Use of Animals in Scientific Research
(Author’s name)
(Institutional Affiliation)
Abstract
Millions of animals are used each year for the acquisition of new scientific knowledge, necessary for survival and continuity of the human race. However, this practice by scientific research denotes a considerable amount of unethical execution, which is the basis of conflict regarding the issue. Though the issue has received a lot of criticism, the use of animals is acceptable because the results of most of these scientific research studies are beneficial for all. However, the application of this should be monitored and controlled to ensure that there is no violation occurs in the process.
Key Words: Scientific Research, Animal Testing, Ethics
Introduction
Research, in truth, is crucial for the survival of humanity. It is through research that the human race has successfully managed to come up with new ways of adapting to the ever-changing environment, and in the process attain and maintain survival and sustainability of their race (Strangor, 2010). Research has led to the discovery of food, and medicine among other things, thus its significance to human beings. However, research cannot reach its full implementation without the use of test subjects, to illustrate the effectiveness of the research. Notably, scientific research cannot be conducted on human beings, and for that reason, exploits the use of animals for research. In essence, scientific research comprises of three components including balancing between animal and human physiologies, experimenting on compounds, substances, or devices, and gaining new knowledge (Giridharan, 2000).
This paper examines the concept of animal testing in scientific research. The paper explains the extent to which animals can be used in scientific research in an acceptable manner.
To what Extent is the Use of Animals in Scientific Research Acceptable?
Evidently, research involving the use of animals for testing, has more significant contribution to scientific progression than research that does not employ animal testing. Results of studies conducted through animal testing have a 95% likelihood of being beneficial to their users, making this practice acceptable (Lowell, 2004). For example, scientists explain that the use of rodents and other animals is crucial for carrying out toxicological studies in the development of a drug molecule. Notably, in order to term animal testing as an ‘acceptable’ procedure, individuals need to take into consideration the procedures for application of this procedure. Researchers using animals for their studies need to consider the laws and principles that have been put in place to ensure proper application of this. This is the only way that animal testing can be deemed as acceptable, as the reversion of this has a negative connotation.
Contrastingly, critics believe that animal testing is unethical and requires curtailing. They believe some of the practices in animal testing are inappropriate, unethical, and refutable. Though it is accepted that animal testing is crucial for all, some researchers may conduct their experiments in deplorable mean, thus drawing on the unacceptability of the practice. Accordingly, critics argue that researchers who deliberately conduct animal testing in their research in the wrong manner should not be permitted to conduct research at all.
Conclusion
Animal testing in scientific research is only as acceptable as it is ethical. Put simply, this means that the acceptability of the practice depends on how researchers conduct experiments using animals. When using the correct procedures for animal testing in experiments, this practice is acceptable; but, if the procedures are wrongly employed, animal testing then becomes unacceptable.
References
Giridharan, N. V. (2000). Use of Animals for Scientific Research. Retrieved from:
http://www.icmr.nic.in/bioethics/Animals_biomedical%20research.pdf
Lovell D. P. et al., (2004). Reducing the Use of Laboratory Animals in Toxicological Research
and Testing by Better Experimental Design. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 58(1): 127-140.
Stangor, C. (2010). Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Cengage
Learning.
