2 of 48

No

Write now Article Tools

Pinel (2006) advises us to use caution when considering the views of individuals or organizations that have extreme positive or negative views on a topic. I appreciate that he provided us with the Pro, Con, and Careful Consideration websites below (Pinel, 2006). Viewing each of these links has provided me with a better understanding of some benefits and drawbacks to using animals for medical research.

The Foundation for Biomedical Research (FBR) website was one of the sites listed that "advises careful consideration" of this subject and was very informative. They listed many medical advancements that were due largely to animal research. These medical advances were beneficial to both humans and animals and included research on antibiotics, blood transfusions, organ transplants, vaccines, and other types of treatment and prevention (Foundation for Biomedical Research). They also explain the benefits of proper treatment of lab animals. It is not only mandatory, it is logical and in the best interest of the researcher as well as the animal. FBR stresses that in order to conduct the best and most effective research, with the most valid results, the animals must be healthy and stress free.

But there are also several drawbacks to using animals in research. The most obvious is that the research can involve pain and death to the animals involved. Another drawback would be that although APA has set specific standards for the care and use of animals for research (American Psychological Association, 2006) there are always going to be researchers who fail to follow these guidelines. Another setback would be that the results from animal testing may not even be applicable to humans. There are many substances that are toxic to humans but have no effect on animals at all (Vivisection Fact Sheet) and vice versa.

A final drawback is that animal testing is extremely expensive (Pinel, 2006). When you think about it though, it could also actually be a benefit. The high costs could assure that researchers won't be so quick to run tests on animals if there are other effective and less costly options available.

When considering such a controversial topic it is important to consider whether or not the advantages outweigh the costs before forming an opinion. I don't anticipate any time soon that we will no longer use animals in scientific research. There are still so many unanswered questions in science that cannot ethically be answered by studying humans. I do think that APA will continue to monitor the treatment of animals in research and also evaluate and improve on their guidelines.

References:

American Psychological Association. Guidelines for ethical conduct in the care and use of animals. Retrieved March 7, 2008, from http://www.apa.org/science/ang uide.html.

Foundation for Biomedical Research. Retrieved March 7, 2008, from http://www.fbresearch.org

Pinel , John P. J. (2006). Biopsychology, Beyond the Brain and Behavior (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Vivisection Fact Sheet. Retrieved March 7, 2008, from http://www.ypte.org.uk/docs/fa ctsheets/env_facts/vivisection .html

Learn more about this author, Tiffanie Jones.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Is it morally wrong to use mice or dogs in medical research??
We want to hear your view. Write now!