used for practicing surgery before doing it actually in humans. No patient will trust even the smartest of these surgeons to operate delicate parts of their body if the procedure had not been tested. Obviously, we hate sacrificing the lives of animals but is seems that the only other option is to practice it to humans, which is a big no. Alternatives might be useful to other concerns but they can never compare to animal research.

That’s enough about the opposing claims. Let’s try to review some relevant numbers. Sources of Brandon Spun, a reporter from Insight, announced that eleven thousand anticancer chemicals developed in mice, none helped human. While five million of butulinom kills man, ten grams has no effects on dogs or cats. Rodents live three years while humans average 72. Animal Aid, an anti-animal research organization in the United Kingdom stated that thousands of chimpanzees have been use in useless experiments to find cure for AIDS, but it is known that, while it kills humans, AIDS wont kill chimpanzees.

According to the Partners in Research, a Canadian-based organization, ninety-seven of the animals used by humans are used in the food chain. Less than one third of one percent of the animals used by humans is used for bionomical research, teaching and testing. One in ten million vaccinations fail because of animal research. Over 135 million people in the world suffer form diabetes. Because of animal research, insulin was discovered and the diabetic people enjoy the benefit of enjoying a relatively normal life. Over ninety-four percent of the animals used in research are fish, rodents and birds. These are animals that breed rapidly and are inexpensive to house and breed. Only one to one and a half percent of animals used in medical research are dogs or cats and less than one half of one percent are primates.

Today’s issue on animal experimentation no longer depends on moral leverage. This revolution in advocacy has spawned a whole new contrary opinion.

“Animals may be ninety-nine point nine percent similar to humans but it is not good enough. At the cellular level, one tenth percent is a big deal” – Dr. Joseph Murray

A lot of medical experimentation, perhaps all of it, is a sham. . . I know it’s kind of ludicrous to continue this charade, this kind of lazy, outdated science as an answer.” - Alec Baldwin, actor and celebrity spokesman for people for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

“You do not settle whether the experiment is justified or not by merely showing that it is of some use. The distinction is not between useful and useless experiments, but between barbarous and civilized behavior.” - George Bernard Shaw

“If you have information on human genes, what’s the point of going back to animals?” - Gorton Baxter, co-founder of Pharmagon Laboratories

“Without the use of animals and human beings, it would have been impossible to acquire the human knowledge needed to prevent much suffering and premature death not only among humans, but also among animals. - Albert B. Sabin, M.D., Developer of the Polio Vaccine

“I don’t like using animals. I use them because seeing people with devastating illness is even worse. The day when we don’t need to use animals, I will be absolutely delighted. Until that day comes. I have absolutely no doubt that the animal research must continue. – Nancy Rothwell, MRC Research Professor

“There is no alternative to the use on of animals for analyzing the complexity of immunity. Progress in all areas of medicine is enormously enhanced by the new gene ‘knockout’ and transgenic mouse technology. - 1996 Naubel Laureata Peter C. Doherty, Ph D.

Lets take look at the laws governing the conduct of Animal Research. In the United Kingdom, vivisection is controlled by the Animals Act 1986, which states experiments can only take place if the expected benefits to humans outweigh the animals’ suffering. The Criminal Code of Canada, Cruelty to Animal Section, forbids “causing unnecessary suffering.” It is an offence to willfully cause, or being an owner willfully permit to be caused unnecessary pain, suffering or injury to an animal or bird. The Animal Welfare Act of the United States are relatively similar to that of the UK and Canada but critics claim that it is very weak and poorly enforced.

It is clear to me that testing on Animals involves risks but I would rather put the lives of these animals in line than humans. We don’t need someone who is brave enough to get into an airplane that has never been flown before. If it takes some sacrifice, I would rather let animals play the heroic role. I would understand vegetarians that are against animal experimentation but not those others who try to make an exciting career of trying to stop such research by repeatedly asserting that it is with no value. Taking all these in a simplistic perspective, the question about animal research winds down into “Do the ends justify the means?” And my solid answer is yes.

References:

1. Insight on the News, June 24, 2002 v18i23 p21(3) (InfoTrac)

2. Animal Aid Organization (UK) website. www.animalaid.org.uk (ProQuest)

3. Webwatch: Rekindling the debate on Animal research. Contributed by Marilyn Larkin. (ProQuest)

4. Animal Savings Club website. Animalsavingsclub.com

5. Partners in Research website. www.pirweb.com