Many people today, including scientists and doctors, are questioning the suffering and
killing of animals for the sake of human beings. Is it morally correct to dissect a frog
or a worm for the purpose of educating a high school student? On the other hand, must "We
study life to protect life" (1:131) The issue of killing animals for the use of
biomedical research, education, and cosmetics can be referred as "vivisection".
Twenty-five to thirty-five million animals are spared in the U.S.A. each year for the
purpose of research, testing, and education. Although vivisection serves as an important
tool for scientists and doctors to work in research and may benefit humans, the harms
indeed outweigh the benefits.
Animal experimentation was not common until the early nineteenth century and emerged as
an important method of science. The first recorded action of vivisection was the study of
body humors by Erasistratus in Alexandria during the third century (1:3). Later, in A.D.
129-200, the physician, Galen, used five pigs to investigate the effects of several
nerves (1:4). He is considered to be the founder of experimental physiology. During the
Renaissance Era, Andreas Vesalius conducted experiments on monkeys, swine, and goats
(1:3). By the late eighteenth century, the methods of scientific discovery were changer
to experimentation of live animals by two French physiologists, Claude Bernard and
Francious Magnedie. They revolutionized methods of scientific discovery by establishing
live animal as common practice (1:4). Claude Bernard believed that in order for medicine
to progress, there must be experimental research, and affirmed that "vivisection is
indispensable for physical research". This is when the anti-vivisection movement was
established ("vivisection").
There are different views as to why or why not there should be animal experimentation.
For example, Descartes believed that animals are incapable of feeling pain. He said "The
greatest of all the prejudices we have retained from our infancy is that of believing
that beasts think" (1:4). In other words, Descartes believes that animals have no
sensations. Singer argues and thinks that animals have feelings, desires, and
preferences. He observed that stimuli that cause pain to humans, such as hitting and
burning, cause pain to animals (1:25). Singer 's position is that equal harms should be
counted equally and not downgraded for animals. However, he does not say that humans and
animals have an equal moral status, for he believes that "humans are superior to their
fellow animals by virtue of God-given soul" (12:37). Regan, another opposer to Descarte's
view, feels that animals do feel pain and have desires as well. He believes that animals
are "Subjects of a life just as human beings are and a subject of a life have inherent
values" (1:26). He also feels that animals should not be tested for toxic substances,
instead one should use cell tissue cultures (5:26).
The people who favor animal experimentation feel that research is for the purpose of
humans. Research is a cultural value to acquire knowledge for knowledge's sake. In other
words, the means justifies the end if the end benefits society. (4:62). They also believe
that humans are superior to all other creatures (1:28). Research is for biomedical
purposes; 1) to add scientific understanding of basic biological behavior, functions, and
processes 2) to improve human or animal health by studying the natural history of the
disease (1:22). Henry Foster, the founder of Charles River Breeding Laborator, said that
"the use of animals in experiments is all for the benefit of mankind. If you don't use
animals you don't do research!" (2:45).
Most of the times by doing research one performs tests on animals. For example, rabbits
are locked in a chamber and forced to inhale grass, sprays, and vapors. In dermal
toxicity studies, rabbits have their fur removed to have substances placed on their skin.
In this case they are restrained so they don't scratch (2:55). Testing is conducted to
assess the potency, effectiveness, or toxicity of substances that have established or
potential usefulness for medical, scientific, or commercial purposes (1:39). For
instance, new drugs are tested for efficiency and safety before clinical trials are
conducted on humans. Tests on animals are done to establish safety levels for humans of
known toxic substances (1:40).
Although testing might seem like the most efficient way to gain knowledge in these
areas, alternatives exist. The use of slides, films, computer programs, and models can
fulfill the same job without any harm. For example, in vet schools the symptoms of
strychnine poisoning were demonstrated by poisoning dogs and then put on a video tape. On
the video the students can go over steps repeatedly and see what is taking place more
clearly than in a lecture hall (9:234). In medical schools procedures are easier to
follow by camera. Students can watch surgery performed by the top practitioner of the
area. By using videos lives are saved, suffering is reduced, and money is saved (6:107).
Animals are also used to teach human concepts at all levels of education, to instruct
students in biology, to teach certain skills, and to train the next generation of
scientists (1:40). For example, high school students have been conducting frog
dissections for the past fifty years. In some schools it is part of the curriculum. A
fifteen year old, Jennifer Graham, refused to take part in the dissection of frogs. She
was told by her teacher that if she did not do the assignment she would fail the course.
She was an "A" student and received a "C" for the course. She took this matter to court.
The judge compromised and told her to dissect a frog that died of natural causes, however
she never found one and the matter was not resolved (1:195). There are benefits using
animals in school like the previous case. It gives students opportunities for detailed
function and observations of the structure. When studied in school an increase in
interest and motivation to study living animals is provided. It also stimulates
children's creative ability and encourages appreciation towards animals. Finally, it
contributes to the personal development of students. Thus a responsibility for animals
and the growth of caring attitudes is established (9:221).
In veterinary training, animals are used as models for other animals. In the United
States students dissect animals to study their anatomy and function (10:233).
Veterinarians practice with animals so they can form technical abilities. In the United
Kingdom, on the other hand, veterinarians are trained without ever touching animals.
Their first experience with live animals is on the job (9:232). The issue of vet students
is serious and is left as an endless debate (10:232).
The United States Congress Office of Technology Assessment has estimated that several
million animals are used each year for toxicological testing in the United States (2:54).
Cosmetics and other substances are tested in animals' eyes. J.H. draize developed a scale
for assessing how irritating a substance is when placed in a rabbit's eye (2:55). The
animals are usually placed in holding devices from which only their heads protrude. This
prevents the rabbits from scratching their eyes. Shampoo, ink, or bleach is placed in the
eye of each rabbit and is then observed daily for eye infection or swelling (2:56).
Antivivisectionists are unconvinced that animal experimentation has benefits. They feel
that vivisection is cruel to animals and detrimental to the moral character of humans.
Humanitarians believe that this suffering leads to insensitivity. Their sensibilities
hardened thus vivisects became capable of barbarous acts against humans as well as
animals (7:59). Medical students, corrupted by hospital teaching, absorb such a love of
cruelty that when they visit their homes they practice it for their own sake.
Antivivisectionists say that vivisection "reverses the order of the refining forces of
civilization" (7:60). The use of animals in these issues should be limited and controlled
even though some cases are justified (8:338). The debate among moral philosophers is
never ending. There are undoubtedly many moral choices in animal experimentation. But
most philosophers agree that animals should be granted a higher status when people decide
to "use" them (11:9).
In conclusion, animals should not be viewed as man's gift to the world and, therefore,
should not be used excessively without a proper justification. When educating students in
grade school, the killing of animals is unnecessary. For educating in high school,
college, and graduate school, alternatives can be used. It is also inhuman and
unnecessary to kill animals for the use of cosmetics. For this purpose animals are being
killed to perfect the beauty of humans. In some cases, such as research to help cure
diseases, many questions are raised about morality. These cases must be researched
individually . The bottom line is that "a life is a life and animals have the same right
as humans do to enjoy it!"
VIVIECTION
Many people today, including scientists and doctors, are questioning the suffering and
killing of animals for the sake of human beings. Is it morally correct to dissect a frog
or a worm for the purpose of educating a high school student? On the other hand, must "We
study life to protect life" (1:131) The issue of killing animals for the use of
biomedical research, education, and cosmetics can be referred as "vivisection".
Twenty-five to thirty-five million animals are spared in the U.S.A. each year for the
purpose of research, testing, and education. Although vivisection serves as an important
tool for scientists and doctors to work in research and may benefit humans, the harms
indeed outweigh the benefits.
Animal experimentation was not common until the early nineteenth century and emerged as
an important method of science. The first recorded action of vivisection was the study of
body humors by Erasistratus in Alexandria during the third century (1:3). Later, in A.D.
129-200, the physician, Galen, used five pigs to investigate the effects of several
nerves (1:4). He is considered to be the founder of experimental physiology. During the
Renaissance Era, Andreas Vesalius conducted experiments on monkeys, swine, and goats
(1:3). By the late eighteenth century, the methods of scientific discovery were changer
to experimentation of live animals by two French physiologists, Claude Bernard and
Francious Magnedie. They revolutionized methods of scientific discovery by establishing
live animal as common practice (1:4). Claude Bernard believed that in order for medicine
to progress, there must be experimental research, and affirmed that "vivisection is
indispensable for physical research". This is when the anti-vivisection movement was
established ("vivisection").
There are different views as to why or why not there should be animal experimentation.
For example, Descartes believed that animals are incapable of feeling pain. He said "The
greatest of all the prejudices we have retained from our infancy is that of believing
that beasts think" (1:4). In other words, Descartes believes that animals have no
sensations. Singer argues and thinks that animals have feelings, desires, and
preferences. He observed that stimuli that cause pain to humans, such as hitting and
burning, cause pain to animals (1:25). Singer 's position is that equal harms should be
counted equally and not downgraded for animals. However, he does not say that humans and
animals have an equal moral status, for he believes that "humans are superior to their
fellow animals by virtue of God-given soul" (12:37). Regan, another opposer to Descarte's
view, feels that animals do feel pain and have desires as well. He believes that animals
are "Subjects of a life just as human beings are and a subject of a life have inherent
values" (1:26). He also feels that animals should not be tested for toxic substances,
instead one should use cell tissue cultures (5:26).
The people who favor animal experimentation feel that research is for the purpose of
humans. Research is a cultural value to acquire knowledge for knowledge's sake. In other
words, the means justifies the end if the end benefits society. (4:62). They also believe
that humans are superior to all other creatures (1:28). Research is for biomedical
purposes; 1) to add scientific understanding of basic biological behavior, functions, and
processes 2) to improve human or animal health by studying the natural history of the
disease (1:22). Henry Foster, the founder of Charles River Breeding Laborator, said that
"the use of animals in experiments is all for the benefit of mankind. If you don't use
animals you don't do research!" (2:45).
Most of the times by doing research one performs tests on animals. For example, rabbits
are locked in a chamber and forced to inhale grass, sprays, and vapors. In dermal
toxicity studies, rabbits have their fur removed to have substances placed on their skin.
In this case they are restrained so they don't scratch (2:55). Testing is conducted to
assess the potency, effectiveness, or toxicity of substances that have established or
potential usefulness for medical, scientific, or commercial purposes (1:39). For
instance, new drugs are tested for efficiency and safety before clinical trials are
conducted on humans. Tests on animals are done to establish safety levels for humans of
known toxic substances (1:40).
Although testing might seem like the most efficient way to gain knowledge in these
areas, alternatives exist. The use of slides, films, computer programs, and models can
fulfill the same job without any harm. For example, in vet schools the symptoms of
strychnine poisoning were demonstrated by poisoning dogs and then put on a video tape. On
the video the students can go over steps repeatedly and see what is taking place more
clearly than in a lecture hall (9:234). In medical schools procedures are easier to
follow by camera. Students can watch surgery performed by the top practitioner of the
area. By using videos lives are saved, suffering is reduced, and money is saved (6:107).
Animals are also used to teach human concepts at all levels of education, to instruct
students in biology, to teach certain skills, and to train the next generation of
scientists (1:40). For example, high school students have been conducting frog
dissections for the past fifty years. In some schools it is part of the curriculum. A
fifteen year old, Jennifer Graham, refused to take part in the dissection of frogs. She
was told by her teacher that if she did not do the assignment she would fail the course.
She was an "A" student and received a "C" for the course. She took this matter to court.
The judge compromised and told her to dissect a frog that died of natural causes, however
she never found one and the matter was not resolved (1:195). There are benefits using
animals in school like the previous case. It gives students opportunities for detailed
function and observations of the structure. When studied in school an increase in
interest and motivation to study living animals is provided. It also stimulates
children's creative ability and encourages appreciation towards animals. Finally, it
contributes to the personal development of students. Thus a responsibility for animals
and the growth of caring attitudes is established (9:221).
In veterinary training, animals are used as models for other animals. In the United
States students dissect animals to study their anatomy and function (10:233).
Veterinarians practice with animals so they can form technical abilities. In the United
Kingdom, on the other hand, veterinarians are trained without ever touching animals.
Their first experience with live animals is on the job (9:232). The issue of vet students
is serious and is left as an endless debate (10:232).
The United States Congress Office of Technology Assessment has estimated that several
million animals are used each year for toxicological testing in the United States (2:54).
Cosmetics and other substances are tested in animals' eyes. J.H. draize developed a scale
for assessing how irritating a substance is when placed in a rabbit's eye (2:55). The
animals are usually placed in holding devices from which only their heads protrude. This
prevents the rabbits from scratching their eyes. Shampoo, ink, or bleach is placed in the
eye of each rabbit and is then observed daily for eye infection or swelling (2:56).
Antivivisectionists are unconvinced that animal experimentation has benefits. They feel
that vivisection is cruel to animals and detrimental to the moral character of humans.
Humanitarians believe that this suffering leads to insensitivity. Their sensibilities
hardened thus vivisects became capable of barbarous acts against humans as well as
animals (7:59). Medical students, corrupted by hospital teaching, absorb such a love of
cruelty that when they visit their homes they practice it for their own sake.
Antivivisectionists say that vivisection "reverses the order of the refining forces of
civilization" (7:60). The use of animals in these issues should be limited and controlled
even though some cases are justified (8:338). The debate among moral philosophers is
never ending. There are undoubtedly many moral choices in animal experimentation. But
most philosophers agree that animals should be granted a higher status when people decide
to "use" them (11:9).
In conclusion, animals should not be viewed as man's gift to the world and, therefore,
should not be used excessively without a proper justification. When educating students in
grade school, the killing of animals is unnecessary. For educating in high school,
college, and graduate school, alternatives can be used. It is also inhuman and
unnecessary to kill animals for the use of cosmetics. For this purpose animals are being
killed to perfect the beauty of humans. In some cases, such as research to help cure
diseases, many questions are raised about morality. These cases must be researched
individually . The bottom line is that "a life is a life and animals have the same right
as humans do to enjoy it!"
|