Add a Comment
Save my information
The entire article begs the question whether or not any of those animals should be used in the first place for scientific research. These animals do not consent to the research, did not volunteer and they want to live as much as you and I. Leave them alone
I understand why people feel that it is wrong to test on animals. But at the same time I find it incredibly stupid to complain about something that you aren’t willing to change. I see a lot of people who do not support testing on animals but also wouldn’t sacrifice their bodies to testing. If you don’t wanna test on animals anymore then sign yourself up to be tested on. The things that are tested on animals are usually things that are trying to benefit humans. If you cared enough about animals you would volunteer to be the lab rat.
As a purely scientific concern that might also help the ethics/philosophy side: Certainly if there’s an interaction between the study drug and/or standard drug and painkillers, we would want to know if it occurs in humans as well as the animal model.
A model should be as realistic as possible. There is no realistic scenario in a well-run healthcare setting where a human with an extremely painful condition would not be given painkillers for symptomatic relief as well as the targeted therapy. So if an animal model is being inflicted with a condition where a human would be given painkillers, it could also make sense to give the animal model treatment and placebo groups equivalent doses of painkillers.
Many promising preclinical drug candidates have been scuppered by interactions with real-world interactions in humans that weren’t accounted for in in vitro or animal models. Painkillers could definitely be one to look at.
The problem is deep. Modern Allopathic medicine itself needs to change. It treats, not only animals, but even human patients as ‘things’. Only by mid-20th century, terms such as “holistic medicine”, “mind-body medicine” started to emerge, but continue to remain non-mainstream ideas. No alternative medicine system that I know of involves any animal testing. Declaring all animal testing in pharmaceutical industry will force Allopathy meficine to seek a theoretical basis for its very conception of what counts as a living body. Medivine is supposed to save lives, but the very notion of life remains scientifically undefined in medicine, all they can do is to try save bodies, not life. A body in modern scuence is mere res extensa, extended substance, a la Descartes.
An implicit assumption of animal research that human lives are by definition superior to other forms of life, without an explanation of why it is so. Other forms of life are referred to as “lower” forms of life, and may be so at the level of body, but is “life itself”, as biologist Rosen called it, across bodies lower or higher? We may all agrre that cycles and motor cycles are (mechanically soeaking), lower forms of transport compared to car. But can we thereby say the living principle in each of these vehicles, the drivers, are also lower?
Animal researchers should be asked to consider the possibility of karmic reaction, that they would have to be also born as the rodents etc., and receive similar pain meted out to them. Of course, the cycle feeds itself and can become only more viscious. Animal research must therefore stop at all levels forthwith, regardless of the financial cost to companies involved. If relieving you pain requires some othe even more pain, how far it can be justified?
They are animals. They need the normal, calm life. Need the petition signs. Don’t pain in lab animals. :(
Any type of pain is too much. It is animal torture, pure and simple. Vivisection must end immediately.
This is terrible abuse.. PLEASE stop the torture.. you were made to have compassion for animals, they are not just THINGS . They are living creatures.. NOT put in this world for anyone to treat them this way.. they are not ours!! People that can perform such acts are a disgrace to the human race.. with no feelings or comapssion..sad.. there will be a day that you will answer for the pain tou have caused, all for the sake of profit.. shameful
It should be noted that nearly all University Animal Care & Use Committees are closed to public scrutiny. As taxpayer-supported institutions, they should be REQUIRED to have public access, thereby curbing some of the most outrageous abuses. The public has a RIGHT to know.
I’m ever mindful of a line in I.B. Singer’s book, “Enemies: A Love Story.” The novel’s protagonist, returning from a slaughterhouse, muses to himself, “As far as the animals are concerned, all men are Nazis.” Keep in mind that Singer was a Holocaust survivor.
Homo sapiens (sic) is truly a cancer upon the planet, to the detriment of all other life forms. Non-living forms, too, a huge evolutionary mistake.
Vivisection is barbaric and morally disgusting. I once saw a picture of an animal who was so covered in lesions and tumors that I could not identify the species. Animal experimentation, where living creatures have no power to consent to such painful exploitation, has no place in an advanced society.
Unfortunately, too many believe that the most horrid abuse is justified if human beings are benefited. I hope future generations will think differently.
Any is to much. They are live animals.
Stop the heinous torture of sentient beings.
Being human does not grant you the right to do so.
By participating in inflicting such pain on innocent
defenseless creatures, your vibration is lowered
to the most base and cruel of species…unevolved
Let them go. Testing on animals is horribly wrong! God did not create them for this, you are NOT God. May your karma return to you in exact same measure.
I appreciate that Ingfei Chen has attempted to shed light on the hidden issue of animal suffering in scientific experimentation. However, as a veterinarian, I must take issue with some of the statements regarding animal pain in this article. In particular, the assertion that “most animals reflexively react to harmful stimuli…that’s not the same thing as feeling pain and suffering, which are subjective experiences” is simply not supported by scientific literature. It is well-established that vertebrate animals (which includes mice and rats) suffer from pain, and experience both psychological and physical effects of acute and chronic pain. Our understanding of invertebrate pain, to include lobsters, crayfish, crabs, and octopuses, has evolved greatly within the past decade, and invertebrates have demonstrated both “motivational tradeoff” and “conditioned place avoidance.” These are measurable indicators of pain that cannot be explained away as a reflex. The argument that we can’t attribute the experience of pain to animals due to its subjectivity is nonsensical. Even among humans, perceptions of pain, “the experience of pain,” differs, and one person can truly never understand another person’s pain. If the argument of subjectivity is taken to its logical conclusion, then we can’t really know that other humans experience pain. Yet experimenters seem to demand this excessive burden of proof, despite the already existing evidence, to escape the fact that animals suffer in painful experiments that do not yield useable results. It is, truly, wasting lives “for no good reason.” Knowingly inflicting pain in the hopes of some vague future benefit (which decades of experiments in animals have shown does not pan out) can no longer be justified. It’s time for biomedical science to evolve.
Thank you, Ingfei Chen, for reporting on this important topic and for including input from Drs. Pound, Nicol, and Beauchamp, as well as AWI’s Cathy Liss. As you mention, no U.S. or European policies forbid experimenters from causing animals ‘severe, unalleviated pain,’ but this does not extend only to experiments aimed to gather ‘valuable scientific data.’ Experimenters can receive permission to inflict immense pain and suffering on animals with even the most hollow justification. During my own experience in animal experimentation, I saw this demonstrated time and time again. You also state, ‘Experiments that use critters to simulate human illness or injury are stepping stones to the medical treatments we all use;’ however, the data disagrees. Ninety-five percent of drugs that were developed using and that test safe and effective in animals go on to fail in human clinical trials because they’re not effective or they’re dangerous. Animal experiments are stepping stones to irreversibly wasted intellectual and financial resources. This is why, increasingly, pharmas and other institutions whose bottom lines depend on success are giving up animal experiments in favor of human-relevant technologies, such as microfluidics (organs-on-chips). Taxpayers who finance federally-funded experiments and those who donate to charities, not to mention patients and their families waiting on cures, also deserve a better return on their investments.
Adding to the complexity is the fact that rodents are prey species and would hide their pain and discomfort. By the time you notice the symptoms, they’re REALLY suffering. We also often see in inspection reports that experimenters fail to give animals pain relief or use expired drugs. It boils down to apathy, which is an acquired attitude that experimenters practice throughout training. You can’t be too bothered by the animals’ suffering, or the day-to-day guilt associated with tormenting animals would eat you alive. How can these same people then be entrusted to carry out animal welfare measures?
In average more than 95 percent of time preclinical animal tests don’t yield human-relevant results. No matter how well cared for the animals are (before being killed), more than 95 percent of time it’s entirely pointless.
Vivisection is horse ‘n’ buggy research. Time for a new path – for animals AND people. Live animal research should be against the law everywhere.
Testing on animals does. not. work. Yet we cling to this cruel practice instead of venturing into new, innovative and truly with the potential for a breakthrough. What’s that saying, “doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.” Conducting experiments on animals is insanity.
ANY pain in lab animals is too much. ALL invasive research on animals should be outlawed. It’s a true “Crime Against Nature.” And as G.B. Shaw famously wrote, “Anyone who doesn’t hesitate to vivisect, will not hesitate to lie about it.” Such research is cruel, unethical and immoral. It needs to stop. In the interim, follow the money.