Ethics of Animal Testing
Animal testing is really important for development of new medical devices and drugs. I do understand that the PETA might have an objection to it but such test help us achieve in reaching a benchmark when it comes to research. However perfect one thinks his model is but its always too dangerous to approve of it unless we have trials on living organisms as it could possibly put a lot of human lives at risk. One can do is that they should not treat animal as guinea pigs and constantly killing them without understanding what caused them failure and examine it before every trial and learn from it that way we can save lives of animals too and understand whether the product is fit for human trial or not.
Animal testing has its own pros and cons apart. In one way, doing animal testing is good rather than on human trials (which can’t be done legally) for development of scientific research. But considering the fact of sentient beings, animals also have the stress and pain while doing up research. More generally bioscience community accepts animals must be used for research purpose only within an ethical framework. But one should understand the cause of failure of an experiment made to specimen A before testing in on another specimen B; which helps in reducing usage of testings.Animal testing for research would become reduced if there is a rise of other alternatives like humanoid robots in the future.
I feel research on animals is ethical as it's for science, and only this way any kind of breakthrough can occur in the medical industry.
If Pre-Clinical trial is necessary then we need to test it the animal model and we can't do anything about that as it is as per the law.
There should be am alternative to this but unfortunately at this point science has not found the answer to this, maybe in future when we find an alternative we will surely avoid the use of animals for pre-clinical trials.
Humans are animals, so the entire world of medicine revolves around animal testing. Pre-clinical research allows us to test our devices on animals that aren't human. The unfortunate risks and consequences of research testing must be strictly understood and enforced by all research staff and test subjects to minimize these risks. Animals, and some humans, however, don't have the ability to understand the research that's being done on them, nor voice their concerns. The ethics of medicine is a delicate balance, and the accepted standards must be established. I appreciate the efforts of PETA, the IACUC, IRB, and government agencies to ensure the ethical standards for animal and human testing are maintained. However, some PETA efforts go as far as to abolish animal testing, which is simply not possible in a medicinal research world, except in a future where animal testing can be accurately modeled through computational simulations.
The alternative to testing a substance's biocompatibility through animal testing in vivo, is to perform toxicity tests in vitro. This, however, is often not enough to accurately estimate how the body's immune response will be to the foreign substance. While cytotoxicity tests can be performed in vitro to simulate some of the reactions, it is difficult to reliably estimate every hazard. Although it is not ideal to subject animals to harm or sacrifice, it is necessary before moving onto human clinical trials in order to minimize the detrimental effects on human test subjects. There are guidelines in place to ensure that animal tests are conducted as humanely as possible without jeopardizing the integrity of the experiment. For the time being, unless a better or equally sufficient alternative is available, I believe that the benefits of animal testing outweigh the ethics involved with sacrificing animals for scientific/medical progress.
Animal testing is a crucial part of biomedical research. Before any devices are implanted into humans, we must already have a very good idea of how it will react with the human body. The best way to do this at this time is to test on other mammals like mice, rats, and rabbits. With that said, it is extremely important to follow guidelines that have been established for ethical treatment of laboratory animals. Laboratory Animals fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture, specifically under Animal Welfare Act and Animal Welfare Regulations. There are also several institutions, such as the APA (American Psychological Association), which provide in the ethical conduct of care and use of animals. For an animal study to occur, the study will be reviewed by a committee first.
I do not think the concept of animal testing is unethical in general. However, it could become unethical if we treat the animals inappropriately by not designing the experiments correctly. For example, reducing the number of animals for testing by taking additional time with in vitro work. This may delay results or take longer but ultimately achieving results. The intention of taking short cuts with animal testing is not good. Our current technology of simulating in vivo testing with in vitro or computer modeling and simulation is limited, but I do think we will eventually have greater success and reduce animal testing requirements. By evaluating and developing alternatives to extensive animal testing would demonstrate ethical practices.
Testing on animals is a necessary evil. While alternatives do exist, such as in-vitro models, alternatives do not always provide the necessary data needed to prove that whatever is being tested is safe for humans. That being said, there are guidelines in place to ensure that animal testing is as ethical as possible. Before working with animals you often need training and before starting an experiment that uses animals you need to get the experiment approved by the board that oversees the humane treatment of animals. That doesn't mean that what is done to animals for research purposes is not inherently cruel though. As you said, research animals are dying for the progression of research. Animals are often anesthetized and sacrificed as humanly as possible, but they are still being sacrificed regardless. I think that in most research cases the act of sacrificing or experimenting on an animal is, while somewhat cruel, ethical solely because these things are not done arbitrarily. They're done to test medicines or to test the results of biomedical devices, which I think is justified.
I unfortunately do not believe there is a current alternative that can produce results as reliable and meaningful than on living animal subjects when testing for safety and efficacy of a product on living human subjects. Recent technological advancements have made it necessary to test on a live subject with physiological characteristics similar to humans in order to model a closed-loop, whole-body, living system. Without the sacrifice of animals being tested, many life-saving cures would not have been able to initially prove their effectiveness or eventually be mass produced. Regulated bodies such as the FDA would not allow for the mass production of a product without testing of safety and results to be established, documented, and reproducible. This is to ensure products released on the market do not pose an adverse risk to the consumer. Additionally, proposals for animal use in studies must be approved by a committee and animal research is highly regulated in efforts to protect those involved from any mistreatment. Possibly in the future we can use computer simulation to test for medical research, but the field is just not advanced enough yet.
Animal testing is needed to reduce the time needed for development, maybe it seems the only possible way but there is different thing that can be done. For me I don't like it, and i consider it not ethical. Human life is important but animals have nothing to do with it, and even we humans made all these diseases to spread and making all the negative effects on the environment and animals are the main creatures who get effected by it and even killed.
other ways that can be good alternative for animal testing are:
- In Vitro testing.
-Research using human voulnteers
- and Human tissues.
Most of the medical research have therapeutic purpose, and some research are done to develop treatment procedures. Therefore, the animal testing is mandatory for the sake of humanity. In addition, the people souls are more sacred than the animal souls in Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), these religious people are more than half the world. So, it is ethical to use animal in pre-clinical research in order to save people.
the ethical question of animal testing is a very tricky question. working for a vaccine trial, early stages of vaccine development is tested on the animal during animal trials. certain companies have an animal-friendly environment at work, they take good care of animals on trial feed them, and play with them. sometimes animals don't suffer any major side effects in those trials but some do unfortanully. While its sad to see animals suffer in the name of science, we have to keep in mind some people voluntarily agree to be part of clinical testing just to help to advance science and improving the health of people all over the world.
Since in-vivo testing is an essential part of some pre-clinical trials, I do not believe that it is unethical to use animals for research. It is important to treat the animals well up until they are used for research, but unfortunately this is an essential part for understanding biocompatibility of products and devices. It is also important to justify the use of animals within the study protocols developed so that we understand how the animals are being treated and why they are being used.
This is a good question. I never really thought about the ethics of animal testing. To an extent, I do understand the issue with animal testing. These animals are at risk for dying while being tested on and as you said "Technology is something that has been evolving for 20+ years". While technology is important in testing through simulations, there is only so close a simulation can get to the actual unpredictability of a living breathing thing. This is where animal testing becomes so important. If we get rid of testing on animals, all of the potential animals that might die during the testing now becomes someones son/daughter, mother/father, husband/wife, best friend. As cold as it sounds, replacing an animal is much easier than replacing a person.
Although it may be hard to eliminate animal testing, technology is evolving and scientists need to find alternatives to animal testing. Animal testing is a cruel method to make studies and develop drugs/devices. Animal testing should not be allowed unless it is for experiments that require trials on animals. Developing and using different methods should be the focus now, such as using cell cultures to grow into 3D organs or structures. Another method could be using human donated tissues to study Diseases and create cures. Even if the tissues are from unhealthy/ill people, it still helps to diagnose the sickness. Aside from donating tissues, humans can volunteer to be safely tested on using advanced technological methods, such as brain scanning machines, etc. There are many alternatives that can be done using technology that could even be more accurate than animal testing in some cases. Animal testing is cruel and may not be accurate most of the time, which is why is it necessary that we use the technology developed along with information we know about human bodies from tissues and computer models, to give more accuracy in the results and future developments.