Animal Experimentation and Research Commons^™

Harry F. Harlow And Animal Research: Reflection On The Ethical Paradox, John P. Gluck

John P. Gluck, PhD

With respect to the ethical debate about the treatment of animals in biomedical and behavioral research, Harry F. Harlow represents a paradox. On the one hand, his work on monkey cognition and social development fostered a view of the animals as having rich subjective lives filled with intention and emotion. On the other, he has been criticized for the conduct of research that seemed to ignore the ethical implications of his own discoveries. The basis of this contradiction is discussed and propositions for current research practice are presented.

The Ethics Of Animal Research: A Survey Of The Public And Scientists In North America, Ari R. Joffe, Meredith Bara, Natalie Anton, Nathan Nobis

Morality and Ethics of Animal Experimentation Collection

Background: To determine whether the public and scientists consider common arguments (and counterarguments) in support (or not) of animal research (AR) convincing.

Methods: After validation, the survey was sent to samples of public (Sampling Survey International (SSI; Canadian), Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT; US), a Canadian city festival and children’s hospital), medical students (two second-year classes), and scientists (corresponding authors, and academic pediatricians). We presented questions about common arguments (with their counterarguments) to justify the moral permissibility (or not) of AR. Responses were compared using Chi-square with Bonferonni correction.

Results: There were 1220 public [SSI, n = 586; AMT, n = …

Psychology And Its Animal Subjects, Kenneth J. Shapiro

Kenneth J. Shapiro, PhD

By way of introducing Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PsyETA) to readers of the journal, I have been asked to make some comments about the organization and, from a personal point of view, to suggest some of my own positions and views.

The Harmful, Nontherapeutic Use Of Animals In Research Is Morally Wrong, Nathan Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, PhD

It is argued that using animals in research is morally wrong when the research is nontherapeutic and harmful to the animals. This article discusses methods of moral reasoning and discusses how arguments on this and other bioethical issues might be defended and critiqued. A basic method of moral argument analysis is presented and used to show that common objections to the view that “animal research is morally wrong” fail: ie, common arguments for the view that “animal research is morally permissible” are demonstrably unsound or in need of defense. It is argued that the best explanations why harmful, nontherapeutic research …

The Ethics Of Animal Research: A Survey Of Pediatric Health Care Workers, Ari Joffe, Meredith Bara, Natalie Anton, Nathan Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, PhD

Introduction: Pediatric health care workers (HCW) often perform, promote, and advocate use of public funds for animal research (AR). We aim to determine whether HCW consider common arguments (and counterarguments) in support (or not) of AR convincing. Design: After development and validation, an e-mail survey was sent to all pediatricians and pediatric intensive care unit nurses and respiratory therapists (RTs) affiliated with a Canadian University. We presented questions about demographics, support for AR, and common arguments (with their counterarguments) to justify the moral permissibility (or not) of AR. Responses are reported using standard tabulations. Responses of pediatricians and nurses/RTs were …

The Ethics Of Animal Research: A Survey Of Pediatric Health Care Workers, Ari Joffe, Meredith Bara, Natalie Anton, Nathan Nobis

Experimentation Collection

Introduction: Pediatric health care workers (HCW) often perform, promote, and advocate use of public funds for animal research (AR). We aim to determine whether HCW consider common arguments (and counterarguments) in support (or not) of AR convincing.

Design: After development and validation, an e-mail survey was sent to all pediatricians and pediatric intensive care unit nurses and respiratory therapists (RTs) affiliated with a Canadian University. We presented questions about demographics, support for AR, and common arguments (with their counterarguments) to justify the moral permissibility (or not) of AR. Responses are reported using standard tabulations. Responses of pediatricians and nurses/RTs were …

The Harmful, Nontherapeutic Use Of Animals In Research Is Morally Wrong, Nathan Nobis

Experimentation Collection

It is argued that using animals in research is morally wrong when the research is nontherapeutic and harmful to the animals. This article discusses methods of moral reasoning and discusses how arguments on this and other bioethical issues might be defended and critiqued. A basic method of moral argument analysis is presented and used to show that common objections to the view that “animal research is morally wrong” fail: ie, common arguments for the view that “animal research is morally permissible” are demonstrably unsound or in need of defense. It is argued that the best explanations why harmful, nontherapeutic research …

Harry F. Harlow And Animal Research: Reflection On The Ethical Paradox, John P. Gluck

Experimentation Collection

With respect to the ethical debate about the treatment of animals in biomedical and behavioral research, Harry F. Harlow represents a paradox. On the one hand, his work on monkey cognition and social development fostered a view of the animals as having rich subjective lives filled with intention and emotion. On the other, he has been criticized for the conduct of research that seemed to ignore the ethical implications of his own discoveries. The basis of this contradiction is discussed and propositions for current research practice are presented.

The Ethical Judgment Of Animal Research, Shelley L. Galvin, Harold A. Herzog

Experimentation Collection

One hundred sixty subjects acted as members of a hypothetical Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and evaluated five proposals in which animals were to be used for research or educational purposes. They were asked to approve or reject the proposals and to indicate what factors were important in reaching their ethical decisions. Gender and differences in personal moral philosophy were related to approval decisions. The reasons given for the decisions fell into three main categories: metacognitive statements, factors related to the animal, and factors related to the design of the experiment.

Ethical Aspects Of Animal Experimentation, Wolfgang Scharmann

Experimentation Collection

If inquiries are made of people regarding their attitudes towards animal experimentation, there will no doubt be various answers corresponding to the different ethical attitudes today. Three principle points of view are imaginable. The two extremes are: an unrestricted support of all animal experiments; and a radical rejection of any such experiment. These two positions, in all likelihood, are taken by only a minority of the population. The majority will approve of animal experimentation in principle, however, only insofar as it is really necessary to preserve human life. So, the point of controversy arises from the question: When is an …

Ethical Concerns In Primate Use And Husbandry, Ardith A. Eudey

Experimentation Collection

Subsequent to World War II, a dramatic increase occurred in the utilization of nonhuman primates in biomedical and psychological research and industry. At the same time field studies on the ecological and social behavior of natural populations of primates also increased, making possible more realistic assessments of both the behavioral potentiality of primate populations and their conservation status. In spite of the growing body of information indicating the endangered or threatened status of most species, many laboratory workers and planning agencies continue to regard primates as renewable resources, even seeking to bypass protective legislation in habitat countries to obtain them. …

Protection For Animals In Biomedical Research, F. L. Thomsen

Laboratory Experiments Collection

Our conclusion from all of this work and study is that not just a small part, but that most of the suffering undergone by laboratory animals in "unnecessary" under the terms of the pain provisions of the Rogers-Javits bill. Granted, it will take some time and effort to bring about the necessary interpretations of these provisions. The Act, when passed, offers us the medium through which to obtain such interpretations.

This unnecessary suffering results mostly from the indifference, and from the inertia and the lack of proper scientific training and technical knowledge, of many of those conducting laboratory animal experiments …